ITC Failed to Consider Diesel Fuel Price Increases in Shrimp Injury Finding, Exporters Argue
The International Trade Commission erred in failing to consider diesel fuel price increases when assessing whether imports of frozen warmwater shrimp from Ecuador, India, Indonesia and Vietnam harmed the U.S. industry, Ecuadorian respondents Industrial Pesquera Santa Priscila and Sociedad Nacional De Galapagos argued. Filing a complaint at the Court of International Trade on Feb. 18, the pair said the injury finding was unsupported by the record, due to the lack of information about fuel price increases (Industrial Pesquera Santa Priscila v. United States, CIT # 25-00029).
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.
The respondents argued during the injury proceeding that diesel fuel price increases "could constitute the sole or primary cause of any decline in shrimper profitability." The companies laid out the fuel price increases they faced at the start of the investigation period, which rose from $3.079 per gallon in January 2020 to over $5 per gallon in "seven months of 2022."
As a result of this increase, shrimpers today would have to pay an extra $50,000 for every fishing trip, the companies argued before the commission.
The ITC never asked for information about fuel price increases nor addressed the respondents' evidence on the increases in its preliminary determination, the complaint said. In its final phase questionnaires, the commission included a question requiring each shrimper to report its total "fuel and oil" operating expenses for the period of investigation. The respondents argued that the ITC should require the shrimpers to provide the amount of fuel and oil bought during the investigation period.
The complaint said this request was denied "without explanation." As a result, the respondents argued, the commission "had unlawfully failed to ask shrimp fishermen to report the volume of diesel fuel that they purchased during the period of investigation." Had it done so, it would have received evidence that "confirmed that the diesel fuel cost increases that shrimp fishermen incurred in both 2022 and 2023 were solely responsible for deterioration in their financial condition that they incurred in those two years compared to 2021, when they were highly profitable."
During the post-hearing briefing, the respondents again argued that the 55% increase in diesel fuel prices accounted for the injury to the U.S. industry. The commission didn't address the claims in its final determination, prompting the legal challenge from the respondents.