The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative “properly exercised its authority” under the Section 307 modification provisions of the 1974 Trade Act when it ordered the imposition of the lists 3 and 4A Section 301 tariffs on Chinese imports, the Court of International Trade ruled in an April 1 opinion. Test-case plaintiffs HMTX Industries and Jasco Products, plus the more than 3,600 complaints that followed, sought to vacate the tariffs on grounds that lists 3 and 4A were unlawful without USTR launching a new Section 301 investigation.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Taiwanese corrosion-resistant steel products exporters Yieh Phui Enterprise Co. and Prospeity Tieh signed off on the Commerce Department's remand results in an antidumping duty matter at the Court of International Trade. On remand, Commerce reversed its decision to collapse mandatory respondents Yieh Phui and Synn Industrial Co. with one of their affiliates, Propserity Tieh Enterprise Co., in a bid to bring its stance in line with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. "It is our position that the Department’s decision on the collapsing issue made in the Remand Results is in line with the [Federal Circuit's] decision," Yieh Phui's comments said (Prosperity Tieh Enterprise Co., Ltd. v. United States, CIT Consol. #16-00138).
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Washington-based importer Keirton USA isn't permitted to import drug paraphernalia since Washington state law doesn't expressly authorize the possession of such items, the U.S. told the Court of International Trade in a March 28 cross-motion for judgment. If the state's current laws did authorize possession of drug paraphernalia, then the mere absence of criminal liability -- the situation in Washington -- would consume the whole statute federally outlawing possession of drug paraphernalia, DOJ said (Keirton USA, Inc. v. United States, CIT #21-00452).
Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of March 21-27:
The Commerce Department requested a voluntary remand in a March 28 filing at the Court of International Trade so it can reconsider its use of adverse facts available relating to China's Export Buyer's Credit Program. The remand is appropriate given Commerce's "evolving practice" on the topic, the brief said. In a separate countervailing duty investigation, Commerce found that it was able to verify that a respondent's U.S. customers did not use the program without certain information requested from the Chinese government (Risen Energy Co. v. United States, CIT Consol. #20-03912).
The Supreme Court of the U.S. declined to take up a key case over the president's power under the Section 232 national security tariff statute. Rejecting a petition from importer Transpacific Steel and several other companies, SCOTUS in effect upheld a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decision that said that the president can increase tariffs under Section 232 beyond procedural time limits.