Skip to main content

Trade Enforcement Efforts Are Paying Off

I am happy to report that things are going well for us in our ongoing trade case against Chinese extruders.  The Seventh Administrative Review has commenced, scope issues and  results are falling our way, and we continue to make progress in our trade enforcement efforts. 

Mandatory respondents are being confirmed for the Seventh Administrative Review.  We have asked the Department of Commerce to select at least one curtain wall and one door threshold exporter.  This helps us in the review and in the scope challenges involving both of those end uses.  Furthermore, we plan to maintain our position that the other elements that make up a curtain wall unit or door threshold, which are subsidized like the extrusions, be subject to the review.  Winning this argument keeps the rates high.  As a reminder, the current countervailing duty is 20% and the anti-dumping rate is 86% for a total duty of 106%.  This grueling process will go on for a few months with the final results due December of 2019.

We have three key scope issues in focus.  We continue to await a date for the latest appeal in the curtain wall case.  Having won (again) the last round, some of those petitioners decided to appeal (again).  More to come about this issue once we hear from the courts.  We have asked the courts to reconsider its position in its appliance handle ruling.  We await their reply.  While we do not want to lose this business to the Chinese, it is important to know that the precedent behind the decision is very important.  We didn’t get what we wanted in the courts decision on this case.  So, we are asking them to reconsider.   More to come on this, as well.  Finally, the door threshold case continues to move forward.  There are three importers that have wreaked havoc in this area, and all three of them are now included in this case.  Confidence is very high we will win, since door thresholds are expressly mentioned as subject merchandise in our original orders.  That can’t be changed, so there is no way for them to win – in my opinion.  I expect fireworks around this issue once the decision comes.

Trade enforcement efforts have paid off.  We now have three "transshippers", which we have reported to Customs.  Also, Customs has asked the AEC to hold another seminar with key port employees from around the country.  We did this last year, and it was a huge success.  The more we invest in the education of port officers, the more violations they will catch. 

I am also very pleased to announce that Carrie Owens, the head of the Enforce and Protect Act at Customs, will be presenting at the AEC fall Management Conference, September 11-13 in Chicago (open to members only).  You will NOT want to miss this and the chance to meet Carrie.  We will also have a breakout session focusing on trade enforcement.  If you suspect someone is evading orders or want to hear more details about AEC’s efforts and results in this area, be sure to attend this session.

In closing, I am happy to communicate that all is well on the trade front.  We are focusing our efforts in the tasks at hand.  We are fully engaged in the trade enforcement aspect of defending our orders by using the old adage, “The best defense is a good offense!”  Thank you for your continued support!  Have a great summer!

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…