There is "absolutely no substantive justification" to give the Commerce Department another 91 days to review NLMK Pennsylvania's Section 232 steel and aluminum tariff exclusion requests, the company argued in an April 20 brief opposing the extension bid at the Court of International Trade (NLMK Pennsylvania v. United States, CIT # 21-00507).
The Commerce Department wrongly said there was ambiguity in the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on hardwood plywood from China, the Court of International Trade ruled. Judge Mark Barnett, remanding Commerce's scope ruling, said the scope language and the (k)(1) sources confirm the "unambiguous" meaning of the orders' scope, which excludes two-ply panels imported from China to Vietnam.
The Court of International Trade upheld parts and sent back parts of a countervailing duty case brought by Dalian Meisen Woodworking in a confidential opinion. In a letter to litigants, Judge Richard Eaton gave the parties until April 27 to inform the court what should remain confidential. The trade court previously remanded the Commerce Department's use of adverse facts available related to China's Export Buyer's Credit Program, telling the agency it must "find a practical solution" to verify information from respondents' U.S. customers showing that they did not use the EBCP (see 2205230033) (Dalian Meisen Woodworking v. U.S., Slip Op. 23-57, CIT # 20-00110).
CIT Again Upholds Commerce's Decision to Find Korea's Provision of Electricity Didn't Confer Benefit
The Court of International Trade upheld the Commerce Department's finding that the South Korean government doesn't subsidize the steel industry via the provision of electricity for less than adequate remuneration. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves, issuing a nearly identical opinion in a second case brought by countervailing duty petitioner Nucor Corp. (see 2304190017), said the agency permissibly analyzed whether the electricity prices paid by all companies, including the two CVD respondents, were consistent with market principles and supported its decision with substantial evidence.
The Commerce Department properly found that a particular market situation did not exist in South Korea affecting inputs for oil country tubular goods from South Korea, the Court of International Trade ruled in a case on an antidumping review on Korean OCTG. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves said the agency legally found that hot-rolled coil imports from China and South Korea's electricity market did not constitute a PMS.
The Commerce Department must reconsider its explanation that all costs stemming from a merger are for expanding normal business operations and thus not extraordinary, the Court of International Trade ruled April 20. Judge Gary Katzmann said Commerce laid out this explanation "without citing to agency practice or court precedent, or any accounting principles supporting its position."
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Court of International Trade upheld the Commerce Department's finding that the South Korean government's provision of electricity was for less than adequate remuneration but did not confer a benefit in a countervailing duty review. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves ruled the agency permissibly analyzed whether the electricity prices paid by all companies, including the two CVD respondents, were consistent with market principles and supported its decision with substantial evidence.
The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act does not apply to criminal cases, the Supreme Court of the U.S. held in an April 17 opinion, opening Turkish state-owned Halkbank up to criminal prosecution for conspiring to evade U.S. sanctions on Iran. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the author of the opinion, said the text of the FSIA, which the bank claimed protected it from prosecution, clearly shows it only addresses civil suits. Six of the court's justices sided with Kavanaugh, with Justices Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito dissenting (Turkiye Halk Bankasi A.S. v. U.S., Sup. Ct. # 21-1450).
Importer SXP Schulz Xtruded Products needed a protest to properly challenge CBP's failure to apply a Section 232 duty exclusion on four entries of its steel forged and turned bars, the Court of International Trade ruled. Dismissing the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves held that SXP could have filed for an extension of liquidation while it was waiting for the Commerce Department to correct the erroneous exclusion it issued or simply have filed a protest, which would have queued up jurisdiction under Section 1581(a).