The Commerce Department incorrectly calculated dumping rates for Canadian lumber exporters and used those "tainted" margins to calculate rates for other companies, a coalition including the governments of Canada and Quebec said in an Oct. 6 complaint to the Court of International Trade. The case is yet another involving the alleged misapplication of the Cohen's d test in Commerce's differential pricing methodology (Government of Canada, et al. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00187).
Ben Perkins
Ben Perkins, Assistant Editor, is a reporter with International Trade Today and its sister publications, Trade Law Daily and Export Compliance Daily, where he covers sanctions, court rulings, and other international trade issues. He previously worked as a trade analyst for a Washington D.C. advisory firm. Ben holds a B.A. in English from the University of New Hampshire and an M.A. in International Relations from American University. Ben joined the staff of Warren Communications News in 2022.
Metal finstock used to test machinery can't be considered articles eligible for testing eligible for duty-free Temporary Importation under Bond (TIB), CBP said in a recently released headquarters ruling.
The Court of International Trade sustained the Commerce Department's zero percent rate for non-individually examined companies in the fifth remand redetermination of the antidumping duty investigation of hardwood plywood products from China. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves in an Oct. 10 opinion sustained Commerce's separate rate along with its decisions to exclude Dehua TB and Jiangyang Wood from, and to include Sanfortune Wood and Longyuan Wood within, the order. Commerce ultimately decided on the zero rate under protest after Choe-Groves disallowed the use of a 57.36% rate, calculated using only de minimus and AFA rates (see 2303170047).
The Commerce Department made no changes to the final results of the 2019 administrative review of the countervailing duty order on corrosion-resistant steel goods from South Korea, in its Oct. 5 remand results. Commerce said that, in accordance with the court's July remand order (see 2307100028), it further explained its decision-making process for finding that three debt-to-equity restructurings provided a countervailable benefit, that a benefit passed to the new ownership, and that the uncreditworthy benchmark rate and unequityworthy discount rate were correctly calculated and applied (KG Dongbu Steel Co. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00047).
The Commerce Department made a host of errors in its antidumping duty calculations in an administrative review on light-walled rectangular pipe and tube from Mexico, including the improper collapsing of pipemaker Maquilacero and auto-parts manufacturer Tecnicas de Fluidos (TEFLU), the two companies argued in a Sept. 28 motion for judgment at the Court of International Trade (Maquilacero v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 23-00091).
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
The Commerce Department made multiple errors when it miscalculated benchmark data and its use of adverse inferences in a countervailing duty review on multilayered wood flooring from China, Chinese wood flooring exporters and consolidated plaintiffs Fine Furniture (Shanghai) and Double F said in an Sept. 29 reply brief at the Court of International Trade. The brief raised similar points to one filed by respondent Baroque Timber Industries two weeks earlier (see 2309180042) (Baroque Timber Industries (Zhongshan) Co. v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 22-00210).
The Commerce Department's failure to use a weighted average to calculate the denominator of the Cohen’s d test coefficient in an antidumping duty case remand was contrary to the underlying academic literature and produced unreasonable results, a group of AD respondents said in their Oct. 2 comments to the Court of International Trade. The respondents argued that Commerce failed to explain its choice in the face of its own practice and judicial precedent and have asked the court to remand the case to Commerce with instructions to calculate the denominator of the Cohen’s d equation either by weight averaging the standard deviations of the test group and the comparison group or by relying on the standard deviation of the entire population (Mid Continent Steel & Wire v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 15-00213).
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York: