The brings those tests into focus. Ahead of the October 18 implementation deadline, 22 House members asked President Trump to apply exceptions and rate adjustments to allies reducing Russian energy purchases. They also requested country determinations and their supporting methodology.
The EU's national diversification records can support a claim for relief. Yet ACER's July report, covering gas flows through May, shows why a binding exit timetable and a decline in imports cannot be treated as the same evidence. An importer pricing machinery or consumer goods from an EU member state needs the applicable U.S. treatment before removing a tariff contingency from an order.
The gas exception has two conditions
Section 113(a) reaches all goods from a covered country, subject to statutory exceptions. The exposure therefore extends to non-energy products.
Section 113(d) of Public Law 119-111, enacted September 18, prevents a duty based on a covered country's Russian natural-gas imports when two conditions hold. Those imports must have represented less than 15 percent of Russia's total annual natural-gas exports during the 12 months preceding enactment, and the country must have taken significant steps to reduce them.
The denominator is Russia's exports, not the buyer's gas consumption. A country could depend heavily on Russian gas yet account for a small share of Russia's export market. Conversely, a falling Russian share of national consumption does not establish the statutory percentage.
This exception concerns gas-based coverage under Section 113(c)(1). It does not erase a separate crude-oil or oil-sanctions-evasion basis for a duty. The initial buyer test also requires knowing new purchases on or after day 30 following enactment, alongside the historical top-five ranking. A European gas policy alone cannot settle that coverage inquiry.
After initial imposition, Section 113(b) requires rate adjustments within a range above zero and up to 100 percent following the specified written determination about significant steps to change Russian oil or gas trade. Section 115 separately provides presidential waiver authority, while Section 114 contains transaction and activity exceptions. A reduction, a waiver and the gas exception therefore need different supporting records.
National measures can strengthen the European case
Regulation (EU) 2026/261 makes the phaseout legally binding while allowing specified existing contracts a transition. Under Article 4, the long-term LNG transition ends with a prohibition from January 1, 2027. The corresponding pipeline date is September 30, 2027, with a conditional storage-related extension to November 1.
Article 9 required national gas-diversification plans by March 1, 2026. The plans must distinguish measures already in place from those planned, identify quantities to be replaced, and set milestones. Annex I provides the template. Recital 29 and Article 12 protect confidential information. The submission requirement does not prove that every plan was filed or is publicly available.
That distinction between implemented and planned measures is useful for the U.S. inquiry. A documented alternative-supply arrangement or completed measure offers something concrete to assess against the phrase "significant steps." These are possible grounds for a U.S. finding, rather than criteria supplied by the EU regulation. The American statute leaves "significant steps" undefined.
Importers should therefore preserve public national implementation records when available, without assuming that the full plans can be obtained from suppliers. A supplier's statement that Europe will stop buying Russian gas does not identify what its own government has done.
A future ban can coexist with rising imports
The July 1 ACER report on Russian gas contracts and diversification illustrates why commitments and observed trade need separate treatment. For January through May 2026, Russian pipeline-gas imports into the EU rose 7 percent year over year, while Russian LNG imports rose 11 percent. ACER suggested that frontloaded deliveries and contractual adjustments before tighter restrictions helped explain the increase, alongside wider market conditions.
Those observations do not establish October import levels or disqualify a country from the U.S. exception. They show why the existence of a binding phaseout cannot prove that current imports have fallen. Equally, a short-period increase does not establish that no significant reduction measures have been taken. The U.S. statute does not substitute a simple year-over-year decline for its steps test.
ACER also warns that the member state where Russian gas enters or a contract is authorized need not be where the gas is consumed. Its customs analysis covers January through April, while the broader flow analysis extends through May. Neither series matches the full U.S. statutory lookback or supplies Russia's worldwide export denominator.
Before using a European number in a tariff assessment, the compliance manager needs to know whether it measures physical entry, customs release, contracted capacity or final consumption. Combining those measures can produce a figure that no underlying dataset supports.
Keep the evidence attached to the question it answers
An importer's country-exposure file can preserve the following distinctions without trying to perform the U.S. government's determination.
Evidence
What it can establish
What remains unresolved
EU gas prohibition and transition dates
Binding future restrictions
U.S. coverage and relief
Public national measures and implementation records
Steps taken toward reducing Russian gas imports
U.S. acceptance and the separate 15 percent test
ACER contracts and flow data
Reported arrangements and trade for specified periods
The statutory country measure, full lookback and Russian export denominator
Operative U.S. action
Covered scope, rate or relief actually adopted
Shipment-level application under its terms
Preserve member-state detail even if the administration ultimately uses another approach. The September 3 CRS analysis of the then-pending bill identified uncertainty over treating the EU as one country. The enacted text retains the relevant country language. A regional sourcing total cannot reconstruct national exposure under the chosen implementation method.
The proposed country-list amendments discussed in Traverse's September analysis of gas relief did not resolve this question in the enacted law. The CRS Policy Signal provides the legislative background.
Price the applicable U.S. action
The methodology report required for congressional committees under Section 113(g) need not be made public. An importer may therefore have to work from the operative U.S. measure without access to all the underlying evidence.
For an open European purchase order, retain the country, product, expected entry date and contractual allocation of additional duties. Keep a relief scenario conditional until the applicable U.S. instrument resolves it. Review the relevant action for its basis, effective date and remaining exceptions before changing the broker's instructions.
Daily Trade Brief
Get the next one in your inbox.
New U.S. trade actions and the analysis that changes an import, customs, or counsel file, on weekday mornings after you confirm your address.
From reading to review
Run the numbers on your lane.
The duty calculator runs the current stack for any HTS code and origin. A free account opens full tool output, AD/CVD detail, Chapter 98 processing, and available exports.