The Court of International Trade on Aug. 11 upheld the Commerce Department's 2021-22 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells from China in a confidential decision. Judge Mark Barnett gave the parties until Aug. 18 to review the confidential information in the decision. In the case, exporter Yingli Energy argued that the trade court should strike down the Commerce Department's ordinary presumption that exporters in non-market economies are under foreign government control, urging the court to undertake a Loper Bright analysis of the AD statute (see 2506050001) (Yingli Energy (China) Co. v. U.S, CIT # 24-00131).
The Court of International Trade on Aug. 12 sent back the Commerce Department's 2021 administrative review of the countervailing duty order on cut-to-length carbon-quality steel plate from South Korea in a confidential decision. Judge Claire Kelly gave the parties until Aug. 18 to review the confidential information in the decision. The suit was brought by exporter Hyundai Steel to contest Commerce's specificity finding regarding the provision of subsidized electricity (see 2505270004). Kelly previously remanded the review after finding that the agency didn't provide a "rational basis" for its de facto specificity finding (see 2412170041). Commerce initially said the Korean steel industry was one of four apparently unrelated industries out of 10 that, together, were the four biggest users of the off-peak electricity program. On remand, the agency switched its grouping to only three industries (Hyundai Steel Co. v. U.S, CIT # 23-00211).
The Commerce Department on Aug. 11 clarified the basis it used for applying adverse facts available against respondent Saha Thai Steel Pipe in the 2020-21 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on circular welded carbon and steel pipes and tubes from Thailand. Submitting its remand results to the Court of International Trade, Commerce said it reconsidered Saha Thai and BNK Steel Co.'s affiliation status and found that the two are affiliated based on AFA (Saha Thai Steel Pipe Public Co. v. U.S., CIT # 21-00627).
The Court of International Trade on Aug. 12 sustained the Commerce Department's selection of a surrogate financial statement and use of respondent Siam Metal Tech Co.'s invoice date as the date of sale for the respondent's U.S. sales in an antidumping duty proceeding. Sustaining the AD investigation on boltless steel shelving units prepackaged for sale from Thailand, Judge Mark Barnett also upheld the agency's reliance on respondents Bangkok Sheet Metal Public Co.'s and Siam Metal's actual costs that are recorded in their financial accounting systems for the total cost of manufacturing.
The Commerce Department properly included importer Valeo North America's T-series aluminum sheet in the scope of the antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders on common alloy aluminum sheet from China, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held on Aug. 12. Judges Richard Taranto, Todd Hughes and Kara Stoll disagreed with the importer as to the ambiguity in the orders' scope and on whether its aluminum sheet falls outside the orders' scope, since it's heat-treated.
Brazil requested dispute consultations with the U.S. at the World Trade Organization on Aug. 11 regarding the 50% tariffs that President Donald Trump recently imposed on Brazilian goods. Brazil said the measures are inconsistent with U.S. obligations under Articles I and II of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 and Articles 23.1 and 23.2 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU).
The U.S. filed a motion for default judgment at the Court of International Trade on Aug. 10 against importer Rago Tires, seeking $56,435.48 for gross negligence in classifying its tires as not subject to antidumping duties and countervailing duties (United States v. Rago Tires, CIT # 24-00043).
The U.S. "myopically" focused on a "single piece of evidence" regarding the proper date of sale of exporter Toyo Kohan's U.S. sales in the 2022-23 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on diffusion-annealed nickel-plate flat-rolled steel from Japan, Toyo Kohan argued in an Aug. 8 reply brief at the Court of International Trade. The government's brief centered on a statement in the exporter's questionnaire responses and the "price of a single example sales transaction" and says this focus is "reasonable," yet it's unreasonable to "ignore the second example in the same exhibit" that shows a price change, the brief said (Toyo Kohan Co. v. United States, CIT # 24-00261).
The Commerce Department on Aug. 8 calculated an individual countervailing duty rate for exporter Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo and Wood Industry Co. on remand in a case on the administrative review of the CVD order on multilayered wood flooring from China for the 2017 review period. Commerce gave Jiangsu Senmao a 2.4% CVD rate in response to an instruction from the Court of International Trade to individually review the respondent (Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo and Wood Industry Co. v. United States, CIT # 20-03885).
The U.S. told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Aug. 11 that stripping the president of his authority to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act would lead to "ruinous" economic consequences in light of the trade deals reached with the EU, Indonesia, the Philippines, Japan and the U.K. (V.O.S. Selections v. Donald J. Trump, Fed. Cir. # 25-1813).