Commerce Defines “U.S. Content,” Leaving Valuation and Documentation Questions for CBP

The Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security has issued guidance defining “U.S. content” for tariff treatment under clause (2)(d) of Proclamation 11032. The guidance concerns products of Canada and Mexico that qualify for preferential treatment under the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement. Its practical significance turns on how importers establish and value qualifying U.S. content.

The guidance applies to goods entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 12:01 a.m. Eastern Time on October 14, 2026. “U.S. content” includes:

• The value attributable to parts wholly obtained, entirely produced, or substantially transformed in the United States.

• To the extent not already included, the value attributable to steel melted and poured in the United States, or aluminum or copper smelted and cast in the United States.

The definition recognizes qualifying U.S. parts and metal inputs while preventing double counting. The notice does not, however, specify a calculation method, required supporting documents, or procedures for allocating value through multiple production stages. These omissions leave questions for U.S. Customs and Border Protection about how importers should substantiate claims and determine the qualifying value. The notice directs product-specific questions to CBP. Commerce notice, 91 FR 65162.

The implementation context also matters. In its June 5, 2026, guidance on Proclamation 11032, CBP stated that separate instructions would follow for tariff headings 9903.82.18 and 9903.82.19. The Commerce notice supplies a definition relevant to implementation, but it does not provide entry-filing instructions or establish whether those previously deferred instructions have been issued. CBP’s June guidance.

For affected importers, the immediate task is to assess available origin and valuation records and identify questions requiring CBP clarification. Calculation methods, documentary standards, and allocation procedures should not be treated as settled requirements on the strength of this notice alone.