Skip to main content

Circumvention Issues Continue to Heat Up, Fourth Administrative Review Under Way

For this month’s update we’ll discuss administrative reviews, update scope requests, and developments in circumvention cases.  Each one has several moving pieces, so I’ll only address the key highlights.  However, this month we have the added story of how the AEC’s lobbying efforts help form U.S. trade policy in landmark legislation that recently became law. AECmembers: read the July issue of the AEC member newsletter, essentiALs, for more information.

The fourth administrative review has just begun.  Every year at this time, the Department of Commerce (DOC) reviews import data to select top aluminum extrusions exporters from the People’s Republic of China.  From this list, they will pick two or three companies for the Anti-Dumping (AD) case, and a similar number for the Countervailing Duty (CVD) case.  Chinese extruders are also offered a chance to seek a special rate by agreeing to disclose all of their production and/or sales data.  We will know which companies the DOC selects in the next few weeks.

The third administrative review is entering its final phase.  As reported last month, the DOC issued an incomplete preliminary ruling on the CVD case, and made an obvious error in its calculation in the AD case.  We expect to see a post-preliminary announcement from Commerce in mid-to-late August.  There is a growing optimism that the DOC will actually increase the rates.

Based on incoming evidence that we believe will be quite helpful in our 5xxx series alloy case, we have requested an extension to prepare our arguments.  That extension was granted.  I will update our progress next month.  Elsewhere on the scope request front, there were no new scope determinations announced by Commerce, and only two new requests.  Liberty Hardware Manufacturing Company asked for an exclusion on their shower door kits.  We will enter an appearance and ask for more information before going farther.  There was also a request from Ace Hardware regarding an extension pole product.  Products similar to this have already been excluded.  In cases with a strong precedent we generally do not respond.  We prefer to preserve our resources for more productive pursuits.

Circumvention issues continue to heat up.  I’ve received two more reports in the last month.  Both of them came from U.S. extrusion customers.  These are buyers of domestic aluminum extrusions that are abiding by the orders, but have competitors still importing product from China.  One of them filed an e-Allegation through the U.S. Customs’ website four years ago, yet has not heard a word from the government since.  It is frustrating for companies to go through this process. I’m learning that our current system is built so reporters of violations are required to use this system, but don’t get any feedback.  The pending Customs Re-Authorization Bill working its way through Congress now aims to address that issue.  I will address that in my special legislative report.

In summary, we’ve been encouraged that this year’s administrative review may be developing in a way that could lead higher tariffs for our orders.  That will be a first, if it happens.  While we anxiously want a ruling on the 5xxx series issue, new evidence will bolster our case thus causing us to seek an extension.  And, finally, circumvention reports and issues continue to be the hot topic.  We have a lot of resource aimed at these efforts that we expect will bring a result like we saw in Puerto Rico and Florida in recent months.

As always, I am grateful for your continued support!  Please direct comments to me directly at jhenderson@tso.net.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Nice Win to Start the Year!

 For months you’ve read my blog posts bemoaning the terrible decisions coming out of Washington D.C. related to our case.  Well, with the New Year, we have a fresh start.  And it’s a good one!  The industry has won its first Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA) case involving fencing extrusions.  On December 20, 2023, Fortress withdrew its request for an administrative review, prompting U.S. Customs & Border Protection (CBP) to terminate the administrative review entirely. Termination of the review makes the CBP’s affirmative determination of evasion final.  When terminating the review, CBP clarified that termination does not in any way preclude CBP or other agencies from pursuing additional enforcement actions against Fortress or imposing penalties should the need arise. The other EAPA fencing case is pending, and it appears the respondent is not participating.  We submitted voluntary factual information and the company in question did not submit writte...

Keep That Ram Moving Forward

By Jason Weber, AEC VP of Government Affairs   On June 17 th , the International Trade Commission (ITC) will issue the Final Producer Questionnaire in the Aluminum Extrusion AD/CVD cases .  The questionnaire is due 30 days after it is issued .  As always, we continue to update membership with Trade Alerts as appropriate to keep them informed .  Beyond the Final Producer Questionnaire, key upcoming dates are the Final Hearing on September 9, 2024, the Final Vote on October 23, 2024, and the Final Determination on November 11 , 2024.   In last month’s essentiALs article and Fair Trade blog post, I outlined the recent Department of Commerce (DOC) changes to the 232 Aluminum Tariffs .  In that article, I outlined the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) codes that were removed from the General Approved Exclusions (GAEs):    GAE. 1.A : HTS 7609000000 (Aluminum tube or pipe fittings (for example, couplings, elbows, sleeves);   GAE. 4.A : ...

Aluminum 232 Exclusion/Objection Process in Full Swing

Since our last update, the 232 exclusion/objection process is in full swing.  Over the last several weeks we have continued to refine the workflow and communication of the exclusion requests to make sure membership continues to receive the communications and objects when appropriate. For those members that have been working through the process we at AEC HQ thank you.  If for some reason you’re an AEC Extruder Member who should be receiving these communications, please let me know at jweber@tso.net and we’ll make sure you’re added to the distribution list. Although there are new companies submitting requests, we continue to see the same entities entering the bulk of the exclusion requests.  However, for the most part the exclusion requests are much the same with slight changes here and there.  This does simplify the objection process in a way where similar objections can be filed for multiple exclusion requests. As a reminder, price is not a valid reason for a company...