The Commerce Department will not consider arguments for a particular market situation that are devoid of quantifiable data, the agency said as part of a proposed update to its antidumping duty regulations. While Commerce acknowledged that it legally can consider non-quantifiable data per the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's decision in NEXTEEL v. U.S. (see 2304200048), the agency said it finds such arguments "typically unhelpful" to its analysis, proposing to not be required to consider them in determining whether a PMS exists. Commerce added that it will not be required to consider "speculative costs or prices" as well.
The Court of International Trade determined May 9 that Commerce Department reasonably found it does not need to incorporate offsets for the costs of complying with Germany's Electricity and Energy Tax Acts into countervailing duty rate calculations for respondent BGH Edelstahl Siegen. Ruling on Commerce's remand results in a case on the CVD investigation into forged steel fluid end blocks from Germany, Judge Claire Kelly also remanded the agency's finding of de jure specificity for Germany's KAV program. The judge said Commerce failed to explain how the criteria for the program are economic in nature and horizontal in application.
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices May 8 on AD/CVD proceedings:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit will drop SunPower Manufacturing Oregon from an appeal of the case on the 2017-18 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on solar cells from China if the company does not enter an entry of appearance within 14 days. John Magnus, counsel for SunPower, told Trade Law Daily that the company did not participate in the proceedings at the Court of International Trade and shouldn't have been included as a party in the appeal before the Federal Circuit. In the case, the Commerce Department set surrogate values for silver paste, while revising its use of adverse facts available, choosing to use partial neutral facts available (see 2301050026) (Risen Energy Co. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1550).
The Commerce Department applied a more lenient standard to antidumping duty petitioner Nucor Tubular Products by accepting a correction to a ministerial error that was raised only after the final results in the 2018-19 administrative review of the AD order on heavy walled rectangular welded steel pipes and tubes from Mexico was issued, respondent Maquilacero argued in comments to the Court of International Trade on Commerce's remand results accepting the correction (Nucor Tubular Products v. U.S., CIT # 21-00543).
The Commerce Department correctly treated expenses from suspended production lines as general and accounting costs during an antidumping duty review on welded line pipe from South Korea, DOJ said in its May 5 remand comments at the Court of International Trade. The losses are attributable to the general operations of the company because when lines are shut down for an extended period, no products are produced, which could outweigh the cost of maintaining those lines, DOJ said (Nexteel Co. v. U.S., CIT # 20-03898).
The Court of International Trade denied countervailing duty petitioner Nucor Corp.'s motion for a stay in a case involving the 2019 administrative review of the CVD order on carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate from South Korea. Judge Mark Barnett said the court ruled on a similar stay request in a different case also brought by Nucor, finding in both instances that "Nucor's desire to avoid duplicative efforts is not the type of 'pressing need' meriting an indefinite stay" (Nucor Corp. v. United States, CIT # 23-00003).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied a motion from plaintiff-appellants, led by Spanish olive growers Asociacion de Exportadores e Industriales de Aceitunas de Mesa, to get an additional 1,500 words to file in their reply brief in a case concerning the countervailing duty investigation on the ripe olives from Spain. Judge Kara Stoll told the olive growers that their brief is not to exceed 7,000 words and is due within 21 days. The olive growers asked for the additional words due to the "complexity of the issues presented in this appeal and the fact-specific nature of the arguments raised by the other parties" (see 2304170032) (Asociacion de Exportadores e Industriales de Aceitunas de Mesa v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-1162).
GreenFirst Forest is not the successor to Rayonier A.M. Canada (RYAM) for the purposes of countervailing duty calculation because RYAM still exists, DOJ said in its May 3 response brief at the Court of International Trade. DOJ asked the court to sustain Commerce’s remand redetermination on softwood lumber products from Canada (GreenFirst Forest Products v. U.S., CIT # 22-00097).
CBP ignored Congress' "unambiguous express statutory command when it failed to distribute" interest assessed after liquidation, known as delinquency interest, under the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000, appellant Monterey Mushrooms said in a reply brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Adee Honey Farms, et al. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 22-2105).