Skip to main content

Aluminum 232 Investigation & Fair Trade Update

This month we will look at the 232 Investigation and provide an update on our Fair Trade case.  After having lived, eaten, and slept the 232 Investigation for the last 11 months, it is hard to believe it’s nearly over.  I say nearly over, because the aluminum industry now has an opportunity to seek exclusions by country or product.  Furthermore, the President has made it clear to excluded countries that they are only conditionally excluded pending the outcome of other trade negotiations.  Nevertheless, the AEC’s shuttle diplomacy to Washington D.C. on this matter is, for all intents and purposes, complete.

Countries and individual companies have already started to seek exclusions.  Both Canada and Mexico were initially excluded, based on a positive outcome to the ongoing North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) renegotiations.  Other countries have also been excluded since the announcement.  Now we are seeing and hearing of many companies coming forward seeking specific product exclusions.  The administration appears prepared to process those requests.  On April 5th the AEC hosted a webinar presented by its lead attorney on this matter, Matthew McConkey of Mayer Brown.  You can hear the recorded session on our YouTube channel here.

For the AEC fair trade case, the focus continues to be on trade enforcement.  The AEC launched its petition for a circumvention case against Vietnam earlier this year.  The Department of Commerce (DOC) has since initiated a full investigation.  The results from that investigation are expected towards the end of 2018.  Likewise, the AEC has engaged the Customs and Border Patrol through the new Enforce Act about reports of transshipments coming from other countries.  I will be spending a lot of time on this type of reporting in the coming months.  The U.S. government changed its process in handling reports of transshipment activity.  This new process requires Customs to report certain findings and hit specific deadlines in order to make the investigation more transparent to the reporters.  I have met with the person in charge of this new process and she is excited to support our industry!

Scope issues are still being followed closely in the curtain wall, door threshold, and appliance handle cases.  I have previously reported on our progress in those matters.  At this time there is nothing more to report.

This summer we will be gearing up for the next administrative review, and look forward to the DOC’s announcement about its results on this year’s review.

Be sure to check out the upcoming essentiALs articles related to our trade case.  There are some interesting events taking place, which cannot yet be discussed publicly!  Thank you for your continued trust and support!

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…

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…

AEC Duties Unchanged; “Trumponomics” Impacts Extruders

Our 6th Annual Administrative Review results have been announced.  As previously reported, the Department of Commerce (DOC) maintained extrusion tariffs at 86.01% for our subsidy, or countervailing duty (CVD), case and 20% for our anti-dumping (AD) case.  The combined duty of 106% has been stable since 2016.  This is a good number for the industry, which continues to contain Chinese aluminum extrusion at less than 1% market share. Furthermore, the DOC also assigned the Adverse Facts Available (AFA) rate of 198.61% to the two mandatory respondents, Liaoning Zhongwang Group Co., Ltd. and Liaoyang Zhongwang Aluminum Profile Co. Ltd., which has been the AFA rate since the 5th review.  The 7th Annual Administrative Review has begun with the selection of mandatory respondents. 

Elsewhere in our case, there is nothing new to report on the scope issues we are battling.  We continue to wait for court dates or decisions depending on the matter.  Our trade enforcement actions and results have ma…