HR-4674-119
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Sponsored by Steven Horsford (D-NV)
What it does
This bill would prohibit the President from using authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs on baby hygiene products, specifically diapers, baby wipes, and baby changing tables. It would also require the President to immediately terminate any such tariffs already in effect at the time of enactment. Additionally, the bill would bar the President from using any other authority to impose tariffs on these items that are substantially similar to IEEPA-based tariffs.
Who benefits
Parents and caregivers of infants and young children, who would likely see lower retail prices on diapers, wipes, and changing tables. Low-income families, who spend a disproportionate share of income on baby hygiene products. Domestic retailers and e-commerce sellers of baby products, who may see increased consumer purchasing. Diaper banks and nonprofit organizations that distribute baby hygiene products to families in need. Importers and distributors of baby hygiene goods sourced from countries subject to IEEPA tariffs.
Who is hurt
Domestic manufacturers of diapers, wipes, and changing tables, who currently benefit from tariff protection against lower-cost foreign competitors. Workers employed in U.S. baby hygiene product manufacturing facilities. The executive branch would lose a specific tool for using tariffs on these goods as economic leverage in trade negotiations. Foreign governments subject to IEEPA tariffs may gain a concession without reciprocal action.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that baby diapers and wipes are essential hygiene necessities — not luxury goods — and that tariffs function as a direct tax on families with young children, particularly those with lower incomes who cannot substitute away from these products. They contend that IEEPA was designed as a national security and foreign policy emergency tool, not a mechanism for broad consumer goods tariffs, and that applying it to baby products stretches the statute well beyond its intended purpose.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that selectively exempting specific consumer goods from presidential tariff authority undermines the coherent use of trade policy as a negotiating tool, potentially weakening U.S. leverage in broader trade disputes. They contend that Congress has historically delegated broad trade authority to the executive branch for good reason — the President needs flexibility to respond quickly to foreign economic threats — and that carving out individual product categories sets a precedent that could fragment trade policy into hundreds of narrow exemptions.
Constitutional context
The Foreign Commerce Clause (Art. I, §8, cl. 3) grants Congress the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, including tariffs. Congress delegated portions of this authority to the President through IEEPA. This bill would partially reclaim that delegated authority for a specific product category. Post-Loper Bright (2024), courts independently assess whether executive actions fall within statutory delegations, which is directly relevant to ongoing legal debates about whether IEEPA authorizes broad tariff imposition at all.
Checks and balances
Congress would gain authority over tariff policy for this specific product category, limiting executive discretion; the President retains all other IEEPA and trade authorities, and could still seek tariff changes through other statutory mechanisms such as Section 232 or Section 301, subject to their own legal requirements.
Historical precedent
Congress has previously enacted product-specific tariff exclusions and suspensions through the Miscellaneous Tariff Bill process, though using legislation to directly prohibit presidential IEEPA tariff authority for specific goods is a more novel approach.