Skip to main content

WOW! Did he say ‘Billion’?

The biggest news to hit the trade case came last month.  The Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a complaint against Perfectus seeking $1.5 Billion in unpaid duties for the fake pallets exported to the United States.  The DOJ didn’t pull any punches in their submission.  From the complaint, the DOJ stated, “Zhongtian Liu, a Chinese national, is the founder and chairman of China Zhongwang, one of the world’s largest industrial aluminum extrusion companies. Zhongtian Liu controls and is effectively the owner of Perfectus Aluminum, Inc. (“Perfectus”).  Between 2011 and at least 2014, Zhongtian Liu used Perfectus to illegally import more than 2.1 million aluminum “pallets” from China into the United States, as described in detail below.2 The “pallets” were manufactured by China Zhongwang and/or its affiliates and “sold” to Perfectus by several intermediary entities, including Dalian Liwang Trade Co., Ltd., Zhongwang Investment Group, and Yingkou Quianxiang Trading. Many of these intermediary entities are or were owned and operated during the relevant period by members of Zhongtian Liu’s family or his close associates.”

Furthermore, the complaint reveals the scope of the scheme by reporting, “In total, the predecessor entities imported approximately 2,190,000 aluminum “pallets” into the United States from China during this period in an effort to avoid AD/CVD.” Clearly, the size of this operation is something never before witnessed by our industry, and the complaint settles many questions from the market about what the government was going to do with this issue.

Elsewhere, beyond the fireworks, we continue to work on our administrative reviews.  For this year, we saw the Department of Commerce’s preliminary ruling to set rates at 86% for the CVD case, and 20% on the dumping case.  We have every confidence that these rates will be upheld when the DOC announces its final ruling this December (or earlier).

And finally, after many months of speculation, the judge in the curtain wall appeal has decided to hold a hearing early next month.  You can read more about this case, and how you can support this measure here.  This is an incredibly important issue and one we simply cannot afford not to support.  The Curtain Wall Coalition has sought help from the market to cover legal costs.  They have done a good job, but we really need the industry to step up now.

It’s not every month that we can report such dramatic news as the DOJ complaint against Perfectus.  So, we should a raise a glass and salute the result of our hard work in bringing this scheme to justice.  Moving forward, we should feel confident as we work our way a little further down the rabbit’s hole in an effort to confront the other schemers we know that are actively and negatively impacting our industry.  And they should know, we will find them and bring them to justice no matter how big or small.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Section 232 Implications: Get the Latest

 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...

Valuation, USMCA, and Fair Trade Priorities

 The primary focus of our government affairs work at this moment centers on the Section 232 valuation issue currently under discussion in Washington, D.C.  As highlighted during the recent Aluminum Summit and in prior AEC communications, there remains uncertainty regarding how the Administration intends to resolve this matter. The original Executive Order that established the Section 232 aluminum tariffs made clear that the tariffs were intended to apply to the full value of the imported aluminum extrusion, not solely the value of the aluminum content within the product.  At this time, it remains unclear whether the Administration will seek to address the issue by issuing a new Executive Order or by providing additional interpretive guidance through U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).  The AEC is actively monitoring these discussions and will update members as soon as a definitive course of action emerges. Parallel to the valuation discussions, attention is tur...

Adjustments to the 232 Tariffs

 On June 3, 2025, an Executive Order (EO) was issued adjusting the Section 232 tariff on aluminum and aluminum derivative products (DPL) from 25% to 50%.  In addition to the adjustment in the 232 tariff, the EO also contains language that adjusts how the 232 tariff is applied. The following is a summary of the key points.  Aluminum and aluminum derivative products within HTS Ch. 76 and outside HTS Ch. 76: the 50% duty applies only to the aluminum content.  Any non-aluminum content in these products will be subject to the reciprocal tariff (currently at 10%).  This is a change from the February 10, 2025, EO for aluminum and aluminum derivative products in HTS Ch. 76 where the 232 tariff was applied to the full value of the product.  With the most recent EO, the 232 tariff now applies only to the aluminum content and the 10% reciprocal tariff applies to the non-aluminum content.  The current EO also changes how the 232 Auto tariffs, 232 aluminum tariffs ...