The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices May 7 on AD/CV duty proceedings:
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Despite hotly contested litigation in the lower court, the Justice Department has been notably absent from an appeal of an antidumping case initially brought by exporter Goodluck India Limited. During May 3 oral argument in front of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, counsel for a group of tubing producers appealing the case refused to speculate on the government's lack of participation in the case but did point out that the Commerce Department did file its remand determination under respectful protest in the initial Court of International Trade proceedings (Goodluck India Limited, v. U.S. et al., Fed. Cir. # 2020-2017).
Trade Law Daily is providing readers with some recent top stories. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
CNC Associates is being investigated after allegations of evasion of antidumping and countervailing duties required on imported wooden cabinets and vanities and components from China, CBP said in a May 5 notice. The investigation stems from allegations filed under the Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA) by MasterBrand Cabinets, an Indiana cabinetmaker, CBP said. The company alleged that CNC evaded AD/CV duties using transshipment through Malaysia. MasterBrand is represented by Wiley Rein lawyer Timothy Brightbill, who represents several EAPA allegers.
Negative injury determinations that ended antidumping duty investigations on polyethylene terephthalate resin from Brazil, Indonesia, South Korea, Pakistan and Taiwan in 2018 will stand, after the Court of International Trade sustained a remand redetermination from the International Trade Commission that provided further explanation of the ITC’s decisions without any changes to the end result.
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices May 6 on AD/CV duty proceedings:
The Commerce Department recently issued two scope rulings that found wheels and wheel components purportedly imported for passenger vehicle use are not subject to antidumping and countervailing duties on steel wheels 12 to 16.5 inches in diameter from China (A-570-090/C-570-091). In scope rulings issued April 30 and May 3, the agency found that the wheels and wheel components are not intended for use on trailers.
The Commerce Department's preliminary application of an adverse facts available rate for a mandatory respondent to more than 40 non-selected respondents in an antidumping duty administrative review on stainless steel flanges from India violates the agency's obligation to calculate accurate rates, the lawyer for some of those non-selected respondents said in a May 4 letter to the agency. Peter Koenig of Squire Patton criticized the agency's practice of selecting a limited number of mandatory respondents in antidumping reviews, finding AFA on the respondents, then applying the erroneously reached higher dumping rate to all other respondents. He noted that, in a recent case involving Jilin Forest Industry Jinqiao Flooring Group, CIT found that this use of Commerce's "Mandatory Respondent Exception" goes against its statutory intention, which was to determine an "accurate all-others rate, based on a weighted average of rates determined for mandatory respondents" (see 2104300079). "Commerce should accurately calculate Chandan’s dumping margin, if not for Chandan (as should), but then for the 44 other Indian companies to whom Commerce is applying the Chandan dumping margin," Koenig's letter said. Chandan, the mandatory respondent, was assigned a 140.38% antidumping duty rate in the preliminary results of the review issued in February, and that rate was also extended to the non-selected respondents.
The Commerce Department backed its decision to not collapse companies into a single entity in an antidumping case, according to a May 5 reply brief to the Court of International Trade in support of the agency's remand redetermination. In a final affirmative antidumping duty determination on stainless steel flanges from India, Commerce originally consolidated Echjay, Echjay Industries Private Limited, Echjay Forgins Industry Private Limited and Spire Industries Private Limited into one entity since they were all owned by the Doshi family in India. After a CIT remand, Commerce reversed course, finding substantial evidence, including decrees from the Bombay High Court, indicating a “familial and business separation” between the companies. In its reply, Commerce addressed opposition from petitioners to the remand redetermination, and included a detailed analysis of why the companies are not affiliated and thus do not warrant being collapsed into a single entity.