The Court of International Trade should sustain the Commerce Department's determination that the South Korean government's provision of port usage rights constitutes a countervailable benefit, the U.S. argued in a Sept. 15 reply brief. Responding to respondent Hyundai Steel, Commerce said, contrary to what the company says, there is no evidence to show that the period of port usage for which Hyundai does not pay fees was specifically calculated to match the costs incurred by Hyundai for building the port (Hyundai Steel Co. v. U.S., CIT #21-00304).
Automated shade machines are neither "curtains" nor " builders' wares" but are complex machines classifiable in the tariff schedule as appliances with individual functions, importer Lutron said in a Sept. 14 complaint to the Court of International Trade (Lutron Electronics v. U.S., CIT #22-00264).
The omission of certain documents related to service-related revenues (SRRs) in an antidumping review does not warrant the use of total adverse facts available, respondent Hyundai Electric & Energy Systems argued in a Sept. 15 brief at the Court of International Trade. Nor does the respondent's failure to report a sale of a large power transformer that the Commerce Department believed was made in South Korea, Hyundai said in vying for partial AFA (Hyundai Electric & Energy Systems v. U.S., CIT #20-00108).
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Importer Katana Racing Could Not Revoke of Statute of Limitations, US Tells CAFC in Unpaid Duty Case
The Court of International Trade was wrong to dismiss the government's case against importer Katana Racing seeking to collect over $5.7 million in unpaid duties due to an expired statute of limitations, the U.S. argued in its Sept. 13 opening brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The government's suit was in fact timely filed since Katana could not revoke its waiver of the statute of limitations, the brief said. The U.S. said no law backs the finding that such a waiver could be revoked and stop the government from filing suit for unpaid duties, and that the trade court's ruling "leads to absurd results" (U.S. v. Katana Racing, Fed. Cir. #22-1832).
The Commerce Department properly found that a particular EU subsidy to Spanish olive growers was de facto specific, the Court of International Trade ruled in a Sept. 14 opinion. After previously remanding the case twice, Judge Gary Katzmann this time bought Commerce's rationale for its de facto specificity finding, along with the agency's conclusion that demand for ripe olives -- the subject merchandise -- was substantially dependent on the demand for certain raw olive varietals.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Plaintiffs Reserve Right to Oppose US' Inadvertent Liquidations in Solar Panel Tariff Exclusion Case
Plaintiffs in a case challenging President Donald Trump's decision to withdraw a tariff exclusion for bifacial solar panels reserved all their rights to the extent that the plaintiffs are affected by the U.S.'s inadvertent liquidations of the entries at issue in the action, the plaintiffs said in a Sept. 13 reply brief. The reserved rights include, but are not limited to, "opposing the Government’s actions and legal authority to void liquidations without court approval and without providing specificity that would allow for meaningful comment, the brief said (Solar Energy Industries Association v. United States, CIT #20-03941).
The Court of International Trade in a Sept. 13 confidential order upheld parts and sent back parts of the Commerce Department's final determination in the antidumping duty investigation on refillable stainless steel kegs from China. In a letter, Judge M. Miller Baker said he intends to issue the public version of the opinion Sept. 21, giving the parties until Sept. 20 to review the confidential information in the opinion. In the case, Commerce dropped its reliance on Malaysian surrogate data after the trade court raised questions over the distortive effects of forced labor in Malaysia (see 2111050033). While the plaintiff, American Keg Co., signed off on this move, the plaintiff continued to oppose Commerce's surrogate data pick, pushing instead for Brazilian surrogate data (New American Keg d/b/a American Keg Co. v. U.S., CIT #20-00008).
The Commerce Department legally dropped its reliance on adverse facts available for whether countervailing duty respondent Both-Well (Taizhou) Steel Fittings Co. benefitted from China's Export Buyer's Credit Program, the Court of International Trade held in a Sept. 13 opinion. Judge Claire Kelly previously sent back Commerce's use of adverse facts available over the Chinese government's unwillingness to submit certain information about its EBCP. The judge said that if the agency wanted to keep using AFA it had to attempt to verify the non-use of the program by looking at evidence from Both-Well and its U.S. customers. Commerce did so on remand, finding that the respondent did not benefit from the EBCP, dropping the company's CVD rate from 25.90% to 15.36%.