AD/CVD Court Decisions In Second Half of August 2010

Court Dismisses Byrd Amendment Suit by Large Group of U.S. Food Producers

Domestic producers of honey, mushrooms, garlic and crawfish sued the U.S. government and multiple import sureties over the failure to collect new shipper AD duties and remit them to domestic producers, and over the sureties having failed to require sufficient bond guarantees. The plaintiffs argued that under the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000, or Byrd Amendment, prior to its lapse in 2006, they and other U.S. producers were entitled to the uncollected duties. In a partial ruling on March 26, 2010, the CIT dismissed the complaints directed against the surety providers. On August 27, 2010, the court dismissed the remaining complaints. The court determined that the under-collected duties would not be recoverable, and the prospective discovery burden on the government would not be justified. (See ITT’s Online Archives or 04/22/10 news, 10042255, for BP summary of earlier court decision.) (Slip Op. 10-96, dated 08/27/10)

Subsidy Values, Adverse Rate Upheld in 2006 Indian PET Film CVD Review

In the administrative review of the CV duty order on polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film, sheet, and strip from India for the 2006 calendar year, the International Trade Administration found that MTZ Polyfilms, Ltd. had benefited from export subsidies in reduced customs duties, excise taxes, and financing rates, and had failed to provide information requested, thus meriting the application of adverse facts available. MTZ challenged these steps but the CIT upheld the subsidy value calculations and the use of adverse facts. (See ITT’s Online Archives or 02/12/10 news, 10021230, for BP summary of final results of 2007 CV review of PET film from India.) (Slip Op. 10-78, dated 07/14/10)

HEDP Fair Value Investigation Remand Results Upheld

Following an earlier challenge, the ITA’s remand results in the less-than-fair value investigation of hydroxyethylidene-1,1-diphosphonic acid (HEDP) from China gave a country-wide AD duty rate of 30.94% and a separate rate of 15.47% for two Chinese producers, Changzhou Wujin Fine Chemical Factory Co., Ltd. and Jiangsu Jianghai Chemical Group, Ltd. Though the new rates were less than half the prior final results rates, the companies claimed the ITA’s recalculations were outside the scope of the remand, but the CIT denied the claim and upheld the remand results. (See ITT’s Online Archives or 04/28/09 news, 09042835, for BP summary of AD order on HEDP from China and India.) (Slip Op. 10-85, dated 08/05/10)

Court Sends Russian Magnesium 2006-2007 Redetermination Back to ITA

In the AD administrative review of pure and alloyed magnesium metal from the Russian Federation for the period April 2006 through March, 2007, the CIT concluded that the ITA based its results on a “misapprehension” of the production process, and ordered the agency to recalculate the value for chlorine gas, taking into account the production methods actually used by the respondent company, Avisma Corporation. (Slip Op. 10-93, dated 08/17/10)

Indian Carbon Steel Flat Products 2007 CV Duty Review Gets Partial Remand

Indian producer Essar Steel Limited sued over several ITA subsidy valuations in the final results of the administrative review of the CV duty order on carbon steel flat products from India for the period January through December, 2007. The CIT upheld the agency on the value of iron ore purchases from government-owned mines, and on the benefits from the 2005 Special Economic Zone Act and three national and state-level export subsidies, but ordered a reconsideration of the value of an export subsidy from Chhattisgarh State. (See ITT’s Online Archives or 07/27/10 news, 10072725, for BP summary of final results of 2008 CV duty review.) (Slip Op. 10-95, dated 08/19/10)