Two Ecuadorian exporters challenged the Commerce Department's countervailing duty investigation on frozen warmwater shrimp from Ecuador, arguing, among other things, that the agency erred in finding that certain tax benefits were de facto specific and in applying adverse facts available for specific subsidy programs. Respondent Industrial Pesquera Santa Priscila challenges its final 3.57% CVD rate, while respondent Sociedad Nacional De Galapagos (SONGA) challenges its 4.41% CVD rate (Industrial Pesquera Santa Priscila v. United States, CIT # 25-00025).

Chinese exporters led by Giti Tire Global Trading repeated Feb. 17 their claim that the Commerce Department should have taken distance into account when constructing boat freight costs in an antidumping duty review (see 2411050046), saying the government was misinterpreting the financial information provided by a surrogate (Giti Tire Global Trading v. U.S., CIT #24-00083).

The Commerce Department continued to find on remand at the Court of International Trade that respondent Louis Dreyfus Co. Sucos S.A. and an unnamed supplier, dubbed "Supplier A," are not affiliated, nor are they partners. The agency said it's important to "distinguish 'exclusivity' from 'reliance'" in conducting affiliation analyses, noting that an exclusive relationship with a supplier doesn't mean a party isn't "perfectly capable of acting independently if the exclusive relationship is no longer in its interests" (Ventura Coastal v. United States, CIT # 23-00009).

The Commerce Department's finding that the Vietnamese traded-goods sector was the "predominant user" of the alleged undervaluation of the Vietnamese dong is not in line with the "statutory requirements," exporter Kumho Tire (Vietnam) Co. argued in a Feb. 14 brief at the Court of International Trade (Kumho Tire (Vietnam) Co. v. United States, CIT # 21-00397).

Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week, in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

The Commerce Department properly excluded in-transit mattresses from the calculation of constructed export price (CEP) for respondent PT. Zinus Global Indonesia in the antidumping duty investigation on mattresses from Indonesia, the Court of International Trade held on Feb. 18. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves also sustained Commerce's exclusion of the selling expenses of Zinus Indonesia's parent company Zinus Korea from the normal value calculation.

For the third time, the Court of International Trade remanded part of the Commerce Department’s final results of an antidumping duty review on multilayered wood flooring from China.

An importer of 3D pen kits again said Feb. 14 that the U.S. hadn’t met the procedural requirements to shield unredacted internal CBP communication under the deliberative process privilege (Quantified Operations Limited v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 22-00178).

The U.S. said Feb. 7 that importer Mitsubishi’s catalyst blocks were actually filters, despite the importer’s arguments otherwise, and thus was properly classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 8421 and assessed Section 301 tariffs (Mitsubishi Power Americas v. United States, CIT # 21-00573).

The Government of India and exporter Balkrishna Industries replied to petitioner Titan Tire Corp.'s arguments against the Commerce Department's finding that Balkrishna didn't use or benefit from India's Advanced Authorization Scheme in the 2021 countervailing duty review on new pneumatic off-the-road tires from India. The Indian government said neither Commerce nor the petitioner had reason to doubt the fact that Balkrishna hadn't benefited from the program, while Balkrishna argued that the Indian government properly verified the information at issue (Titan Tire Corp. v. United States, CIT # 23-00233).