Chinese Solar Exporter Contests AD Margin, Alleges 'Double Remedy'
The Commerce Department failed to adjust the export price for Chinese exporter Trina Solar and continued to use the "unreliable" price of Romanian glass over Trina's objections, the exporter argued in a Nov. 6 complaint to the Court of International Trade (Trina Solar v. U.S., CIT # 23-00213).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
Trina's filing contests its 10.5% antidumping margin, assigned during the seventh administrative AD review of certain crystalline silicon photovoltaic products from China and asked the court to remand the margin to Commerce for recalculation.
Trina was the lone mandatory respondent in the review. In April, Trina argued in its case brief that Commerce should make adjustments from its 16.79% preliminary dumping rate to account for countervailed subsidies and avoid a "double remedy." In Commerce's final results, published in September, Commerce reduced Trina's margin to 10.5%, but Trina continued to argue Commerce had erred in its calculations.
Trina said that while the department correctly identified five export programs it regarded as subsidies, it failed to find an additional six export-contingent programs. Commerce’s determination these six programs were specific was based on adverse facts available and not on export contingency, which Trina alleged was unlawful.
Trina also argued that Commerce valued solar glass input prices using import values under Romanian HTS 7007.19.80 despite evidence that it was not the best available information.