A rebar exporter received a specific subsidy from the Turkish government’s tax exemption program for companies that engage in foreign exchange, the U.S. and countervailing duty petitioner said Jan. 29 in response to that exporter’s motion for summary judgment. They also said the exporter provided unreliable benchmark value data, justifying the Commerce Department’s use of data from the petitioner, the Rebar Trade Action Coalition, instead (Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret v. U.S., CIT #23-00131).
Pipe importers supported CBP's final redetermination on remand that imported Chinese-origin “rough” carbon steel butt-weld pipe fittings, which only undergo the first stage of processing in China, aren't covered by the antidumping duty order on the finished products. They asked for their suspended entries to be liquidated (Norca Industrial Co. v. United States, CIT Consol. # 21-00192).
Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week, in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
Exporter Oman Fasteners asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Jan. 29 to dismiss petitioner Mid Continent Steel & Wire's appeal of a Court of International Trade decision imposing an injunction on the Commerce Department's antidumping duty cash deposits on Oman Fasteners' steel nail imports. The exporter said the injunction is no longer active because the Commerce Department completed the next administrative review of the AD order, so there is no live controvery in the case (Oman Fasteners v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1661).
The Court of International Trade on Jan. 31 remanded for a third time the Commerce Department's antidumping investigation on refillable stainless steel kegs from China, rejecting the agency's continued use of a Mexican data set to calculate a surrogate labor costs value for respondent Ningbo Master International Trade. Judge M. Miller Baker said Brazilian wage data already provided by petitioner American Keg was "correct as a factual matter," making Commerce's reopening of the record on remand to seek additional Mexican data unjustified.
The Court of International Trade on Jan. 30 said that for drawback purposes the 10-digit Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheadings should be read starting with their directly adjacent text and not the superior indented text. Judge Claire Kelly said the "plain meaning" of the statute governing substituted unused merchandise drawbacks refers to the "words describing the article adjacent to the 10-digit number."
The following trade-related lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Rebar Trade Action Coalition, a domestic petitioner and defendant-intervenor in a case recently decided in the Court of International Trade, announced Jan. 26 it will be filing an appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. It is seeking to overturn CIT’s holding that Turkish shipbuilding company and scrap metal supplier Nur Gemicilik ve Ticaret isn't a cross-owned input supplier of Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret, a rebar producer and countervailing duty respondent in the Commerce Department’s 2018 investigation of its products (see 2311270059). The decision meant that Commerce didn't have to attribute Nur’s government subsidies to Kaptan, which ultimately received a de minimis duty in the review (Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret v. U.S., CIT # 21-00565).
A wood board importer filed for summary judgment Jan. 26 challenging an August 2023 scope ruling that found the company’s edge-glued boards intended for making cabinets were subject to the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on wood mouldings and millwork products from China (Hardware Resources v. U.S., CIT # 23-00150).
Various importers and exporters are looking to intervene in a suit from solar cell maker Auxin Solar and solar module designer Concept Clean Energy challenging the Commerce Department's pause of antidumping and countervailing duties on solar cells and modules from Southeast Asian countries found to be circumventing the AD/CVD orders on these goods from China (Auxin Solar v. United States, CIT # 23-00274).