HR-7276-119
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
What it does
This bill would direct the President to impose an additional 30% tariff on sheep and lamb products — including meat, wool, and other derived goods — imported from Australia or New Zealand. It would apply on top of any existing duties already in place on these products.
Who benefits
U.S. sheep and lamb producers (ranchers and farmers) who would face less price competition from lower-cost Australian and New Zealand imports. Domestic wool producers and processors who compete with imported wool. Rural communities in sheep-producing states such as Texas, California, Wyoming, Colorado, and South Dakota. U.S. meatpacking and processing facilities that handle domestic lamb. Workers employed in domestic sheep agriculture and related industries.
Who is hurt
U.S. consumers who purchase lamb meat or wool products, who may face higher retail prices. Restaurants and food service businesses that feature lamb on their menus. Importers and distributors of Australian and New Zealand sheep and lamb products. Retailers that sell imported lamb or wool goods. Australian and New Zealand sheep farmers and exporters, who would lose price competitiveness in the U.S. market. U.S. trade partners broadly, as retaliatory tariffs from Australia or New Zealand could affect American exporters in unrelated sectors.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that Australia and New Zealand benefit from large-scale, heavily subsidized sheep industries that undercut U.S. producers on price, threatening the viability of domestic sheep farming — an industry that has declined significantly over recent decades. They contend that a 30% duty would level the playing field, protect rural livelihoods, and preserve domestic food production capacity that serves national security and supply chain resilience interests.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that the tariff would raise prices for American consumers and businesses that rely on imported lamb and wool, with the cost burden falling disproportionately on lower-income households. They contend that targeted tariffs on specific allies risk triggering retaliatory measures from Australia and New Zealand that could harm U.S. exporters in agriculture, manufacturing, and services — potentially costing more American jobs than the tariff protects.