Skip to main content

Several Key Issues in Play

By
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, 2017 Prehearing 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 ranging from 33 percent (PRC-wide entity) to 86 percent (separate rate respondents).  Commerce continued to assign the PRC-wide entity a dumping margin of 33 percent because no review was requested on the PRC-wide entity.  While Guangzhou Jangho Curtain Wall System Engineering Co., Ltd. and Jangho Curtain Wall Hong Kong Ltd. (collectively, Jangho) failed to participate in Commerce’s proceedings for the third consecutive review, the agency refused to increase Jangho’s margin above the PRC-wide rate.  Finally, the Department continued to assign the separate rate (i.e., 86 percent) to JMA (HK) Company Limited when the company was granted a separate rate in the preliminary results, but later withdrew from the Administrative Review and requested that all of its business proprietary information be removed from the record.  JMA did so in an attempt to become a member of the PRC-wide entity and receive the lower 33-percent margin in the final results.  Commerce found that JMA attempted to manipulate the administrative review process.  To preserve the integrity of its proceedings, the agency assigned JMA the higher separate rate margin (i.e., 86 percent) for the final results.

Scope Issues

The 5050 alloy preliminary decision was as we had hoped.  The pallet issue decision was postponed until 12/9/16.  We are still confident of a ruling that these pallets are covered by the scope of our orders.

Elsewhere 

The Australians have filed for protection against extruders in Vietnam and Malaysia.

So, we expect an exciting and busy Q1 in 2017.  Thanks for all your support!

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Valuation, USMCA, and Fair Trade Priorities

By
 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...
Post a Comment
Read more

Section 232 Updates & Enforcement Expands

By
 The Administration issued another update to the Section 232 steel, aluminum and copper tariff program on June 1.  The program now reaches a growing list of derivative products and downstream imported goods where aluminum content is part of a larger product. The June 1 action modifies several of the 232 product annexes and makes temporary adjustments for certain equipment categories.  According to the White House fact sheet, certain agricultural equipment and other equipment will be adjusted from a 25 percent tariff to a 15 percent tariff.  The action also expands the category of industrial equipment eligible for the temporary 15 percent tariff treatment to include certain mobile industrial equipment, such as bulldozers and forklifts, when imported from trade deal countries eligible for that treatment.  These temporary changes are scheduled to remain in place through December 31, 2027. There were also modifications to the HTS codes covered by the annexes.  ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Section 232 Update: Focus on Aluminum Derivative Products

By
 Over the past several weeks, we have started to get a clearer picture of how the updated Section 232 framework will impact aluminum, especially when it comes to derivative and finished products tied to the markets our members serve. The most important change is how the tariffs are applied. Covered products are now generally assessed on the full value of the imported product, rather than only the aluminum content. For finished goods, that is a meaningful change in how duty exposure is calculated. Looking at the annex structure, several key extrusion-driven products are now clearly defined. Aluminum windows, doors, and structural components (7610.10.00 and 7610.90.00) fall under Annex I-A and are generally subject to a 50% Section 232 tariff applied to full value. Trailers and aluminum ladders (8716.10.00 and 7616.99.5130) fall under Annex I-B and are generally subject to a 25% Section 232 tariff, also applied to full value. The takeaway is straightforward. Tariff treatment is drive...
Post a Comment
Read more