Aluminum Foil Exporters Challenge Benchmark, Surrogate Value Picks in AD/CVD Reviews
Various exporters led by Jiangsu Dingsheng New Materials Joint-Stock Co. challenged the Commerce Department's antidumping and countervailing duty reviews on aluminum foil from China at the Court of International Trade (Hangzhou Five Star Aluminum Co. v. United States, CIT # 24-00231) (Jiangsu Dingsheng New Materials Joint-Stock Co. v. United States, CIT # 24-00228).
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 2022 CVD review, Commerce used different "tier 2" benchmarks in evaluating the adequacy of remuneration for the aluminum ingot bought by respondents Dingsheng and Jiangsu Zhongji Lamination Materials Co. (HK). For Zhongji, the agency used ingot prices from the London Metal Exchange, while it used prices from UNComtrade for Dingsheng. Zhongji got a 14.21% CVD rate, while Zhongji got a 2.65% CVD rate.
The respondent said the move was not backed by substantial evidence, adding that the law requires Commerce to use the same benchmark from the London Metal Exchange. Alternatively, Dingsheng faulted Commerce for failing to average the London Metal Exchange prices with the UNComtrade data.
Dingsheng also challenged Commerce's use of adverse facts available against the respondent pertaining to China's Export Buyer's Credit Program. The respondent said it submitted non-use certificates for all but one of its U.S. customers, justifying a rejection of AFA.
In the AD review, Dingsheng challenged a host of surrogate value picks made by Commerce. For instance, the agency selected Romania as the main surrogate country and calculated Dingsheng's surrogate financial ratios using Romanian company Alro's financial statement. The respondent challenged both moves, along with the agency's rejection of Bulgaria as the main surrogate country. Dingsheng also contested Commerce's pick of surrogate values for the respondent's self-made recycled aluminum scrap input and by-product recycled aluminum.
Apart from surrogate values, Dingsheng challenged the agency's alleged "failure to grant" both a double remedies adjustment for the respondent and all Dingsheng companies a separate rate. The respondent also contested Commerce's liquidation instructions.