CIT Sustains Tire Exporter's 18% Duty Rate in AD Review
The Court of International Trade granted an unopposed motion for partial final judgment Nov. 26, sustaining the antidumping duty rate calculated for exporter Kenda Rubber (China) Co. in the 2016-17 review of the AD order on passenger vehicle and light truck tires from China. Judge Mark Barnett said the rate is "unchallenged and otherwise appears supported by substantial evidence and in accordance with the law" (YC Rubber Co. (North America) v. U.S., CIT # 19-00069).
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 review, Commerce initially picked two mandatory respondents: Zhaoqing Junhong Co. and Shandong Haohua Tire Co. Haohua declined to participate, and the agency calculated a rate for Junhong and used it to establish the margin for the separate rate respondents. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit remanded the case, finding that Commerce had to pick more than one mandatory respondent (see 2208290026).
On remand, the agency sought to pick another respondent, considering five companies, but ultimately choosing Kenda as the second mandatory respondent. Commerce calculated an 18.15% rate for the exporter. The trade court remanded this pick, finding that Commerce may have erred "in the order in which it selected a second respondent." The agency submitted its second remand results in October, discussing the order in which it considered the remaining exporters but sticking with its Kenda pick (see 2410290027).
In seeking partial judgment, Kenda said its pick as the second respondent "remains unchallenged" and its 18.15% AD rate "stands regardless of the disposition of these issues." As a result, there's "no just reason" to delay judgment for Kenda, the company said. Barnett obliged.