Skip to main content

Making Our Case Known

In case you missed it, the Wall Street Journal wrote back-to-back articles about Zhongwang and Aluminum Shapes.  In a scathing indictments the Journal linked Zhongwang to the massive inventory of aluminum extrusions in Mexico and connected Aluminum Shapes to Zhongwang about the so-called aluminum pallets.  Consequently, both Zhongwang and Aluminum Shapes came out with their denials.  Regardless, the issue certainly has grabbed the attention of the Department of Commerce (DOC) and Customs.

For the AEC the timing was perfect.  With our fall conference located in Washington DC, we were able to take our case to Capitol Hill asking for support in pressing Commerce on a decision about the pallets.  We expect the DOC to rule in our favor on the pallet issue by declaring them within the scope of our orders and therefore subject to tariffs and fines.  If the DOC should decide not to call the pallets in scope, then our petition calls on them to immediately launch a circumvention investigation.  Either way, we are in a strong position to bring this issue to justice.

For those awaiting a decision from Commerce on the 5000-series alloy issue, we continue to press the DOC to send additional questionnaires to all known importers and exporters of these extrusions, which are clearly a circumvention scheme.  I should also comment that I am hearing rumors that the next substitution the Chinese will try to exploit is 7000-series alloyed extrusions.  I am asking AEC members to send me any details and news they are seeing in the field related to this issue.

During the AEC Management Conference, Robert DeFrancesco, our lead attorney from Wiley Rein, outlined the next steps in our Sunset Review.  The International Trade Commission will be issuing new questionnaires for our industry participants.  We expect to see those forms very soon, and anticipate them to be due back to the International Trade Commission (ITC) before the end of 2016.  Stay tuned for more information on this.  While we don’t expect any opposition to our base extrusion case, the ITC will hear ‘like product’ arguments from companies buying and selling heat sinks, appliance handles, and heat exchanger units.  The petitioners in the ITC hearing will be arguing that their product is distinct and different from extrusions.  While these are similar arguments we’ve seen in scope challenges at the DOC, they are different.  We will certainly be arguing that these products have generally been considered in the scope of our orders, and allowing them into our market will cause harm to our industry.

Recently, the AEC went on the record in opposition to the proposed purchase of Aleris by Zhongwang.  We’ve added our voice to others, including the United Steel Workers, in an effort to educate law makers about the potential harms to our industry and the overall aluminum industry.
Clearly, the AEC has been busy getting its voice heard all over the world!  The number of news outlets that covered the Wall Street Journal article is in the hundreds.  In fact, the news that the Mexican metal horad could account for 6% of all the aluminum in the world went viral.  It is great to see the coverage on these issues and for the AEC generally.  As you now know, we will not back down.  Instead we aim to keep the pressure on as we await the World Trade Organization’s (WTO’s) decision on China’s request for market economy status.  With all of the recent revelations about the largest extruder in China, we believe we are doing more than our fair share of bringing these issues to light.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Fair Trade Update: Curtain Wall, Door Thresholds & Vietnam

Well, our year is off and running with a bang. Scope issues, Administrative Review, and circumvention top our list in early 2018.

This month we learned that there will be an appeal in the curtain wall scope case.  Permasteelisa and Jangho filed a notice of appeal last week.  It is expected that Yuanda will almost surely file their own notice of appeal by the deadline, which is February 12. The Chinese industry signaled that they would appeal in a recent article in US Glass magazine.   

Additionally, our scope challenge related to door thresholds continues to move forward.  This is a significant case because door thresholds are expressly mentioned as subject merchandise in our trade orders.  So, to lose this application could open the door to many applications clearly covered by our case.  Finally, we continue to await the judges’ (there are more than one judge at the CIT) decision in the appliance handles cases we defended last fall.  We believe we will win.  However, we are mostly i…

WOW! Did he say ‘Billion’?

The biggest news to hit the trade case came last month.  The Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a complaint against Perfectus seeking $1.5 Billion in unpaid duties for the fake pallets exported to the United States.  The DOJ didn’t pull any punches in their submission.  From the complaint, the DOJ stated, “Zhongtian Liu, a Chinese national, is the founder and chairman of China Zhongwang, one of the world’s largest industrial aluminum extrusion companies. Zhongtian Liu controls and is effectively the owner of Perfectus Aluminum, Inc. (“Perfectus”).  Between 2011 and at least 2014, Zhongtian Liu used Perfectus to illegally import more than 2.1 million aluminum “pallets” from China into the United States, as described in detail below.2 The “pallets” were manufactured by China Zhongwang and/or its affiliates and “sold” to Perfectus by several intermediary entities, including Dalian Liwang Trade Co., Ltd., Zhongwang Investment Group, and Yingkou Quianxiang Trading. Many of these intermediar…

Heating Up & Settling Down: The Dichotomy of our Trade Case

The agenda for our trade case continues to be driven by transshipment/circumvention issues and the 232 Investigation.  Meanwhile, our ‘base case’ is so quiet that we’ve been able to free up budget dollars from the Administrative Review to finance our circumvention case against Vietnam.

The Administrative Review is now complete.  The final rates determined by the Department of Commerce are 86% for countervailing duty (CVD) and 16% for anti-dumping duty (AD).  The total of 102% is our highest rate since we first filed the case.

Scope issues have calmed down a lot.  In fact, only the curtain wall case, the appliance handles case, and door threshold cases are on the front burner.  Reports from the hearing for the curtain wall case were very positive.  The attorney leading that effort, David Spooner, is quite confident we will win this round.  Of course, we fully expect another appeal from the Chinese.  We are awaiting the decision from the judge in the appliance handle cases and believe w…