CIT Remands China Ironing Boards AD Review to ITA on Separate Rate Issue
The Court of International Trade once again remanded to the International Trade Administration the agency‘s “separate rate” determination for Chinese producer/exporter Since Hardware (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd., in the August 2006 - July 2007 AD administrative review of floor-standing metal-top ironing tables and certain parts thereof from China.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
In its prior remand the court upheld the use of adverse facts available in response to Since Hardware’s having submitted false documents, but instructed the ITA to re-examine whether the firm acted free of government control, to see if the firm qualified for an individually calculated "separate rate," albeit an adverse facts-available rate, rather than the China-wide rate used for entities presumed to be under government control - in this case, 157.68%. In response, the ITA argued that because the company’s accounting records had been shown to be unreliable it could not make the separate rate determination.
Citing at least partially favorable evidence from the company in the record of the review, the CIT faulted the agency for not following its remand instructions and the AD regulations to determine whether Since Hardware was independent of government control in setting prices and disposing of profits. In a series of reprimands, the court ordered the ITA not to again rely on a verification report from a prior period; ordered it to re-open the administrative record to new documents; and suggested the agency carry out a new verification mission on-site to further evaluate Since Hardware’s possible eligibility for a separate rate.
(See ITT’s Online Archives 10102104 for summary of the CIT’s previous decision upholding the use of adverse facts available for Since Hardware but instructing the ITA to re-examine whether the company had shown it was sufficiently free of government control to have a separate AD rate; see ITT’s Online Archives 11070856 for summary of the latest decision by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) re-opening, in turn, each of three successive AD review results because Since Hardware was found to have provided false certificates of origin to the ITA in order to claim its iron inputs were purchased in market economy countries.)
(Slip Op. 11-142, dated 11/18/11, public version posted subsequently)