The Commerce Department can use adverse facts available in a countervailing duty review due to the Chinese government's failure provide information about how electricity processes and costs vary among its provinces, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said in a Jan. 28 opinion. The opinion, which upheld a Court of International Trade ruling, concerns the fourth administrative review of the CVD order on solar cells from China, in which Commerce identified electricity price variations across different provinces, resulting in a finding of the provision of electricity for less than adequate remuneration.

The trade provisions of the America COMPETES Act of 2022, the House's answer to the Senate U.S. Innovation and Opportunity Act, propose dramatic changes to antidumping and countervailing laws, a restriction on future Miscellaneous Tariff Bill lists, and would bar Chinese goods from entering under the de minimis statute. The House Rules Committee also released a section by section summary.

The Court of International Trade remanded the Commerce Department's final results in the antidumping duty investigation of truck and bus tires from China in a Jan. 24 opinion. The two groups of plaintiffs are represented by two Chinese exporters, Guizhou Tyre and Double Coin Holdings. Judge Timothy Stanceu sent the case back to Commerce so the agency can reconsider its decision not to grant separate rate status to these plaintiffs along with its position that Guizhou failed to rebut the presumption of control by the Chinese government.

The Court of International Trade in a Jan. 21 order denied California Steel Industries' and Welspun Tubular's bid for a stay in a case over the Commerce Department's final results in the third administrative review of the antidumping duty order on welded line pipe from South Korea. CSI and Welspun wanted a stay while the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit mulls whether Commerce can make a particular market situation adjustment to the cost of production in the sales-below-cost test. CIT said CAFC already ruled against the practice, so the trade court can't be certain that granting the stay would "serve any purpose other than" to just delay resolution of the case.

The Court of International Trade on Jan .13 sustained the Commerce Department's remand results in a case on a countervailing duty investigation into carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate from South Korea. On remand from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Commerce held that the Korean Electricity Corp. didn't provide electricity for less than adequate remuneration and that prices on the Korean Power Exchange are not a countervailable benefit. The CVD petitioner, Nucor, questioned the use of a preferential-rate standard in the case, but the trade court held that Commerce also considered whether KEPCO recouped its costs in finding that electricity was not sold for LTAR.

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Jan. 10 upheld the Commerce Department's rates for the separate rate respondents in an antidumping review on diamond sawblades from China. In the review, Commerce calculated the rate by averaging the adverse facts available and zero percent rates of the two respondents. Affirming the Court of International Trade's decision, the Federal Circuit said this move was valid since Commerce was authorized by the statute to rely on AFA in finding the separate rate and that the rate was supported by evidence that the separate rates all trended upwards over the past administrative reviews.

Porsche Motorsport North America can't claim duty-free treatment of its auto parts and tools under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 9801.00.85, the Court of International Trade said in a Dec. 30 opinion. The subheading is meant for goods temporarily exported for use in a trade and then returned to the U.S. Judge Stephen Vaden said that Porsche failed to clear the first criteria for use of the subheading since it sold some of its auto parts in Canada, despite re-importing the unsold goods.

The Court of International Trade on Jan. 3 sustained the Commerce Department's second remand results in the 2016-2017 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on welded line pipe from South Korea. The court previously remanded Commerce's decision to calculate respondent NEXTEEL Co.'s costs of non-prime products based on their resale value and then reallocate the difference between the resale value and actual costs of making non-prime goods to the costs of prime products in calculating constructed value. On remand, Commerce used NEXTEEL's actual costs for non-prime products.

The Court of International Trade on Dec. 28 sustained the Commerce Department's flip to a final negative determination in the countervailing duty investigation of utility-scale wind towers from Indonesia. Judge Jane Restani, in her second opinion of the day, agreed with Commerce's determination on remand that Krakatau POSCO -- a joint venture between a private South Korean steel company and an Indonesian government-owned company -- is neither an authority nor directed by an authority and therefore can't provide subsidies to the CVD respondents. The court also found that Commerce properly reached a negative upstream subsidy determination for the Rediscount Loan Program. Commerce had issued the order, now slated for revocation, in 2020.

The Court of International Trade sustained the Commerce Department's second remand results in the antidumping duty investigation into large diameter welded pipe from Turkey. In the second remand results, Commerce dropped a cost-based particular market situation adjustment to respondent Borusan Mannesmann's cost of production for the purposes of calculating constructed value. While no parties contested the elimination of the PMS adjustment, the AD petitioner took issue with Commerce's decision to not address the issue of the date of sale. Judge Jane Restani said that it is not necessary for the court to address the date-of-sale argument since it is moot since the result is a de minimis rate for Borusan.