119-SJRES-81 Blue Collar Impact Perspective

Summary of my view on S.J.Res. 81

S.J.Res. 81 would terminate the national emergency used to add a 40% across‑the‑board duty (stacked on existing rates) on most goods from Brazil under Executive Order 14323. The Senate passed the resolution 52–48 on October 28, 2025. [1]Congress.gov — Text - S.J.Res.81 (Engrossed in Senate)[2]U.S. Senate — U.S. Senate Roll Call Vote 119-1-594 (S.J.Res. 81)[3]U.S. Customs and Border Protection — CBP CSMS #65807735 – Guidance: Additional…

From a Made‑in‑America perspective, lifting these duties now weakens U.S. workers’ bargaining position in steel, metals, and allied shops while giving importers a windfall. I oppose terminating the emergency without a replacement plan passed by Congress that keeps pressure on strategic imports and ties relief to labor and environmental standards.

Specific impacts on jobs, paychecks, and communities

Net effect: more import pressure on union shops and mill towns; some price relief for import‑dependent retailers; strategic leverage lost.

• Steel and metals: Brazil is a major supplier of iron/steel to the U.S. (about $5.0B in 2024), including large volumes of semi‑finished slab and pig iron; removing the emergency duties invites a surge that undercuts U.S. melt and finish capacity and bargaining power in contract talks. [4]TradingEconomics/UN COMTRADE — U.S. Imports from Brazil of Iron and Steel (2024)
• Important carve‑out context: The EO’s tariff specifically exempted certain items (including pig iron, energy products, fertilizers, some aircraft parts). Even with those exemptions, most other Brazilian goods were hit with an extra 40% duty from Aug 6, 2025; ending the emergency removes that broad coverage. [5]Federal Register (via vLex) — Executive Order 14323 (90 FR 37739) – Addressing…[3]U.S. Customs and Border Protection — CBP CSMS #65807735 – Guidance: Additional…
• Downstream manufacturers: Some shops that rely on Brazilian inputs outside the exemptions would see lower costs, but many U.S. mini‑mills already leaned on exempt pig iron, meaning the upside is smaller than lobbyists claim. [5]Federal Register (via vLex) — Executive Order 14323 (90 FR 37739) – Addressing…
• Port, warehouse, and logistics jobs: Short‑term volume could pop as orders resume; but without enforceable guardrails, we risk a repeat of the boom‑bust cycle that hollows out domestic capacity. (Context from the Senate roll and EO scope.) [2]U.S. Senate — U.S. Senate Roll Call Vote 119-1-594 (S.J.Res. 81)[3]U.S. Customs and Border Protection — CBP CSMS #65807735 – Guidance: Additional…
• Household prices: Coffee and orange‑juice shelves likely get some relief, but shaving pennies off groceries shouldn’t come by sacrificing union jobs and strategic industry. (Brazil ranks among our top suppliers for coffee; U.S. imports of coffee from Brazil were about $2.1B in 2024.) [6]TradingEconomics/UN COMTRADE — U.S. Imports from Brazil by category (2024)
• U.S. export jobs at risk if Brazil retaliates later: Even as Brasília signaled it was “in no rush” to hit back, removing our tariffs now throws away leverage we may need if talks stall; retaliation could hit U.S. machinery, chemicals, and services where we run a surplus. [7]Reuters — Brazil’s Lula in ‘no rush’ to retaliate[8]Office of the U.S. Trade Representative — Brazil – Trade Summary

Social impact on communities and vulnerable groups

• Union steel towns and suppliers: Ending the emergency before a replacement plan risks layoffs in blast furnaces, finishing lines, and fabricators—places already hammered by past offshoring.
• Small manufacturers: Some relief on input costs, but exposure to price whiplash if Brazil’s policy shifts or if transshipment via third countries rises; uncertainty hurts planning and apprenticeships.
• Low‑income consumers: Minor relief on certain staples (coffee/OJ) is real but modest; wage losses from plant slowdowns would dwarf the grocery savings in hard‑hit counties.
• Diaspora and port communities: Volume swings stress casual and contract labor; predictable, rules‑based trade beats stop‑and‑go surges.

Environmental and sustainability angle

We can be pro‑worker and pro‑planet—if we use leverage smartly.

• Beef/deforestation risk: Lower barriers could increase imports linked to Amazon/Cerrado clearing unless strict due‑diligence rules are attached; Brazilian authorities have fined packers tied to illegally deforested land, and watchdogs show persistent risks in cattle supply chains. [9]AP News — Brazil fines meatpackers over cattle from deforested Amazon land[10]Reuters — Brazil fines meat packers for buying cattle from deforested land[11]Mongabay — Deforestation tied to U.S. imports (Trase/Global Witness)
• Reality check on exemptions: The EO excluded energy and some minerals/fertilizers, so environmental changes from ending the emergency will concentrate in agriculture/forestry supply chains (beef, leather, some wood pulp), where due‑diligence is weakest. [5]Federal Register (via vLex) — Executive Order 14323 (90 FR 37739) – Addressing…
• Sugarcane ethanol vs. corn ethanol: Any future carve‑outs should weigh lifecycle emissions and farm jobs together; climate benefits exist in biofuels but mustn’t be used to justify undercutting U.S. workers without reciprocity. [12]Web search · turn 4 #3

Long‑term vs. short‑term effects

• Short term: Some importers and retailers win; workers in trade‑exposed mills and fabricators face headwinds as order books adjust.
• Medium term: Bargaining leverage with Brazil fades; we lose a pressure point that was moving Brasília to the table on multiple disputes (steel, digital rules, agro). [13]Web search · turn 2 #2
• Long term: If domestic capacity shrinks again, taxpayers will pay more later via bailouts, Buy America waivers, and national‑security carve‑outs. Better to convert the emergency into a targeted, congressionally authorized regime with quotas/snap‑backs tied to labor and deforestation benchmarks.

Unintended consequences if S.J.Res. 81 becomes law

• Transshipment risks: Lax enforcement could reroute Brazilian content through third countries, eroding U.S. trade remedies.
• Retaliation whiplash: Brazil held fire while negotiating; if the U.S. shows division, we may invite sector‑specific retaliation later—hitting U.S. export jobs where we run a goods surplus. [7]Reuters — Brazil’s Lula in ‘no rush’ to retaliate[8]Office of the U.S. Trade Representative — Brazil – Trade Summary
• Input squeeze illusions: Because pig iron and certain energy products were exempt, many touted “savings” won’t materialize for U.S. mills; instead, we mostly gift margin to importers of consumer goods. [5]Federal Register (via vLex) — Executive Order 14323 (90 FR 37739) – Addressing…
• Policy instability premium: Repeal today, re‑impose tomorrow—suppliers will price in volatility, raising costs anyway.

Key numbers

Bottom line