There are a number of issues we will cover in this month’s
report. Our 9th
Administrative Review is getting ready to begin. New and old scope challenges are in the
queue. Other matters in the trade arena
have emerged from monitoring systems to the 232.
We have requested administrative reviews in the antidumping (AD) and countervailing duties (CVD)
cases on 95 producers and exporters of extrusions from China, largely based on
the Port Import/Export Reporting Service-PIERS data. We requested a review on the company we believe to be Kingtom’s
Chinese parent, Fujian Minfa Aluminum, as well as Kingtom itself. Kingtom also
requested a review of both orders, as did one of the importers subject to the
Kingtom Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA) allegation, Global Aluminum Distributor. Kingtom and Global
Aluminum Distributor requested that the review be postponed by a year and
consolidated with the next review cycle. This delay would give the company time
to cook their books and delays their current rate. Additionally, information
from the current administrative review could be used in the EAPA investigation,
but this would likely mean conducting a full administrative review, which we
have not done in a few years. We expect reviews to be initiated later this
summer. We will keep you updated about
the process as it unfolds in the coming months.
We
recently received a new scope ruling request from JRSK (dba Away) for certain
telescoping luggage handles. Away is a brand of hard-sided suitcases of various
sizes and is known for including a battery pack in some luggage for
customers to use to charge electronics while waiting at airports. We have previously lost cases when it
involved telescoping poles. Given the
new interpretation by the Department of Commerce that has re-invigorated our
scope that imported merchandise is only excluded if it is a final, finished
product, it would be a great precedent
in our case to win this one.
We continue
to work on the Reflection Window scope challenge involving their window wall
product. We have requested a delay from
Commerce as we continue to build our case.
As we reported last month, we won a huge victory in solar mounting
systems. There is still one more of
these scope challenges involving solar mounting systems from Schletter. The scope proceeding for Schletter’s
grounding clamps is still pending and the deadline for Commerce to issue a
final scope ruling in that case is currently June 25, 2020. Having won the CCM scope challenge,
confidence is high we will prevail here as well.
Transshipment
and circumvention efforts will be greatly improved by the new monitoring system
the Aluminum Association worked so hard to create with Customs. We have engaged this process and requested
some improvements. We submitted comments on May 29, 2020,
detailing that the proposed AIM system should track not only the country of
origin of aluminum products imported to the U.S. but also the origin of the
intermediate input used to create those products and the primary and secondary
aluminum products used to create that intermediate input. The Department is now
considering comments. Our concern here
has to do with the Chinese sending more fake extrusions into Mexico, which will
only disrupt and distort the market.
Many of you received
a request from the Aluminum Association for data on behalf of the Mexican
extrusion industry. The Mexican industry
is seeking trade protection against the Chinese.
We welcome that! However, we are
not pleased with the limited scope the Mexicans are seeking. We all know that any holes in the scope will
be exploited by the Chinese. We have
offered to help them get the data they need to file ONLY if they change their
scope to cover all extrusions, and even fabricated extrusions. Any scope that leaves open the prospect for
duty-free Chinese extrusions through North America is problematic. In the new USMCA, the Trump Administration
caved to Mexico’s demands at the final hour.
The Mexicans demanded that the U.S. and Canada drop requirements that products
must contain at least 70% ‘melted and poured’ aluminum produced in North
America. With that requirement being
dropped there is no safeguard against China supplying aluminum into Mexico that
will end up in the U.S. and Canada. So,
a scope that leaves out substantial product applications combined with the new
USMCA rules ultimately creates a clear pathway for China to injure our markets
through Mexico. We must be persuasive to
the Mexicans and motivate them to seek a universal scope that will shut down
illegal and unfair trade with China.
The Section 232 on Aluminum is back in
our sites. We had a tremendous response
from the trade pubs and our contacts in Washington, D.C. We will continue to work with the media and
our elected officials to make sure they hear our voice. We are not the only industry caught in the
middle of the highest prices in the world for our raw material and no real
protection from the many countries that have entered our domestic market. Steel fabricators also feel the pain. Every
official in Washington we have spoken to in the last few weeks tells us we are
not alone. While we have no expectation
that Trump will reverse his decision to drop the 232, we do hope they
understand that an increase in the tariff we pay will be fatal. We should all recognize the importance of
these types of communications with the media and our lawmakers. The 232 won’t be the only topic we will want to
address over time. So, we should
recognize one of strengths as an industry:
we have members in 35 states.
That is quite a footprint, and one that affords us the chance to lobby
70% of the Senate, and a huge number of Congress members. Thank you all for your effort on this. Together, we make our voice heard.
We will continue to
update you on developments. In fact, we
are discussing a podcast format which will allow us to communicate more
frequently, and invite speakers who can shed light on these complicated
matters. In the meantime, don’t hesitate
to reach out to me with any questions or concerns you may have. Thank you!
Comments
Post a Comment