Skip to main content

5xxx Scope Case Heads to the Next Round

For months the aluminum extrusion industry has been awaiting a decision from the Department of Commerce (DOC) on the scope requests concerning 5000-series products.  In October, the DOC pushed the decision date out to November 7, 2014.  On November 7th the DOC announced its decision to launch a formal scope proceeding on the subject.  While the Department did not take the opportunity to affirmatively state that 5xxx products that have been heat treated were covered by the scope, the fact that they initiated a formal proceeding indicates that they feel it is a close call and worth further examination.  All parties will have until November 28, 2014 to submit their final comments.  The deadline for rebuttal comments is December 8, 2014.

The Aluminum Extruders Council’s Fair Trade Lobbying team has spent many hours in person, and on the phone, looking for support from elected officials.  That effort has translated into numerous calls and letters to DOC Assistant Secretary for Enforcement & Compliance, Paul Piquado, on our behalf.  Clearly, that effort has paid off.  This scope request--given the wording of the original orders and the fact some Chinese extruders are shipping a heat-treated product with a non-heat treat alloy designation--a closer look is understandable.  What would have been a disaster for us is if the DOC believed the 5xxx products excluded in our orders was the same product being brought into the U.S.  We know that is not the case.

According to the Aluminum Association (AA), 5xxx alloyed aluminum is NOT heat treated, whereas the material coming into the U.S. from China is heat treated.  In fact, the AA will be interested to learn that some products are inappropriately labelled using this alloy and temper designation.  End users of extrusions should also be concerned.  Consider liability issues that could arise if there is a failure in the field and the metal used is shown to have an alloy and temper designation never even recognized by the AA.

So, the evidence we’ve been able to present to the DOC, the testimony of AEC members, and the support we’ve received from key elected officials has caused the DOC to stop and take a longer look. That is good for the domestic industry.  However, we still have work to do.

In the coming weeks we will continue to update and recruit elected officials helpful to our effort, add additional arguments that have developed in recent weeks, and stay very close to the DOC.  Stay tuned for further updates and requests for information.  With dedicated efforts from AEC membership, I am convinced we will prevail.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Section 232 Implications: Get the Latest

 Recently, the AEC released a detailed fact sheet outlining the implications of Section 232 tariffs on aluminum imports, available for review on our website here. This document underscores our ongoing commitment to transparency and informed decision-making within our member base. Previously, we updated the 232 Derivative Products List to include a comprehensive breakdown of HTSUS codes and product descriptions, aimed at providing clarity for our stakeholders accessible here . Additionally, The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) within the Department of Commerce established a formal process for the addition of aluminum products designated the USHTS codes. The first window for submission opened on May 1, 2025, and closed on May 15, 2025. After the posting and public comment period occurs the BIS will make a final determination within 60 days. In addition to these regulatory updates, the Trump Administratio...

Valuation, USMCA, and Fair Trade Priorities

 The primary focus of our government affairs work at this moment centers on the Section 232 valuation issue currently under discussion in Washington, D.C.  As highlighted during the recent Aluminum Summit and in prior AEC communications, there remains uncertainty regarding how the Administration intends to resolve this matter. The original Executive Order that established the Section 232 aluminum tariffs made clear that the tariffs were intended to apply to the full value of the imported aluminum extrusion, not solely the value of the aluminum content within the product.  At this time, it remains unclear whether the Administration will seek to address the issue by issuing a new Executive Order or by providing additional interpretive guidance through U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).  The AEC is actively monitoring these discussions and will update members as soon as a definitive course of action emerges. Parallel to the valuation discussions, attention is tur...

Adjustments to the 232 Tariffs

 On June 3, 2025, an Executive Order (EO) was issued adjusting the Section 232 tariff on aluminum and aluminum derivative products (DPL) from 25% to 50%.  In addition to the adjustment in the 232 tariff, the EO also contains language that adjusts how the 232 tariff is applied. The following is a summary of the key points.  Aluminum and aluminum derivative products within HTS Ch. 76 and outside HTS Ch. 76: the 50% duty applies only to the aluminum content.  Any non-aluminum content in these products will be subject to the reciprocal tariff (currently at 10%).  This is a change from the February 10, 2025, EO for aluminum and aluminum derivative products in HTS Ch. 76 where the 232 tariff was applied to the full value of the product.  With the most recent EO, the 232 tariff now applies only to the aluminum content and the 10% reciprocal tariff applies to the non-aluminum content.  The current EO also changes how the 232 Auto tariffs, 232 aluminum tariffs ...