The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
Ben Perkins
Ben Perkins, Assistant Editor, is a reporter with International Trade Today and its sister publications, Trade Law Daily and Export Compliance Daily, where he covers sanctions, court rulings, and other international trade issues. He previously worked as a trade analyst for a Washington D.C. advisory firm. Ben holds a B.A. in English from the University of New Hampshire and an M.A. in International Relations from American University. Ben joined the staff of Warren Communications News in 2022.
If the antidumping rate on activated carbon from China is lowered on Chinese exporter Jilin Bright Future Chemicals, Commerce should recalculate and re-assign the rates assigned to separate rate respondents Cherishmet and Yunguang, the two companies argued in a June 8 motion for judgment at the Court of International Trade (Jilin Bright Future Chemicals Co. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00336).
DOJ is looking to collect over $10 million in unpaid duties and penalties from Florida businessman Zhe "John" Liu and one of his companies, AB MA Distribution, alleging Liu and AB MA transshipped steel wire hangers through India and Thailand to avoid the payment of antidumping and other duties on steel wire hangers from China, according to a June 7 complaint at the Court of International Trade (U.S. v. Zhe "John" Liu and AB MA Distribution Corporation, CIT # 23-00116).
The Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) was updated June 7 with the following headquarters rulings (ruling revocations and modifications will be detailed elsewhere in a separate article as they are announced in the Customs Bulletin):
The Court of International Trade improperly upheld CBP's incorrect classification of conduit tubing imported from Mexico as steel tubing instead of insulated fittings, Shamrock Building Materials said in its June 5 opening brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Shamrock Building Materials v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-1648)
The Court of International Trade remanded aspects of the final results of the Commerce Department's less-than-fair-value investigation of raw honey from Argentina, finding that Commerce's decision to use exporter Nexco's acquisition costs as a proxy for Argentinian beekeeper's production costs and its decision to compare Nexco's third-country sales and U.S. sales were not properly explained. However, the court did agree with Commerce's decision to compare Nexco's costs on a monthly basis for the purposes of the sales below cost test and sustained that aspect of the final determination.
The Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) was updated June 5 with the following headquarters rulings (ruling revocations and modifications will be detailed elsewhere in a separate article as they are announced in the Customs Bulletin):
The Court of International Trade granted a request by antidumping respondent Ellwood City Forge to reply to remand comments in an antidumping duty investigation on forged steel fluid end blocks from Germany. CIT Judge Stephen Vaden granted the May 15 request over objections by both DOJ and intervenor Edelstahl Siegen (Ellwood City Forge v. U.S., CIT # 21-00077).
The Commerce Department's decision to use Afghanistan as a comparison market for India in the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain lined paper products from India was flawed and resulted in skewed margins for respondent Cellpage and the non-selected respondents, a group of U.S. manufacturers said in a June 5 complaint at the Court of International Trade. Prices in Afghanistan were not representative and should not have been the basis for normal value, Association of American School Paper Suppliers (AASPS) argued as it asked the court to remand the results back to Commerce (Association of American School Paper Suppliers v. U.S., CIT # 23-00102).
The Court of International Trade on June 7 remanded the Commerce Department's antidumping investigation on raw honey from Argentina. CIT Judge Claire Kelly remanded the department's decision to use Nexco's acquisition costs as a proxy for Argentinian beekeeper's production costs and its decision to compare Nexco's third-country sales and U.S. sales. However, the court did agree with Commerce's decision to compare Nexco's costs on a monthly basis for the purposes of the sales-below cost test and sustained that aspect, saying that Commerce reasonably explained its decision.