Repeat Filings in AD/CVD More Frequent, Larger Share of Caseload
The number of antidumping or countervailing duty cases brought repeatedly by the same industry is growing, according to a new analysis by Craig Thomsen, an economist at the International Trade Commission.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
In the recent executive briefing on trade on the topic, Thomsen defines a repeat filing as either filing a new AD or CVD case against new countries; re-filing after an order expired; re-filing after relief was denied; or filing either AD or CVD when one or the other was subject to a trade remedy, and the industry is seeking to have both types of relief.
This is the first in a series; the next paper will examine which countries are the targets of these sorts of filings.
Thomsen didn't analyze why the frequency is growing, whether it has something to do with the behavior of foreign firms moving production to new countries after they are hit with AD/CVD orders, or whether it is a function of domestic dynamics, or a combination of factors.
Thomsen calls these filings "boomerang filings" and he says both the raw number has increased, and they are a growing share of all filings.
Between 1995 and 2020, there were 344 trade remedy filings submitted, and 124 were boomerang filings, from 48 industries. (Thomsen defines an industry narrowly, so coated paper and uncoated paper would be separate industries; carbon steel plate and forged steel fittings would be different industries).
He said that from 1995 to 2000, 31% were boomerang filings; but by the end of the 25-year period, 2016-2020, 39% of the filings were repeats.
The total number of AD/CVD filings also grew in the second five-year window. There were 97 filings from 2016 to 2020, and 58 from 1995 to 2000.
"This trend appears to be continuing," he wrote, with 50% of the 14 filings in 2021, and 3 of 7 in 2022.
He said the subsequent filings are following faster, as well. Before 2010, the average number of years until the repeat filing was eight years, but from 2011 to 2020, the average was 3.4 years. He noted that makers of forged steel fittings, mattresses and quartz counters filed trailing petitions a year to 19 months after their prior filings in 2018 and 2019.