Skip to main content

The Aluminum Extruders Council Supports Chinese Imports

I bet you never thought you’d hear me say that, right?

The Fair Trade Committee has worked hard over the last five years to create a fair and level playing field for aluminum extrusion shipments from China.  Over the last couple of years we have seen a combined duty of approximately 42%.  Even though we can’t say with certainty the rate will not change, it seems as though we have hit a plateau.  One interpretation of this is that the U.S. government has looked at our case – now for the fourth time – and concluded that the tariff needed to level the playing field on a fair basis is 42%.  It is on this basis that the AEC can now say it supports Chinese extrusions.  Our ambition from the beginning was to find the right duty that accounts for the unfair and illegal trade practices of Chinese extruders that mercilessly dumped their products into our market during the Great Recession.

Furthermore, it should be noted that if a Chinese exporter or an American importer of aluminum extrusions believes that they do not have an unfair or illegal trade advantage, they can seek a special rate.  First, they could participate in the annual review process and petition the Department of Commerce (DOC) for a special rate.  In each of the first three administrative reviews there have been more than 50 petitioners seeking a special rate on the countervailing duty side, and another 50 or more petitions on the antidumping side. Compare that to the fact the NO Chinese exporters of extrusions came forward in the original investigation.   Secondly, if they believe the products being exported to the U.S. are out of scope and should not be subject to duties, they can file a scope request.  Since the final verdict was reached in late April 2011, there have been over 80 scope requests made to the Department of Commerce.  Many of these have successfully received the exclusion they sought.  In some cases, the AEC did not even oppose the petition. The bottom-line is that a path exists for those that believe they should not be subject to 42% duties to make their case, and if they are correct, they will receive a special rate, or exclusion.

So, this begs the question why a Chinese extruder that wants to compete in the U.S. market would not make every effort to do so.  From the first quarter of 2009 through the third quarter of 2010 Chinese imports into the U.S. went from approximately 7% of the market to 25%.  With such a strong position in the U.S. market, wouldn't a Chinese exporter pursue every legal option available to compete in the U.S. market?

Why wouldn't a company that’s been given the opportunity to show their books to the DOC prove existing duties is unfair?  Just this year two mandatory respondents in the anti-dumping administrative review dropped out of the process.  In 2010 the largest exporter of Chinese aluminum extrusions into the U.S. was chosen to be a mandatory respondent and declined to participate.  Isn't it odd that companies with such a significant stake in this market have done NOTHING to protect it?

Or have they?

It should be clear to the industry that the AEC will muster whatever resources are required to maintain a free and fair trade zone in the U.S. for its products.  The DOC has established the duties needed to create a fair trade environment.  U.S. and International trade law allow for companies to appeal their rate.  Any company or institution that believes they can circumvent the system, no matter how complex the scheme may be, will learn that it simply won’t work.  Illegal and unfair trade practices will not be tolerated in this market.  Those that believe they are clever enough or powerful enough, to outfox the system will eventually learn how wrong they were.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Several Key Issues in Play

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…

Chinese Extrusion Transshipments through Vietnam

In recent months there have been a growing number of reports about aluminum extrusions being imported into the United States from Vietnam.  This recent spike comes at a time when the AEC is watching such reports and import data very carefully.  Given the current policies of the Government of China to export their way out of their self-created overcapacity problems, the AEC is becoming more concerned about the prospect of transshipments from Chinese extruders through Vietnam.

AEC members are asked to contact Jeff Henderson with any reports gathered from the field regarding Vietnamese extrusions coming into the U.S.  All reports will be treated in strict confidence.  It must be determined whether or not there is a pattern in what is being imported.  This pattern could appear in end use markets being targeted, names of the companies exporting product from Vietnam, types of extrusions and finishing, etc.

So, please let Jeff know what you are seeing in the field.  He can be reached at 847.…

Special Report: Details Behind the China Zhongwang Case Filing

As noted in our post from October 23, the Aluminum Extruders Council filed a Circumvention and Scope Clarification case against China Zhongwang (ZW).  Mounting evidence from private investigators, testimony from former employees, data from online import and export databases, and anecdotal evidence from a variety of reporters and other sources made it quite clear that ZW has consistently and systematically been exporting aluminum extrusions that are simply welded together into what are essentially aluminum slabs.  While they claim these so-called ‘deep-processed’ extrusions are aluminum pallets, there is no evidence that ZW or any of its U.S. based operations market such a product.  It is simply incomprehensible that a company would export hundreds of millions of pounds of these extrusions into the U.S. without even marketing them.

The feedback we’ve received so far indicate that ZW intends to do with these extrusions what they have done in Mexico and Vietnam with similar schemes: sen…