I bet you never thought you’d hear me say that, right? The Fair Trade Committee has worked hard over the last five years to create a fair and level playing field for aluminum extrusion shipments from China.  Over the last couple of years we have seen a combined duty of approximately 42%.  Even though we can’t say with certainty the rate will not change, it seems as though we have hit a plateau.  One interpretation of this is that the U.S. government has looked at our case – now for the fourth time – and concluded that the tariff needed to level the playing field on a fair basis is 42%.  It is on this basis that the AEC can now say it supports Chinese extrusions.  Our ambition from the beginning was to find the right duty that accounts for the unfair and illegal trade practices of Chinese extruders that mercilessly dumped their products into our market during the Great Recession. Furthermore, it should be noted that if a Chinese exporter or an American impor...

To properly explain this ruling, let me start with a little background.  Every year the Department of Commerce (DOC) conducts an administrative review on the anti-dumping (AD) and countervailing (CVD) duty rates.  The review begins with the DOC inviting Chinese exporters and U.S. importers to petition the DOC for a separate rate (i.e., a rate separate from the China-wide rate (“PRC-rate”)).  In our case the number of requests has ranged from 50 to 70 or so in the second review covering up to 150 companies for which reviews have been request and  a similar number in the third annual review just getting underway.  From this pool of requests the DOC will select two mandatory respondents to review and provide production data, sales records, and a myriad of other documentation the DOC will use to calculate dumping and subsidy rates for the current review period.  At the end of the review, the two mandatory respondents will be forced to pay the new calculated as...

Circumvention has been one of the key topics of discussion this year in the U.S.-China aluminum extrusion trade case.  In this month ’ s blog entry I will discuss the False Claims Act.  As you may recall, earlier this year the AEC reported that several companies in the Tai Shan case had settled allegations of False Claims Act violations brought by the Department of Justice.    This news triggered a number of discussions among AEC membership about circumvention in general and generated a lot of questions about the False Claims Act.   As the Council ’ s program manager on the Fair Trade Case, this year part of my journey has been to learn more about circumvention and what the United States government is doing to enforce trade orders.  The government has shown significant interest in investigating companies that have allegedly falsified documentation during the importation of aluminum extrusions.  Such conduct could be considered a violation of th...

The Financial Impact of the China Trade Case  Nearly five years ago the industry came together under the leadership of the Aluminum Extruders Council to develop a strategic plan for the industry.  This plan was designed to expand the extrusion market in North America.  It contained defensive and offensive elements. The defense strategy took aim at protecting our market from illegal and unfair trade practices causing an explosion of imports into the U.S. market in 2009. Our offense strategy developed industry promotion actions intended to expand and promote the use of aluminum extrusions.  As these strategies were executed, the United States economy began its slow yet steady rally from the depths of the Great Recession.  I’d like to illustrate how those elements worked together to deliver over one billion more pounds in aluminum extrusion shipments in 2013 compared to 2009. This 32 percent increase in volume has led to extruders investing more than $700 millio...

The lifeblood of the U.S. industry’s trade action against Chinese extruders is the energy of its members.  That energy manifests itself as action, communication, and financial participation.  By the end of 2013 the industry had invested over $5.5 million in legal fees and other costs associated with winning, and subsequently defending this case since the process began in late 2009.  This investment has gone to winning the original petition, fighting off a major court decision referred to as GPX, dozens of scope requests and appeals, the first annual administrative review, and a substantial down payment on the second annual administrative review. As 2014 takes shape it is clear that this battle will continue to rage.  I want to lay out the costs, and present our 2014 funding strategy. For the rest of the story, click here (AEC members-only credentials required; for information on becoming an AEC member, visit www.aec.org/about/memberinfo.cfm

Jeff Henderson, AEC Director of Operations In our essentiALs January 22nd email, AEC members were updated about the recent events in the China import case. Now, I’d like to outline the key issues for 2014. There are three significant areas the industry will focus on this year. The first is administrative reviews, the second is scope requests, and the third is the continued lobbying efforts on Capitol Hill. The first annual Administrative Review came to an end in late 2013, and the second review is now well underway. As you may recall, there were over 60 Chinese extruders and U.S. importers that sought separate countervailing (CVD) and anti-dumping (AD) rates from the combined People’s Republic of China (PRC)-wide entity rate of over 160 percent. The Department of Commerce (DOC) selected three companies to review as being representative for all requests. In these reviews, the respondents attempt to lower their dumping and subsidy margins by demonstrating that they are not p...

AEC  Past Chairman Duncan Crowdis Many are questioning whether the recent drive by the Chinese Extrusion Industry to export products off-shore, and particularly into the North American market, is a long term play or simply a temporary solution to satisfy a short term supply-demand imbalance while their domestic demand improves. It’s a great question and once you look at the data there is an obvious answer and it is about supply and demand. Clearly the domestic industry has been expanding its capacity well beyond the requirement to supply domestic needs within China. First of all let’s consider the domestic demand in China for aluminum extrusions. In looking at the trend over the past decade, it has been anything but anemic. With domestic GDP running well into the double digits over this period, the demand for aluminum extrusions in the Transportation and Building and Construction industries alone have been able to support a significant increase in domestic capacity. S...