Skip to main content

Terrific News for the AEC

This month we received two terrific decisions out of Washington D.C.  The first was the report by the Wall Street Journal that Liu Zhongtian, founder of China ZhongWang, has been indicted by a federal grand jury on charges that he evaded nearly $2 billion in tariffs as part of a conspiracy to smuggle massive quantities of aluminum into the U.S.  The second was the final decision being made in our circumvention case against Vietnam.

First, Mr. Liu.  The AEC has been in a state of conflict with ZhongWang (ZW) since before we won our case.  ZhongWang and its affiliates were the number one exporter of aluminum extrusions into the U.S. prior to our filing.  Reports indicate that anywhere from 65-85% of all extrusions dumped into the U.S. from 2008-2010 were from ZW or its business affiliates.  Many of us will remember Peng Cheng, as one example.  Then the AEC exposed the perplexing mountain of extrusions produced in China and shipped to the Mexican desert, which led to the attempt to open a re-melt facility in Barstow, CA.  But ultimately, it was the fake pallets that caught up to Mr. Liu.  Reports flooded the market of massive amounts of fake aluminum pallets being exported to the U.S. and stored in warehouses.  At that point the AEC launched its scope clarification case against ZhongWang, which we won.  That decision declared the fake pallets to be covered by our orders and subject to duties.  Since then it has been widely reported that all U.S. assets of Mr. Liu and his family were seized, including the pallets.  And now, we have the indictment.  It’s impossible to predict if Mr. Liu will be extradited to the U.S. (probably not).  Regardless, it is a tremendous vindication for the AEC to see these indictments and know that after extensive investigation in this matter by U.S. officials the facts proved we were right all along.

Last week we received a final determination in our long-running circumvention case against Vietnam.  Consistent with its affirmative preliminary determination, Commerce continued to find that imports of aluminum extrusions exported from Vietnam that are made from aluminum previously extruded in China are circumventing the Orders. Commerce made a country-wide ruling, applying the results to all imports of merchandise subject to the inquiry from Vietnam, regardless of producer, exporter, or importer.   In addition to relying on the evidence we provided, Commerce again applied adverse inferences due to the failure to participate by Zhongwang.  Likewise, Commerce again found that additional factors, such as the pattern of trade, the affiliation between GVA and Zhongwang, and import trends, also support a finding of circumvention. Lastly, as established in the preliminary determination, to avoid paying AD/CVD cash deposits on entries of aluminum extrusions from Vietnam that were completed in Vietnam using aluminum not previously extruded in China, importers and exporters will need to complete and maintain certifications and supporting documentation that they will need to provide to CBP and/or Commerce upon request. 
Once again the AEC finds itself back in the news chasing bad actors while the global trade war heats up.  It is great to report these results to you considering the long road we’ve taken to get here. However, we must fight these issues so that others will see that the U.S. is serious about enforcing its trade orders.  And as for the AEC, these bad actors are well advised to stay away from our industry!

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Victories and Struggles: Our Mission Persists

 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...

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...

The 232 Takes Center Stage

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...