CIT Says Commerce Improperly Added 'Regular Use' Requirement to AD Order on Tires
The Court of International Trade on June 9 sent back a Commerce Department scope ruling excluding exporter Cheng Shin Rubber Industry's temporary-use spare tires (T-type tires) from the scope of the antidumping duty order on passenger vehicle and light truck tires from Taiwan. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves said Commerce improperly added a requirement in the order's scope that the tires be of "regular use," since this term doesn't appear in the "statutory language" and is "belied by the terms of the Order itself."
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 AD order specifically covers tires that have the symbol "DOT" on the sidewall, which certifies they conform to applicable motor vehicle safety standards, the court noted. The order also says that tires with "P" and "LT" prefixes and tires with the "LT" suffix are expressly covered by the scope of the order, "regardless of their intended use."
Nevertheless, Commerce excluded Cheng Shin's T-type tire, which the company said is a mini spare tire that doesn't meet the size or regulatory requirements for regular-service on passenger cars or light trucks. Choe-Groves said that the order is "unambiguous," and explicitly covers tires lacking a "P" or "LT" prefix or suffix in their sidewall markings "as long as the tire is of a size that fits passenger cars or light trucks."
The government's interpretation of the order that requires "regular use" is undercut by the language of the order itself, the court said.
Choe-Groves then held that Commerce's scope ruling is belied by the evidence on the record. While Commerce said there isn't any evidence suggesting the tire in question is "of a size that fits passenger cars and light trucks," the court said there's "no dispute that Cheng Shin’s spare tires are of a size that fit passenger cars because spare tires are meant to be used on passenger cars."
Commerce's conclusion "turns on the assumption that the tires that fit passenger cars must be for regular use, not for temporary use as a spare tire," but, as previously discussed, the order's plain language doesn't mention regular use, the court noted. In addition, the court noted an invoice from Cheng Shin showing its tires were listed as "CAR TIRES," suggesting the product is "for use as a spare tire that fits passenger cars," the opinion said.
Prior to even addressing the merits, Choe-Groves held that the petitioner, the United Steelworkers labor union, didn't fail to exhaust its administrative remedies. After Cheng Shin asked for the scope ruling, Commerce set a deadline for parties to request a preliminary determination. The USW asked for a preliminary determination after this deadline. The agency proceeded to forgo issuing a preliminary determination and merely excluded Cheng Shin's tires from the scope of the order.
Choe-Groves held that Commerce was within its discretion to skip the preliminary determination phase, though the court said this didn't mean the USW failed to exhaust their arguments against the scope ruling, since there was no chance to raise them administratively.
(United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO v. United States, Slip Op. 25-72, CIT # 24-00165, dated 06/09/25; Judge: Jennifer Choe-Groves; Attorneys: Roger Schagrin of Schagrin Associates for plaintiff United Steelworkers; Franklin White for defendant U.S. government; Jeffrey Winton of Winton & Chapman for defendant-intervenor Cheng Shin Rubber USA)