CIT Upholds ITA Determination That China "Mixed-Wax Candles" are Covered by AD Duty Order
In Target Corporation, v. U.S., the Court of International Trade upheld the International Trade Administration's final affirmative circumvention determination on remand that mixed-wax candles were later-developed merchandise covered by the antidumping duty order on petroleum wax candles from China.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
(On remand, the ITA had found that mixed-wax candles - candles composed of petroleum wax and over fifty percent or more palm and/or other vegetable oil-basedwaxes - were not commercially available at the time of the original investigation, and based on the evidence on record, that mixed-wax candles had not appeared in the market until 1999. The ITA noted that there had been a gradual evolution in candle production of petroleum wax candles since 1985-1986 such that mixed-wax candles were in fact later-developed merchandise.)
Target challenged the ITA's remand determination, but the CIT stated that it was reasonable given the evidence on record.
Target had also challenged the ITA's findings on four of the five Diversified Products criteria for including later developed merchandise in an order. (Later developed merchandise is included if it has the same (1) general physical characteristics, (2) expectations of the ultimate purchasers (3) and ultimate use, (4) is sold through the same channels of trade, and (5) advertised in a similar manner.)
The ITA had compared both sets of candles and determined that mixed-wax candles and petroleum wax candles were similar in all five criteria. Target argued that mixed-wax candles were different from petroleum wax candles in general physical characteristics, expectations of the ultimate purchasers, channels of trade, and methods of advertisement. However, the CIT found the ITA's analysis was reasonable.
(See ITT's Online Archives or 09/23/08 news: 08092340, for BP summary of Slip Op. 08-101, where the CIT remanded the ITA's circumvention determination for further consideration. See ITT's Online Archives or 10/12/06 news, 06101240, for BP summary of ITA circumvention determination.)
CIT Slip Op. 09-59 (dated 06/17/09) available at http://www.cit.uscourts.gov/slip_op/Slip_op09/09-59.pdf