Countervailing duty petitioner Daikin America will appeal an October Court of International Trade decision sustaining the Commerce Department's decision to drop its subsidy finding against exporter Gujarat Fluorochemicals concerning a 30-year land lease to one of its affiliates, Inox Wind Limited, by India's State Industrial Development Corp. The trade court said the subsidy finding couldn't be legal due to Commerce's interpretation of its regulation, which says the agency will attribute -- to the affiliates' combined sales -- subsidies received by related input suppliers whose inputs are mainly dedicated to the production of downstream merchandise. The court ruled the provision of electricity is not primarily dedicated to the production of granular polytetrafluorethylene, the subject of the CVD investigation, adding that Commerce misunderstood the production chain (see 2310160026) (Gujarat Fluorochemicals v. United States, CIT # 22-00120).
The Court of International Trade on Dec. 12 granted the government's request for a remand so the Commerce Department can reconsider its use of Descartes data in calculating an ocean freight benchmark. Sending back the 2021 countervailing duty review on solar products from China, Judge Jane Restani said that on remand Commerce should consider the court's ruling in a separate case that addresses the use of Descartes data in this context, "as well the court's other rulings on the ocean freight issue."
The Commerce Department didn't give antidumping duty respondent PT. Asia Pacific Fibers a "reasonable" chance to address issues found by Commerce in the company's verification responses, the Court of International Trade ruled Dec. 12. Because Commerce never issued a verification report to Asia Pacific, Judge Richard Eaton said the agency must report the "methods, procedures, and results" of verification and let the company address any issues.
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices Dec. 13 on AD/CVD proceedings:
The Commerce Department asked the Court of International Trade for a voluntary remand on Dec. 11 in a countervailing duty case so it can reconsider or further explain its calculations for the ocean freight benchmark in light of a recent CIT ruling questioning the use of Descartes data. The present suit concerns the 2021 administrative review of the CVD order on solar products from China in which Commerce only used Descartes data to set the benchmark, prompting the case from solar cell exporters, led by Trina Solar (Changzhou) Science & Technology Co. (Trina Solar (Changzhou) Science & Technology Co. v. United States, CIT # 23-00219).
The Court of International Trade in a Dec. 12 opinion remanded the Commerce Department's antidumping investigation into polyester textured yarn from Indonesia. In the proceeding, the agency did not conduct on-site verification due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Judge Richard Eaton found Commerce's failure to produce a verification report prior to issuing its final determination was illegal. As a result, Asia Pacific was "blindsided" by the use of adverse facts available, which led to a 26.07% AD rate.
The Court of International Trade sent back the Commerce Department's decision to disregard Indonesian crude palm oil prices when it calculated antidumping duty respondent Wilmar's normal value, which was based off an export levy set by the Indonesian government. In a Nov. 21 opinion made public Dec. 12, Judge Richard Eaton said if the agency sticks with the particular market situation adjustment in the AD investigation on Indonesian biodiesel, it must explain why doing so doesn't lead to a double remedy, since Commerce countervailed the export levy in the related countervailing duty investigation.
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices Dec. 12 on AD/CVD proceedings:
The Commerce Department illegally used just one respondent in the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on stainless steel flanges from India covering entries in 2018-19, the Court of International Trade ruled Dec. 8. Judge Timothy Stanceu said that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's decision in YC Rubber Co. v. U.S. "is directly on point" in this case, because Commerce only reviewed exporter Chandan Steel Limited in a situation where multiple other companies exported the subject merchandise.
The Court of International Trade in a Nov. 21 opinion made public Dec. 12 sustained parts and remanded parts of the Commerce Department's antidumping duty investigation on biodiesel from Indonesia. Judge Richard Eaton sustained a particular market situation finding based on an export levy the Indonesian government set in 2015, as well as the agency's method for accounting for Renewable Identification Numbers, which decreased U.S. price. The judge sent back Commerce's decision to disregard Indonesian crude palm oil prices when setting respondent Wilmar Trading's normal value, as based on constructed value, to address the potential imposition of a double remedy. Eaton also sustained the use of adverse facts against exporter Musim Mas.