Currently, the trade agenda has largely been pursued by the Aluminum Extruders Coalition.  As they do the work and pay the bills to take this new case to its final hearing later this year, the AEC is still working on legacy matters with the original China case.  Additionally, we continue to work with Commerce to get the Generally Approved Exclusions (GAEs) removed from the Aluminum Extrusion 232.   Unfortunately, we haven’t heard any word from D.C. on the 232, but I am led to believe a decision is imminent.   We continue to show evidence of aluminum extruders exporting from countries not a part of the coalition’s case as proof that the 232 still has a place in protecting our industry.   If you see a news item about a new extrusion operation in another country aimed at our market, please send it to me.   It should be noted that the Dominican Republic part of the Coalition’s case did not survive the preliminary round.   So, this is a clear example of how we need whatever protection we

 For months you’ve read my blog posts bemoaning the terrible decisions coming out of Washington D.C. related to our case.  Well, with the New Year, we have a fresh start.  And it’s a good one!  The industry has won its first Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA) case involving fencing extrusions.  On December 20, 2023, Fortress withdrew its request for an administrative review, prompting U.S. Customs & Border Protection (CBP) to terminate the administrative review entirely. Termination of the review makes the CBP’s affirmative determination of evasion final.  When terminating the review, CBP clarified that termination does not in any way preclude CBP or other agencies from pursuing additional enforcement actions against Fortress or imposing penalties should the need arise. The other EAPA fencing case is pending, and it appears the respondent is not participating.  We submitted voluntary factual information and the company in question did not submit written arguments by the November 6, 202