A U.S. solar panel manufacturer on Feb. 8 filed another request for an anti-circumvention inquiry on solar cells from third countries made from Chinese inputs, including polysilicon wafers and ingots. Auxin Solar says solar cell imports from Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam, and Cambodia are circumventing the antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells from China (A-570-979/C-570-980), in a request filed months after a similar petition from a group of anonymous solar producers was rejected by the Commerce Department.
Brian Feito
Brian Feito is Managing Editor of International Trade Today, Export Compliance Daily and Trade Law Daily. A licensed customs broker who spent time at the Department of Commerce calculating antidumping and countervailing duties, Brian covers a wide range of subjects including customs and trade-facing product regulation, the courts, antidumping and countervailing duties and Mexico and the European Union. Brian is a graduate of the University of Florida and George Mason University. He joined the staff of Warren Communications News in 2012.
Transformer coil winding conductors from Canada made from Chinese aluminum sheet and exported to the U.S. by Hammond Power Solutions remain subject to antidumping and countervailing duties on common alloy aluminum sheet from China (A-570-073/C-570-074), said the Commerce Department in a Jan. 20 scope ruling. The transformer coil windings are still described by the scope of the orders, and the processing in Canada does not substantially transform the conductors into products from that country.
The Commerce Department on Jan. 21 issued a final scope ruling continuing to find "veneered panels" with only two layers of veneer are subject to antidumping and countervailing duties on hardwood plywood from China (A-570-051/C-570-052), and that their processing in Vietnam into plywood by adding face and back veneers does not substantially transform the panels into a product of Vietnam.
CBP will suspend liquidation for entries of solar cells subject to Section 201 safeguard duties over the past 10-15 months, following to a Court of International Trade decision that invalidated a Trump-era increase in safeguard duty rates on solar cells and the withdrawal of an exemption for bifacial cells (see 2111170038), CBP said in a CSMS message Dec. 27.
A protest supplement filed by an importer may not be considered by CBP as a supplement but should be accepted as a new protest, CBP said in a recent ruling. Though the supplement was too late because it came after the relevant protest was denied and addressed an issue not included under the original protest, the supplement otherwise met all requirements for protests filed by CBP, the agency said.
A coalition of anonymous solar companies is “evaluating all options” following the denial of its requests to apply antidumping and countervailing duties on Chinese solar cells to imports from Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam, it said Nov. 15. The American Solar Manufacturers Against Chinese Circumvention (A-SMACC) said it “strongly” disagrees with the Commerce Department’s rejection of its request for an anti-circumvention inquiry, on the basis that the coalition’s members could not remain anonymous.
An exporter of wind towers that enters into post-importation warranty and repair agreements with its customers, but does not hold title or risk of loss when the goods are imported, doesn't have a sufficient financial interest in the wind towers to make entry under the customs laws, CBP said in ruling HQ H312266, dated Oct. 29.
An importer says CBP is incorrectly using a purported “transaction value” to appraise its imports of domestically sold goods from a Canadian warehouse, and that CBP should accept its original appraisal using deductive value because no foreign sale for exportation occurred.
Anonymous solar producers still have yet to justify their requests for anti-circumvention inquiries on solar cells from Malaysia, Vietnam and Thailand, so the Commerce Department should decline to initiate the inquiries altogether, said NextEra and Florida Power & Light in their Oct. 25 response to additional information submitted by the producers nearly two weeks prior.
Haptic motors intended to be mounted to a vehicle seat for sending vibrating warning signals to the driver during certain safety conditions are classifiable as electric motors, rather than as signaling equipment for motor vehicles, CBP said in a ruling dated Oct. 18.