The Commerce Department had sufficient domestic industry support to begin and complete an antidumping duty investigation on oil country tubular goods from Argentina, AD petitioners led by U.S. Steel said in a Sept. 22 reply brief at the Court of International Trade (Tenaris Bay City, Inc., et al. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00343).
Ben Perkins
Ben Perkins, Assistant Editor, is a reporter with International Trade Today and its sister publications, Trade Law Daily and Export Compliance Daily, where he covers sanctions, court rulings, and other international trade issues. He previously worked as a trade analyst for a Washington D.C. advisory firm. Ben holds a B.A. in English from the University of New Hampshire and an M.A. in International Relations from American University. Ben joined the staff of Warren Communications News in 2022.
The Commerce Department has asked for another remand of the results of its antidumping duty investigation on mattresses from Indonesia, DOJ said in its Sept. 27 reply comments at the Court of International Trade. After reviewing comments by AD petitioner Brooklyn Bedding, DOJ said that it became clear to Commerce that the record was missing information regarding the "nature and full extent of Zinus Korea’s involvement in the sale of Zinus Indonesia’s mattresses" (PT. Zinus Global Indonesia v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 21-00277).
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
The Commerce Department correctly reconsidered and changed its methodology used to calculate the constructed export price for Korean oil country tubular good exporter Hyundai Steel, the company said in its second set of remand comments at the Court of International Trade. Hyundai said Commerce correctly reversed its decision to base the calculation of constructed export price profit on Kuwaiti sales data of the other mandatory respondent, SeAH Steel, and instead used Hyundai’s own financial statements in its August remand results, where it dropped the company's dumping margin from 19.54% to 9.63% (see 2308160065) (Hyundai Steel Co. v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 22-00138).
The Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) was updated Sept. 25 with the following headquarters rulings (ruling revocations and modifications will be detailed elsewhere in a separate article as they are announced in the Customs Bulletin):
The Commerce Department addressed "some of the distortions" in its earlier calculations on remand, but the department still undervalued the extent of dumping of multilayered wood flooring from China, the American Manufacturers of Multilayered Wood Flooring coalition said in its Sept. 25 remand comments at the Court of International Trade (American Manufacturers of Multilayered Wood Flooring v. U.S., CIT # 20-03948).
The Court of International Trade should decline to follow another recent opinion regarding the statute of limitations on bond collection, due to "significant flaws" in its reasoning, DOJ said in a Sept. 25 reply at the Court of International Trade. That opinion in U.S. v. American Home Assurance Co. found that the six-year statute of limitations on customs bond collections ran from liquidation rather than the issuance of a bill (see 2308220054) (U.S. v. Aegis Security Insurance, CIT # 20-03628).
The Commerce Department correctly reexamined the "compensation for payment" expense and correctly declined to recalculate the antidumping duty rate for exporter Nagase on remand, DOJ said. In its Sept. 25 remand comments at the Court of International Trade, DOJ said that the final results in an AD administrative review on glycine from Japan fully complied with the remand order and Nagase can't show that the redetermination was unlawful (Nagase & Co. v. U.S., CIT # 21-00574).
The Commerce Department reasonably explained its decision to include in-transmit mattresses in its quarterly ratio calculations for an antidumping duty investigation on mattresses from Indonesia, AD petitioner Brooklyn Bedding said in Sept. 22 remand comments at the Court of International Trade. Respondent Zinus "points to nothing in the statute or Department practice that requires CEP inventory items to be 'physically held' by the seller at the time of sale," Brooklyn Bedding said (PT. Zinus Global Indonesia v. U.S., CIT # 21-00277).