Skip to main content

Great Preliminary Decision in Kingtom Case

By

 As you have been following for several months now, the AEC has been engaged in several legal battles with Kingtom, the Chinese owned and operated extrusion plant in the Dominican Republic.  To date, three separate EAPA filings have been made, and all have been successful.  Now, the legal arena has moved to our Annual Administrative Review in both our anti-dumping (AD) and subsidy (CVD) cases.  Just last week the Department of Commerce (DOC) issued its preliminary decision in this year’s review.  Commerce issued its preliminary results in the AD case on July 30.  Kingtom, the sole mandatory respondent, received the 86.01% China-wide rate, as did the other 84 companies for which we did not rescind our administrative review request.  In the CVD case, Kingtom and two other companies received the 242.15% China-wide rate, and three companies received the 16.08% ‘all others’ rate.  Until Kingtom can prove to the DOC that all exports from its operation consist of extrusions produced in the Dominican Republic, these rates will apply.  The final decision is expected in December.  If history is any guide, don’t expect this ruling to change between now and the end of the year.

In the last two weeks we have heard of up to three more schemes under way.  While I can’t divulge details, the combined volumes of these three separate operations total over 50 million pounds per year.  All three of these claims have come to the AEC from outsiders.  We are assessing the details and data to develop the legal strategy to address these.  The lesson here is to keep bringing your suspicions to us.  You never know; we may be hearing the same reports from others.  So, your voice helps build the credibility of these claims.

Some of you may be aware that the criminal trial in the fake pallet case has been under way for a couple of weeks.  Here is one report you may find interesting.   It is hard to speculate at this stage how the U.S. government will proceed, assuming they win.  We will be watching this closely in the coming weeks as the verdict is announced.

Next month at the Aluminum Summit I want to be sure you or someone from your company stops into our Fair-Trade Focus Session.  In that session, which will be closed to the media, we will openly discuss what we can about our findings.  We continue to run data on incoming shipments.  So, by conference, we ought to have some items to share.  The key to our success with this is marrying the data with the reality of what’s happening in the market.  That is where you can be helpful.  So, in this meeting we’ll get into the weeds with what we’ve learned and what you know.  At this point, we need to identify targets for investigation that can give us the biggest bang for our buck.  I look forward to seeing you there.

Thank you all for your continued support!  Stay safe!


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Victories and Struggles: Our Mission Persists

By
 On December 3, 2024, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) took action in issuing a forced labor finding against Kingtom Aluminio S.R.L. (“Kingtom”).  This victory for U.S. extruders is a culmination of years of effort between the AEC and United Steel Workers (USW), which started with the initial Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA) allegation filed in 2019.  As a result of this finding, CBP has authorized all port directors to seize imports of aluminum extrusions from Kingtom.   For almost 15 years the Aluminum Extrusion Fair Trade Committee (AEFTC) has worked on a wide variety of trade activities.  In defending the China I case, the AEFTC has navigated the 232 Tariffs and has worked with other organizations on EAPA allegations, along with circumvention and transshipment issues.  Thank you to all who have contributed time and resources over the years!  However, there will be more work to do.  With a new administration and 2025 fast approa...
Post a Comment
Read more

Section 232 Implications: Get the Latest

By
 Recently, the AEC released a detailed fact sheet outlining the implications of Section 232 tariffs on aluminum imports, available for review on our website here. This document underscores our ongoing commitment to transparency and informed decision-making within our member base. Previously, we updated the 232 Derivative Products List to include a comprehensive breakdown of HTSUS codes and product descriptions, aimed at providing clarity for our stakeholders accessible here . Additionally, The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) within the Department of Commerce established a formal process for the addition of aluminum products designated the USHTS codes. The first window for submission opened on May 1, 2025, and closed on May 15, 2025. After the posting and public comment period occurs the BIS will make a final determination within 60 days. In addition to these regulatory updates, the Trump Administratio...
Post a Comment
Read more

The 232 Takes Center Stage

By
The 232 exclusion requests, objections, rebuttals and surrebuttals process continues with the U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC).  Since the exclusion process on aluminum extrusions restarted in June, AEC members have logged more than 500 objections and over 40 surrebuttals with the DOC.  While there have been a few very specific exclusion requests (i.e., hard alloy, seamless tube, etc.), objections have been limited to only one producing company.  As an industry, we have mounted a stellar defense with all exclusion requests receiving three or more objections from member companies.  At this point, there have yet to be any exclusion requests to make it to the final determination and we are hoping to have the first round of results to share at the Fall Management Conference .  However, if we do start to receive results before mid-September, we will make sure to communicate results as they are made available.  The number of 232 exclusion requests greatly decrea...
Post a Comment
Read more