The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices June 20 on AD/CVD proceedings:
The Commerce Department found that carbon steel wedge anchors and hex nut sleeve anchors made by Chun Yu Works are not covered by antidumping and countervailing duty orders on alloy and certain carbon steel threaded rods from China, according to six separate but related scope rulings.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its mandate on June 16 in a case on whether the Commerce Department has the statutory authority to conduct expedited countervailing duty reviews. The appellate court said the agency does have the authority under the Uruguay Round Agreement Act's enactment of certain provisions that favor individual company determinations and the URAA's grant of regulatory-implementation power to Commerce (see 2304250061) (Committee Overseeing Action for Lumber International Trade Investigations or Negotiations v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 22-1021).
The Tariff Act's customs penalty statute, and not the False Claims Act, governs customs penalties for fraud, gross negligence and negligence, and is the exclusive means to recover liquidated antidumping duties, appellant Sigma told the U.S. Court of Appealsfor the 9th Circuit in a June 12 brief. Responding to the court's order for supplemental briefing on the two laws, Sigma said 19 U.S.C. 1592 is more specific than the False Claims Act and has a "detailed and comprehensive legal regime," including specific provisions addressing customs fraud (Island Industries v. Sigma, 9th Cir. # 22-55063).
The Commerce Department complied with a remand order from the Court of International Trade by adding a respondent to its antidumping duty investigation on utility-scale wind towers from Spain, but did not alter its all-others rate, in remand results submitted to the trade court June 16 (Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy v. U.S., CIT # 21-00449).
The Commerce Department said that hardwood plywood exported to the U.S. by the Vietnam Finewood Company made using two-ply panels imported into Vietnam from China are outside the scope of antidumping and countervailing duties on hardwood plywood from China, in remand results submitted to the Court of International Trade on June 15. The agency said under protest that the goods are not subject to the duties since the trade court ruled that the scope language "unambiguously" shows that the orders do not include Chinese two-ply panels (Vietnam Finewood Company v. United States, CIT # 22-00049).
The Court of International Trade in a June 20 opinion upheld CBP's finding that importer Skyview Cabinet evaded the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on wooden cabinets and vanities from China. Judge Stephen Vaden ruled that, contrary to Skyview's claims, CBP supported its conclusion with substantial evidence and that Skyview failed to show its goods were made in Malaysia. Vaden added that CBP properly used adverse facts available given foreign manufacturer Rowenda Kitchen's refusal to provide any requested information and that the agency did not violate the company's due process rights.
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices June 16 on AD/CVD proceedings:
The Court of International Trade granted countervailing duty petitioner Nucor's bid to dismiss its case on the 2019 CVD administrative review on hot-rolled steel flat products from South Korea. Nucor claimed the Commerce Department erred by finding the South Korean government's provision of electricity below cost conferred a non-measurable benefit. The company dismissed the case after having all parties sign a stipulation of dismissal (Nucor v. U.S., CIT # 22-00171).
The Commerce Department assigned exporter Double Coin Holdings the 105.31% China-wide dumping rate in its June 15 remand results filed in a suit on an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on off-the-road tires from China. The trade court previously remanded the case so that Commerce could hit the company with the China-wide rate after finding that Double Coin failed to rebut the presumption of government control (China Manufacturing Alliance v. United States, CIT # 15-00124).