Mexican Exporter Challenges AD Circumvention Finding on High-Carbon Steel Wire
The Commerce Department unlawfully expanded the scope of the antidumping duty order on prestressed concrete steel wire strand from Mexico when it found that Mexican exporter Deacero circumvented the order, the company argued in a Dec. 27 complaint at the Court of International Trade. Deacero said Commerce erred in failing to address the company's claims that the agency and the International Trade Commission originally meant to exclude high-carbon steel wire from the scope of the order (Deacero v. U.S., CIT # 24-00212).
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.
Administratively, Deacero claimed Commerce couldn't include high-carbon steel wire within the scope of the order because the ITC "intentionally omitted" it from the order's scope in the original investigations. The company noted the awareness of both Commerce and the commission of this exclusion, also citing the ITC's move to define the "domestic like product" as excluding the high-carbon steel wire.
Deacero also argued that high-carbon steel wire isn't a "part or component" of covered strand but is instead an input that's a "distinct product from the downstream subject merchandise." As a result, Commerce can't expand the order's scope to include the high-carbon steel wire, the exporter told the agency.
Deacero additionally said its production process in the U.S. isn't "minor or insignificant" as Commerce found, claiming that Commerce should assess the company's U.S. processes "relative to its process of producing" covered strand in Mexico. Instead, Commerce continued to compare Deacero's U.S. production process to the "full" production process for strand in Mexico, "starting with the beginning stages of steel production (i.e., steel billets and scrap)."
In all, the exporter filed a six-count complaint contesting the circumvention finding, additionally challenging Commerce's assessment of whether the value of the processing performed in the U.S. represented a "small proportion of the value of the merchandise sold in the United States." The company said the agency "unreasonably assessed the value of Deacero's imported" high-carbon steel wire based on constructed value. "In doing so, Commerce rejected evidence of the actual value of the imported HCS wire at issue" and "failed to articulate a reasoned explanation for this distortive methodological choice," the brief said.
Deacero also challenged Commerce's conclusion that the "pattern of trade supports an affirmative determination," contesting the agency's consideration of Deacero's imports of high-carbon steel wire from Mexico during the inquiry period as compared with the company's imports of the same products from Mexico during the prior 30 months.
The exporter also said the agency "unlawfully expanded the circumvention inquiry while it was underway" by altering the definition of the subject merchandise from "steel wire with a carbon content between 0.78-0.85 percent and a diameter of less than 4.50 millimeters (as stated in the published notice of initiation), to include steel wire with a carbon content between 0.60-0.85 percent and a diameter of less than 4.50 millimeters."