Commerce Lawfully Didn't Include Distance in Surrogate Boat Freight Value, US Says
The Commerce Department adequately calculated the boat freight surrogate value in an antidumping duty review without making an adjustment for distance, the U.S. argued. Responding to respondent Giti Tire Global Trading's motion for judgment at the Court of International Trade, the government said Commerce showed that its calculation was in line with its past practice (Giti Tire Global Trading v. United States, CIT # 24-00083).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
In the 2021-22 review of the AD order on passenger vehicle and light truck tires from China, Commerce calculated the surrogate value on a per-kilogram basis since the source of the data, shipping giant Maersk, reports its data on a U.S. dollar per-kg basis as a flat fee for the shipment of a container to a specific location.
The Maersk data provided fees for shipping the subject merchandise in 20- or 40-foot containers from Shanghai to various U.S. ports. The rates weren't stated on a per-kilometer basis but instead were a flat rate. As a result, Commerce "declined to make the distance adjustment advocated by plaintiffs because it could be 'distortive,'" the brief said. The U.S. said Giti didn't identify any evidence supporting its position that Commerce should have used a distance factor, only providing a breakdown of the distance between Shanghai and the covered ports without evidence that the Maersk rates were taken from those distances.
The government said Giti is "also wrong that Commerce’s practice is to calculate all boat freight on a per-kilogram, per-kilometer basis without regard for the underlying surrogate value source or record," arguing that the agency has previously calculated boat freight on a per-kilogram basis.
Giti also challenged Commerce's instructions to CBP to liquidate entries that weren't reported in Giti's U.S. sales database at the China-wide rate as "inappropriate" since Commerce told Giti not to include certain entries during the review period. In response, the U.S. said the respondent waived the claim, given that it failed to raise it administratively.
The agency "placed draft CBP instructions on the record along with its Preliminary Results that showed exactly how Commerce intended to instruct CBP to liquidate unreported entries at the China-wide rate," the brief said. Giti never challenged the instructions, and there's "no plausible explanation for plaintiffs' failure to raise the issue it now contests. Indeed, they provide none."
None of the exceptions to administrative exhaustion apply, the government added, arguing that Giti's "untimely argument is so skeletal that it should be deemed waived even if the Court entertains it on the merit." The U.S. said Giti also failed to identify any specific entries it thinks would be inappropriately liquidated at the China-wide rate due to Commerce's instructions.