Wood importer Richmond International Forest Products launched a challenge in the Court of International Trade claiming its imports of hardwood plywood from Cambodia were erroneously deemed to be of Chinese origin by CBP. In an April 21 complaint, RIFP said its imports were improperly hit with antidumping and countervailing duties, Section 301 tariffs, Merchandise Processing Fees and additional Harbor Maintenance Fee. In addition, RIFP claims that CBP's failure to consider what it sees as key evidence violated the Administrative Procedure Act and the importer's Fifth Amendment rights of due process.
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices April 22 on AD/CV duty proceedings:
Domestic producer coalitions filed new petitions April 20 seeking antidumping duties on raw honey from Argentina, Brazil, India, Ukraine and Vietnam. Represented by Kelley Drye, the American Honey Producers Association and the Sioux Honey Association allege dumping at rates ranging from 16.83% to 22.60% for Argentina, 34.22% to 99.16% for India, 10.56% to 94.84% for Ukraine, and at 114.5% for Brazil and 207.08% for Vietnam. The scope is more narrow than that of the existing AD duty order on honey from China, with the latter covering both natural and artificial honey, as well as comb honey and certain packaged honey exempt from the scope of the new petitions. The petition for Argentina comes just eight years after antidumping and countervailing duty orders on honey from that country were revoked by a changed circumstances review in 2012.
The Commerce Department improperly treated CBP’s initial findings in an Enforce and Protect Act Investigation as fact when it relied on them to find a sawblade importer’s submissions unreliable and used adverse facts available (AFA) in a scope proceeding, the importer, Lyke Industrial, said in comments to the agency on a preliminary scope ruling.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
CBP's process for carrying out Enforce and Protect Act investigations could eventually be found by the courts to be unconstitutional, trade lawyers Jen Diaz and David Craven of Diaz Trade Law said during an April 21 webinar. The EAPA investigations, which seek to determine if a company evaded antidumping or countervailing duty orders, are mostly secret and do not inform entities if they are being investigated or what evidence stands against them.
The Court of International Trade's newest judge, Stephen Vaden, issued his first opinion with the court on April 21, dismissing tire importer Strategic Import Supply's challenge of CBP's assessment of countervailing duties on its imports of passenger vehicle and light truck tires from China. Vaden found that the importer's protest was filed too late, holding the 180-day deadline for protests runs from the date of liquidation, rather than the date CBP received updated assessment instructions from Commerce after Commerce amended rates set in the relevant CV duty administrative review.
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices April 21 on AD/CV duty proceedings:
Chests of drawers imported by Mitchell Gold are covered by antidumping duties on wooden bedroom furniture from China (A-570-970), but separately imported metal bases and drawer pulls for those chests are not, the Commerce Department said in a scope ruling issued April 19.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade: