Plaintiff Nucor Corporation mischaracterized, oversimplified and took the Commerce Department's remand results out of context in its comments on a submission in a case stemming from the agency's countervailing duty investigation on carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate from South Korea, the Department of Justice said in Aug. 18 comments at the Court of International Trade, backing the remand redetermination. DOJ continued to back Commerce's contention that the South Korean government did not provide a countervailable subsidy to producers of hot-rolled steel through cheap electricity. Contrary to what Nucor's comments assert, Commerce adhered to the statute when completing its less-than-adequate remuneration analysis in the CVD case and properly accounted for the Korean Power Exchange's role in the electricity market, DOJ said (POSCO, et al. v. U.S., CIT #16-00227).
A listing of recent Commerce Department antidumping and countervailing duty messages posted to CBP's website Aug. 20, along with the case number(s) and CBP message number, is provided below. The messages are available by searching for the listed CBP message number at CBP's ADD CVD Search page.
A listing of recent Commerce Department antidumping and countervailing duty messages posted to CBP's website Aug. 18, along with the case number(s) and CBP message number, is provided below. The messages are available by searching for the listed CBP message number at CBP's ADD CVD Search page.
A listing of recent Commerce Department antidumping and countervailing duty messages posted to CBP's website Aug. 13, along with the case number(s) and CBP message number, is provided below. The messages are available by searching for the listed CBP message number at CBP's ADD CVD Search page.
Ribbons exporter Yama Ribbons and Bows Co. did not benefit from China's Export Buyer's Credit Program, the Commerce Department said in Aug. 13 remand results filed at the Court of International Trade. Commerce's new determination, filed under respectful protest, led to the reconsideration of its use of adverse facts available in a countervailing duty review and subsequent exclusion of the AFA rate assigned to the EBCP for Yama. Commerce did, however, continue to find that the provision of synthetic yarn and caustic soda for "less than adequate remuneration" did meet the specificity requirement of the law and are deemed countervailable subsidies (Yama Ribbons and Bows Co. v. U.S., CIT #19-00047).
A listing of recent Commerce Department antidumping and countervailing duty messages posted to CBP's website Aug. 10, along with the case number(s) and CBP message number, is provided below. The messages are available by searching for the listed CBP message number at CBP's ADD CVD Search page.
A listing of recent Commerce Department antidumping and countervailing duty messages posted to CBP's website Aug. 6, along with the case number(s) and CBP message number, is provided below. The messages are available by searching for the listed CBP message number at CBP's ADD CVD Search page.
The Commerce Department issued the preliminary results of a countervailing duty administrative review of large diameter welded pipe (welded pipe) from South Korea (C-580-898). This review covers subject merchandise from the exporters under review entered during the period June 29, 2018, through Dec. 31, 2019. Commerce preliminarily determined that countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters of the subject merchandise.
A listing of recent Commerce Department antidumping and countervailing duty messages posted to CBP's website Aug. 3, along with the case number(s) and CBP message number, is provided below. The messages are available by searching for the listed CBP message number at CBP's ADD CVD Search page.
The Court of International Trade should grant the Commerce Department's cross-motion for judgment, enforcing the antidumping and countervailing duty rates at which the agency instructed CBP to liquidate crystalline silicon photovoltaic products entries, Commerce said in a July 30 brief. While CBP initially imposed an incorrect AD duty rate for the entries in question, the government defense said it identified the proper rate at which the court should enforce the duties (Aireko Construction LLC v. United States, CIT #20-00128).