Over the last thirty days the AEC has begun to feel the impacts of the new administration.  Last month, the administration initiated a 232 Hearing into the domestic aluminum industry.  Just one week prior to that, Trump initiated a 232 Hearing into the domestic steel industry.  Both of these were requested by the United Steel Workers (USW).  (As you may recall, the USW led a short-lived effort to launch a 201 hearing about this time last year.)  You can read more about the 232 process and what it might mean to the AEC here (note: you must be signed in as a member to view the content).  The long and the short of it is that this is both an opportunity and a risk for our industry.  The AEC will be participating in the process as it is imperative that we make our voice heard.  In preparation of that task, we will need your help.  The 232 process grants the U.S. president a wide range of options to address negative trade issues upon U.S. industries based on national security issues.

Theref…

For those of you who attended last month’s Annual Meeting & Leadership Conference, you are well aware of the growing threats we are seeing in the market.  While our own case continues to hold up nicely, there are a variety of issues involving trade enforcement that are becoming the front-and-center issue of our trade orders.  To that end, our lead attorney, Robert DeFrancesco, discussed the opportunities that may arise from the new administration.  Afterwards, we participated in our annual Town Hall and discussed these growing threats and how we may be able to approach Washington with the hope of more help.

Story after story from the members in attendance discussed the increased shipments from Vietnam and Malaysia, and their impact in certain markets.  For many of us, it sounded like “deja vu all over again”!  However, we do have a variety of options, and in the weeks to come we will be exploring those options.  With the new administration beginning to discuss trade and trade poli…

Last month the Aluminum Extruders Council (AEC) testified before the International Trade Commission (ITC) in its request to have our trade orders against the Chinese aluminum extrusion industry renewed for another five years.  Those that testified included Brook Hamilton, Bonnell Aluminum Extrusion Company, Sue Johnson, Futura Industries, Jason Weber, Sapa Extrusions, Rick Merluzzi, Metal Exchange/Pennex, Bennett McEvoy, Western Extrusions, Jeff Henderson, AEC, and Alan Price and Robert DeFrancesco from Wiley Rein.  We expect to hear the ITC’s decision next month.

The hearing went very well.  We remain confident that the ITC will renew our orders.  However, there were ‘like product’ challenges to our case that required defense.  Like product challenges are similar to scope requests.  In essence the argument is whether a certain product, or family of products, should be excluded from the orders because they are so different from aluminum extrusions.  Three products were challenged: he…

This month representative members of the Aluminum Extruders Council will join me in Washington D.C. to testify before the International Trade Commission (ITC) seeking another five years of trade protection from our orders.  This hearing will be followed by a decision from the ITC to either end or extend our orders.  We are confident in our success. Please note that once again no one representing the Chinese extrusion industry will be present to rebut our testimony.  So, it seems reasonable to expect our petition to be extended.

There will be companies testifying that their particular product should be excluded from the orders because it is not a ‘like product’ to extrusions.  We saw this in 2011 when representatives from the shower and bath industry and from a heat sink manufacturer made their case that they should be excluded because what they bought from extruders was so dissimilar to a ‘real extrusion’.  In that round the shower and bath folks lost, but the heart sink manufacturer…

As we head into December there are several key issues in play.

Sunset Review Wiley Rein has gathered information from the industry and is quickly converting that into a filing for our case.  They have told me that we had a good representation of the industry in the data collected.

Remaining Timeline January 10, 2017Prehearing Report Issued
January 18, 2017 Prehearing Briefs
January 19, 2017 Request to appear at Hearing
January 25, 2017 Prehearing Conference
January 26, 2017 Hearing
February 6, 2017 Post-Hearing Briefs
February 23, 2017 Report to the Commission (APO Release)
March 1, 2017         APO Release
March 3, 2017         Final Comments
March 10, 2017         Commission Vote
March 27, 2017         Determination Expected

Administrative Review We received the DOC’s final determination in this year’s Administrative Review.  As expected, Commerce found that Chinese producers dumped aluminum extrusions in the U.S. market during the period of review (May 2014-April 2015) in margins r…

For months now I’ve reported that the center of the universe for our Chinese aluminum extrusion tariff orders has moved from being petitioners, to fighting through an unprecedented number of scope issues, to now, defending our orders.  To that end we have a number of issues still on the table and still unresolved.  We are now well over a year since we petitioned the Department of Commerce (DOC) to do something about the fake pallets and 5000-series alloy issue.  During that time we have visited with the DOC, sought and received help and political pressure on the DOC from many of our senators, and even put pressure on them through the media.  Finally, late last week we received the preliminary decision from the DOC on the 5050 alloy issue.  Now we wait for the pallet decision.

For some time now we have been taught by the DOC’s lack of responsiveness that the only way to get some movement is to harass our elected officials into berating the DOC.  With the election just days away, at the…