Court of International Trade

Italian producer/exporter Schaeffler Italia S.R.L. (with Schaeffler Group USA Inc.) failed at the Court of International Trade in an attempt to overturn the final results of the May 2007 -- April 2008 AD administrative review of ball bearings from Italy, in which the International Trade Administration assigned it a 15.10% AD duty rate based solely on the margin results of SKF Industrie S.p.A./Somecat S.p.A, the only other respondent in the review.

Domestic and foreign producers both contested the June 2007 - May 2008 AD administrative review results for silicon metal from China. U.S. producer Globe Metallurgical Inc. argued that the International Trade Administration should: 1) reduce U.S. prices in the dumping margin calculation to account for export and value added taxes in China; 2) use invoice dates, not entry dates, to define U.S. sales, and 3) use coking rather than non-coking coal values in input costs. Chinese producers Shanghai Jinneng International Trade Co., Ltd. and Jiangxi Gangyuan Silicon Industry Company, Ltd. argued that the ITA should not use an allegedly distressed or “sick” Indian surrogate company in the calculation of overhead, profit and S, G & A expense ratios, or should at least recalculate that company’s ratios to reflect an asset sale and miscellaneous income. The Court of International Trade remanded only this last issue, the surrogate company’s income and expense calculations, for further explanation, and upheld all the other contested aspects of the review.

The Court of International Trade ruled in CBB Group, Inc. v. U.S. that U.S. Customs and Border Protection cannot take action to dispose of imports it found to be piratical copies that infringe a registered copyright while the case is pending, as its Seizure Notice was issued after the importer’s case was brought and the court’s jurisdiction had attached. The importer is challenging CBP’s alleged exclusion of its plush toys from entry and CBP’s deemed denial of its protest of that event.

The Court of International Trade has ruled¹ that U.S. Customs and Border Protection did not err in denying Shell's 1997 protests seeking drawback of Harbor Maintenance Tax (HMT) and Environmental Tax (ET) payments associated with certain petroleum products that it imported and substitute petroleum derivatives it exported in 1993 and 1994. The CIT agreed with CBP that Shell is not entitled to drawback as its protests were untimely.

In the antidumping duty administrative review of certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from India for the period December 2005 through November 2006, the International Trade Administration granted an adjustment to U.S. price to Indian producer Essar Steel Limited for import duties which the company claimed were waived under an Indian Government program to encourage exports. However, U.S. producers United States Steel Corporation and Nucor Corporation argued to the Court of International Trade that Essar had failed to prove that it had qualified for the rebate. Conceding it had made erroneous assumptions, the ITA requested a voluntary remand to reconsider the duty drawback adjustment, and the CIT issued remand instructions accordingly. (Slip Op 11-66, dated 06/14/11)

The following are details of a June 16, 2011 decision by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (here) that overturned a lower court ruling and arguments by U.S. Customs and Border Protection on the classification of certain “CamelBak” back-mounted packs. CAFC agreed with Camelbak that its packs are made up of two different components and are "composite goods" that should be classified by the essential character test, because the two applicable subheadings refer to only part of the subject articles.

The International Trade Administration has announced that it is revising the interim¹ methodology it has been using to value the cost of labor in non-market economy (NME) countries in antidumping proceedings to use a single surrogate-country approach based on different labor cost data.

On June 16, 2011, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit overruled the lower court and agreed with CamelBak Products LLC that its back-mounted packs are made up of two different components (a hydration component and a storage component), and are "composite goods" that should be classified by the essential character test, because the two applicable subheadings refer to only part of the subject articles. CBP had argued, and the lower court had affirmed, that the items were not "composite goods" and that a single tariff provision applied to the articles in their entirety.

The Court of International Trade has ruled in U.S. v. Trek Leather Inc., and Harish Shadadpuri that an importer of record along with its sole shareholder committed gross negligence by consistently failing to include the cost of fabric assists in the price actually paid or payable in their entry documents for men's suits imported into the U.S. The defendants were also found liable for unpaid customs duties and civil penalties, plus interest.

For the antidumping duty administrative review of certain pasta from Italy for the period July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2007, the Court of International Trade previously granted a request from the International Trade Administration for a voluntary remand to reconsider whether accounting expenses of Italian producer Pasta Zara SpA were direct or indirect expenses. The court also ordered the ITA to reconsider whether all home market sales, whether to independent retailers or large discount chains, were in fact at a single level of trade, as the ITA claimed.