Court of International Trade activity

Aluminum extrusions exporter Kingtom Aluminio, which operates out of the Dominican Republic, brought a complaint to the Court of International Trade on Dec. 23 to challenge CBP’s finding that the exporter had used forced labor (Kingtom Aluminio v. U.S., CIT # 24-00264).

The Court of International Trade on Dec. 26 upheld the Commerce Department's finding that Germany's Konzessionsabgabenverordnung (KAV) program, which exempts from a fee gas and power pipeline companies that sell electricity below a certain price, isn't de facto specific and so isn't countervailable. Judge Claire Kelly approved Commerce's use of facts otherwise available to find "the recipients were too numerous to render" the program de facto specific.

The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:

Exporter Teh Fong Min (TFM) International Co. filed a brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit last week adopting the government's defense of its decision to revoke the antidumping duty orders on stilbenic optical brightening agents from China and Taiwan after no interested domestic party filed a notice of intent to participate in sunset reviews on the orders (Archroma U.S. v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 24-2159).

Importer Generac Power Systems brought on Dec. 20 two complaints to the Court of International Trade alleging CBP, in 2020, applied Section 301 tariffs to multiple of its entries despite excluding “substantially identical” merchandise (Generac Power Systems v. U.S., CIT # 20-03882, -03920).

Antidumping duty and countervailing duty petitioners the U.S. Aluminum Extruders Coalition and United Steelworkers argued that the International Trade Commission incorrectly concluded that aluminum extrusions from China, Colombia, Ecuador, India, Indonesia, Italy, Malaysia, Mexico, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates and Vietnam didn't injure the U.S. industry (U.S. Aluminum Extruders Coalition v. United States, CIT # 24-00209).

In a 18,700-word opposition brief, the U.S. attempted to derail a full-throttle attack brought by importers Wabtec Corp. and Strato against the International Trade Commission’s affirmative injury finding for freight rail couplers from China (Wabtec Corp. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00157).

The Court of International Trade on Dec. 26 upheld the Commerce Department's finding in the countervailing duty investigation on forged steel fluid end blocks from Germany that Germany's Konzessionsabgabenverordnung (KAV) program is not de facto specific. The program exempts from a fee gas and power pipeline companies that sell electricity below a certain price. Judge Claire Kelly said the agency reasonably used facts otherwise available to find a lack of specificity after the German government couldn't provide certain information on the program because it doesn't administer the program and would violate trade secret laws by collecting the information.

Tire exporter Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations filed a 10-count complaint at the Court of International Trade on Dec. 23, challenging the Commerce Department's use of adverse facts available against the company in the antidumping duty investigation on truck and bus tires from Thailand (Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations v. United States, CIT # 24-00263).

The International Trade Commission on Dec. 23 published a summary of administrative protective order (APO) breach investigations related to proceedings under title VII and section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 conducted during fiscal year 2024. The commission said that, over time, it has added to its report of breaches in proceedings other than title VII and violations of the ITC's rules, including the rule on bracketing business proprietary information.