This month we received two terrific decisions out of Washington D.C.  The first was the report by the Wall Street Journal that Liu Zhongtian, founder of China ZhongWang, has been indicted by a federal grand jury on charges that he evaded nearly $2 billion in tariffs as part of a conspiracy to smuggle massive quantities of aluminum into the U.S.  The second was the final decision being made in our circumvention case against Vietnam.
First, Mr. Liu.  The AEC has been in a state of conflict with ZhongWang (ZW) since before we won our case.  ZhongWang and its affiliates were the number one exporter of aluminum extrusions into the U.S. prior to our filing.  Reports indicate that anywhere from 65-85% of all extrusions dumped into the U.S. from 2008-2010 were from ZW or its business affiliates.  Many of us will remember Peng Cheng, as one example.  Then the AEC exposed the perplexing mountain of extrusions produced in China and shipped to the Mexican desert, which led to the attempt to open…

This month we will cover the latest developments in open matters within our case.Appeals and scope requests dominated our attention.
Three appeals were filed this month.The first is the Perfectus/Pallet case.Perfectus has appealed their loss at the Court of International Trade (CIT).We will work with the government in this matter to secure victory at the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.In the Tai-Ao 5050 case, the CIT sided with the Department of Commerce (DOC) in their decision that 5050 alloys are covered by our orders.Now Tai-Ao has appealed this decision to the CAFC.We will work with the government on this case as well.Finally, the CIT is asking the CAFC to reject Jangho’s case.In light of the losses suffered by Yulanda in their scope cases, the CIT is asking the CAFC not to waste its time on this pointless appeal.I will keep you posted on these important cases.
We’ve also had some new scope challenges this month.Scaffsales, who sells scaffolding, stadium s…

Since the industry won its 5050 alloy circumvention case, extruders across the country saw a return of orders from customers that went that direction.  With this case on appeal, there were legitimate concerns that all of this would be reversed.  However, the Department of Commerce (DOC) won its case at the Court of International Trade (CIT), and the industry is spared another round of disruption.  This is good news, indeed!

This win comes on the heels of our victory in the Vietnam circumvention case.  Since that preliminary decision was made, Vietnam has placed duties on Chinese imports.  We believe this in response to our circumvention case as reported here.

Also noteworthy: on May 1, 2019, the Department initiated anti-circumvention inquiries to determine whether imports of aluminum jalousie shutters that are processed in the Dominican Republic from window frame extrusions produced in China are circumventing the Orders. The Department also self-initiated a scope inquiry to determine…

This month our Fair Trade focus has shifted back to scope challenges.  At the same time, other issues are developing, which I will touch on in this report.  However, the key decision this month actually came from an adversary.  Whirlpool has dismissed its appeal in the appliance handle case.  This is a great development for us, as we have one less opponent in our quest to push the Department of Commerce (DOC) to return the interpretation of our scope back to the original language and its intent.  This decision from the courts confirms that the DOC cannot rule an item out of scope simply because it has additional non-extruded components.  It also reinforces the principle that a part cannot be ruled out of scope if it is a subassembly of a larger product.  These two issues are the legal pillars that will enhance our ability to keep more applications covered by our orders, and possibly seek a reversal from the DOC on items previously ruled out of scope.

One of those product categories in…

As you know, the success of the AEC’s trade orders against the Chinese aluminum extrusion industry has been built on the scope of our orders.  The AEC orders cover aluminum extrusions including fabricated, finished, and even kitted products as long as the merchandise in question does not make a final complete product.  This scope has enabled us to protect end uses such as curtain wall, door thresholds, window and door kits, and a whole range of products extruders routinely produce.  However, in 2016 the Department of Commerce decided in the side mount valve case that ‘final and finished’ must include sub-assemblies.  This decision caused a shift in the DOC’s views about which products would be covered by our orders.  Consequently, we saw solar mounting systems, as well as several tube, pipe, and pole products be excluded from our case.  This also breathed life into more scope challenges as importers saw a chance to get their sub-assemblies excluded as well.  One such product that fell…

This month’s update will cover the key events related to the scope of our tariff orders.  This is the arena we’ve been focused upon in the last month.  Even so, we continue to work on trade enforcement issues, which I will also address.

There are three scope issues worth noting.  The first is the door threshold case.  Challenged by three importers, door thresholds with Chinese aluminum extrusions that were fabricated in either China or Vietnam were under review.  As reported in our trade alert in mid-January, the domestic industry prevailed in this matter.  It was an important victory because our trade orders specifically mention door thresholds as covered merchandise.  To have lost this case would have meant all aspects of our orders could be vulnerable to scope challenges.  It is also noteworthy to mention the penetration these importers had into the domestic product.  Some reported they had become the second, third, and fifth largest sellers of door thresholds in the U.S. This repr…