Skip to main content

Let the Fireworks Begin!

By

 Some months ago, I wrote that there were several matters in our case that were under review and pending decisions.  Once those decisions were made, we would then see a series of great results.  Now, here they come.  Having seen two such wins in the last couple of weeks I am now more certain than ever that many more are coming.

This month we heard from the Department of Commerce about the Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA) case filed by Ta Chen against Kingtom in the Dominican Republic.  The verdict was clear and Kingtom lost.  This is a significant win for us, even though we did not file it.  However, we have filed our own case against Kingtom and we expect that decision on January 21, 2021.  The DOC is finding that Kingtom did circumvent our trade orders by co-mingling Chinese-produced aluminum extrusions with Dominican product.  These cases are kept under wraps, and we are not allowed to publicly discuss until certain thresholds in the case are met.  So, as I can, and as is prudent, I will continue to update you about this matter.

The other significant win this month was a scope decision concerning fabricated extrusions in an automotive application.  On January 4, 2021, Commerce issued a final scope ruling confirming that some of Unison's automotive frame crossmembers are included in the scope of the orders.  Unison makes crossmembers from both 6xxx- and 7xxx-series alloy aluminum, and because 7xxx-series aluminum is not covered by the scope, the crossmembers made from 7xxx-series aluminum were found to not be covered by the scope.  The 6xxx-series crossmembers were found to be subassemblies - rather than finished merchandise, as Unison had argued - because they are designed to be incorporated into Ford F-150s.  Commerce also found that these crossmembers are merely fabricated extrusions and that the machining processes they undergo do not make them finished merchandise within the meaning of the scope.  We are monitoring for any appeal by Unison, which would be due around February 3.  We plan to get news of this to the automotive community and develop talking points for our members that serve this market, so they can better explain our trade case and the impacts on automotive suppliers’ and manufacturers’ import strategies.

It should be noted, that if we had not been successful in arguing in previous cases that sub-assemblies are NOT final finished products, this automotive part may have been excluded and I would predict many more to follow.   So, this case decision not only protected our automotive business, but re-affirms the language of our scope that sub-assemblies do NOT meet the threshold of a final finished product.

Lastly, you may have read about the rollout of the new Aluminum Import Monitoring System.  This program, adapted from a current program in place for the steel industry, will give us the type of information we need concerning imports from Mexico.  The Aluminum Association did a good job in getting this across the finish line.  As it is just now starting, we cannot expect to see the first series of data for another 60 to 90 days.  It is our hope that once it is up and running, the lag between shipments and the timing of the report will shrink dramatically.

Thank you all for your support and dedication to this case.  This month it demonstrated itself to be as indispensable to the industry as the AEC has been to protecting key markets and addressing circumvention schemes.  If you liked this month’s report, I have a feeling you are going to really like next month’s!

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Valuation, USMCA, and Fair Trade Priorities

By
 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...
Post a Comment
Read more

Section 232 Updates & Enforcement Expands

By
 The Administration issued another update to the Section 232 steel, aluminum and copper tariff program on June 1.  The program now reaches a growing list of derivative products and downstream imported goods where aluminum content is part of a larger product. The June 1 action modifies several of the 232 product annexes and makes temporary adjustments for certain equipment categories.  According to the White House fact sheet, certain agricultural equipment and other equipment will be adjusted from a 25 percent tariff to a 15 percent tariff.  The action also expands the category of industrial equipment eligible for the temporary 15 percent tariff treatment to include certain mobile industrial equipment, such as bulldozers and forklifts, when imported from trade deal countries eligible for that treatment.  These temporary changes are scheduled to remain in place through December 31, 2027. There were also modifications to the HTS codes covered by the annexes.  ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Section 232 Update: Focus on Aluminum Derivative Products

By
 Over the past several weeks, we have started to get a clearer picture of how the updated Section 232 framework will impact aluminum, especially when it comes to derivative and finished products tied to the markets our members serve. The most important change is how the tariffs are applied. Covered products are now generally assessed on the full value of the imported product, rather than only the aluminum content. For finished goods, that is a meaningful change in how duty exposure is calculated. Looking at the annex structure, several key extrusion-driven products are now clearly defined. Aluminum windows, doors, and structural components (7610.10.00 and 7610.90.00) fall under Annex I-A and are generally subject to a 50% Section 232 tariff applied to full value. Trailers and aluminum ladders (8716.10.00 and 7616.99.5130) fall under Annex I-B and are generally subject to a 25% Section 232 tariff, also applied to full value. The takeaway is straightforward. Tariff treatment is drive...
Post a Comment
Read more