Judges at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit during a March 7 oral argument prodded various statutory interpretations of U.S. countervailing duty law as it pertains to finding whether demand for a good is "substantially dependent" on an upstream product for purposes of assigning countervailing duties. If substantial dependence is established, Commerce may attribute subsidies to a raw agricultural grower to a later stage producer.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on March 7 said that importer RKW Klerks' net wraps products, used in a machine to bale harvested crops, are not "parts" of harvesting machinery under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule. Judges Richard Taranto, Raymond Chen and Tiffany Cunningham thus sided with CBP's classification of the products as "warp knit fabric," dutiable at 10% under HTS subheading 6005.39.00.
Cleveland-Cliffs steel company and the United Steelworkers (USW) labor union criticized U.S. Steel for failing to participate in an injury proceeding before the International Trade Commission on tin mill products from eight countries, which ended without the imposition of antidumping and countervailing duties (see 2402060063). Cleveland-Cliffs and USW said the decision will lead to "the continuation of widespread unfair trade practices in the tin mill products market."
The following lawsuit was filed recently at the Court of International Trade:
U.S. importer CME Acquisitions filed a complaint on March 6 at the Court of International Trade to contest the adverse facts available rate for the non-selected companies in the 2021-22 review of the antidumping duty order on stainless steel sheet and strip in coils from Taiwan (CME Acquisitions v. United States, CIT # 24-00032).
International Rights Advocates said the Court of International Trade's recent decision in Ninestar Corp. v. U.S. "highlights the unreasonableness of CBP's delay in issuing a [withhold release order] against imports of cocoa products made with forced child labor in Cote d'Ivoire" (International Rights Advocates v. U.S., CIT # 23-00165).
The Court of International Trade last week ordered a hearing in a countervailing duty injury case on whether any party violated the court's rules regarding the bracketing of confidential information, suggesting that Rule 11 sanctions were on the table.
The Court of International Trade on March 6 sustained the Commerce Department's fourth remand results excluding Star Pipe Products' ductile iron flanges from the antidumping duty order on cast iron pipe fittings from China.
A dispute settlement panel at the World Trade Organization on March 5 found that the EU's measures on palm oil and oil palm crop-based biofuels issued under its Renewable Energy Directive are generally compatible with the bloc's WTO commitments, but that elements of the policies violate global trade rules. The panel also weighed in on similar French and Lithuanian measures on the relevant products.
Importer Sucden Americas Corp. and the U.S. filed a stipulation of dismissal in a customs suit pertaining to the company's four entries of white refined sugar from Guatemala. The U.S. moved to dismiss the lawsuit in December, arguing that the case must be tossed because the importer didn't protest the liquidation of its entries or the denials of its post-importation preference claims (see 2312110045). As a result, the government said there was no subject-matter jurisdiction in the suit under Section 1581(a) (Sucden Americas Corp. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00228).