Importer Says Commerce Improperly Used AFA to Say Its Goods Were Made in China
Importer AM Stone & Cabinets filed a pair of complaints at the Court of International Trade, arguing that its products were unlawfully found to have been made in China based on adverse facts available, despite the company's full cooperation and a lack of evidence showing that its products were made in China (AM Stone & Cabinets v. United States, CIT #s 24-00241, -00243).
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.
In the administrative reviews of the antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders on quartz surface products from China, the Commerce Department said AM Stone's goods were made in China and not in Malaysia, as the importer claims. The agency used AFA against the importer after it failed to provide certain information requested by the agency. In its complaints, AM Stone said the missing information belonged to an "unrelated and uncooperative third party that refused to provide such information to AM Stone."
The importer said the finding of adverse inferences was an abuse of discretion and was arbitrary and capricious.
AM Stone also said it submitted substantial evidence that its products were made in Malaysia, including "inside and outside images of Resstone’s factory, the raw material stock in said factory, and the production process which takes place in said factory." Meanwhile, Commerce "had no evidence that the goods imported by plaintiff were not manufactured in Malaysia and had significant evidence that these goods were manufactured in Malaysia," the briefs said.