The Court of International Trade on Dec. 26 upheld the Commerce Department's finding that Germany's Konzessionsabgabenverordnung (KAV) program, which exempts from a fee gas and power pipeline companies that sell electricity below a certain price, isn't de facto specific and so isn't countervailable. Judge Claire Kelly approved Commerce's use of facts otherwise available to find "the recipients were too numerous to render" the program de facto specific.
Food that was denied entry but can be reconditioned to meet FDA requirements isn't prohibited merchandise, so it isn't eligible for a refund if it's exported or destroyed, CBP said in a recent ruling.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Exporter Teh Fong Min (TFM) International Co. filed a brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit last week adopting the government's defense of its decision to revoke the antidumping duty orders on stilbenic optical brightening agents from China and Taiwan after no interested domestic party filed a notice of intent to participate in sunset reviews on the orders (Archroma U.S. v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 24-2159).
Antidumping duty and countervailing duty petitioners the U.S. Aluminum Extruders Coalition and United Steelworkers argued that the International Trade Commission incorrectly concluded that aluminum extrusions from China, Colombia, Ecuador, India, Indonesia, Italy, Malaysia, Mexico, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates and Vietnam didn't injure the U.S. industry (U.S. Aluminum Extruders Coalition v. United States, CIT # 24-00209).
Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week, in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
In a 18,700-word opposition brief, the U.S. attempted to derail a full-throttle attack brought by importers Wabtec Corp. and Strato against the International Trade Commission’s affirmative injury finding for freight rail couplers from China (Wabtec Corp. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00157).
Tire exporter Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations filed a 10-count complaint at the Court of International Trade on Dec. 23, challenging the Commerce Department's use of adverse facts available against the company in the antidumping duty investigation on truck and bus tires from Thailand (Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations v. United States, CIT # 24-00263).
The Court of International Trade on Dec. 26 upheld the Commerce Department's finding in the countervailing duty investigation on forged steel fluid end blocks from Germany that Germany's Konzessionsabgabenverordnung (KAV) program is not de facto specific. The program exempts from a fee gas and power pipeline companies that sell electricity below a certain price. Judge Claire Kelly said the agency reasonably used facts otherwise available to find a lack of specificity after the German government couldn't provide certain information on the program because it doesn't administer the program and would violate trade secret laws by collecting the information.
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices Dec. 26 on AD/CVD proceedings: