The Court of International Trade in a March 18 opinion made public March 23 sustained the Commerce Department's final determination in the countervailing duty investigation on utility scale wind towers from Canada. Addressing the five issues raised by the plaintiffs, Judge Gary Katzmann said Commerce permissibly excluded plaintiff Marmen's foreign auditor's foreign currency adjustment as unreliable, reasonably found the Quebec Local Content Requirement provided a recurring benefit and acted within its authority to find that the Quebec On-the-Job Training tax credit was a de facto subsidy. Commerce also legally excluded some increased tax liabilities and acted lawfully when finding the financial benefit from additional depreciation for buildings used in manufacturing, Katzmann said.

The Commerce Department lawfully imposed countervailing duties on Vietnam's undervaluation of currency, DOJ said in a March 21 reply brief at the Court of International Trade. Defending Commerce's recent practice to include currency undervaluation as a countervailable benefit, DOJ argued that the currency undervaluation was specific to traders and that the agency's decision to countervail the currency undervaluation is permitted under the statute (Kumho Tire (Vietnam) Co. v. United States, CIT #21-00397).

The Court of International Trade sustained the Commerce Department's final determination in the countervailing duty investigation on utility scale wind towers from Canada, as well as the agency's final negative determination of critical circumstances, in confidential opinion March 18. In a public order on the case, Judge Gary Katzmann denied the motions for judgment filed by plaintiffs Government of Quebec, Marmen Energie and Government of Canada and by defendant-intervenor Wind Tower Trade Coalition. The litigants challenged Commerce's position that Quebec's local content requirement program didn't confer a countervailable subsidy on Marmen, among other things (The Government of Quebec v. U.S., CIT Consol. #20-00168).

The Court of International Trade remanded the Commerce Department's final determination in the antidumping duty investigation on fabricated structural steel from Mexico. In a March 21 letter on the March 18 confidential opinion, Judge Claire Kelly said the court intends to release a public version March 29 following a period wherein the litigants may review bracketed confidential information. Building Systems de Mexico (BSM) had challenged multiple aspects of Commerce's constructed value in the investigation. One such issue concerns the agency's decision to use a 45.42% combined home market selling expense and profit rate as BSM's constructed value indirect selling expense and profit rate (Building Systems de Mexico, S.A. de C.V. v. United States, CIT #20-00069).

The Court of International Trade rejected exporter Ancientree Cabinet's arguments that the Commerce Department violated the law with its financial ratio calculations in an antidumping duty investigation. Judge Gary Katzmann ruled March 21 that Commerce adequately explained its ratio calculation methodology on remand and that, contrary to Ancientree's arguments, the agency didn't violate any normal or established practice.

The Court of International Trade ruled in a March 21 opinion that a customs spat over reimported swimsuits will head to phase two of trial. After sorting through whether a Warehousing Agreement between two related companies sufficed as a lease or similar use agreement during the first phase, Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves ruled that this condition was satisfied for classification under a duty-free tariff provision for U.S. goods returned. The court will now see if the remaining conditions are satisfied in order to grant SGS Sports duty-free treatment of the reimported swimwear.

The Court of International Trade on March 18 dismissed a lawsuit brought by a domestic pipe producer seeking to compel CBP to provide it with information related to an alleged duty evasion scheme by two importers. Judge Timothy Stanceu said that while the trade court did have jurisdiction to hear the case, Wheatland Tube Company improperly submitted its requests for information to CBP, and the agency properly rejected Wheatland's request to revoke a ruling letter.

The Labor Department said that it properly relied on information from senior legal counsel for AT&T when it denied a unionized group of former AT&T call workers trade adjustment assistance, in March 17 remand results at the Court of International Trade. Labor Certifying Officer at the Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance Hope Kinglock said one member of AT&T's senior legal counsel team "demonstrated an active knowledge and understanding of the statutory requirement of Section 222(d)(3)(B) of the Trade Act" requested by Labor. "The Department considered this diligent effort to seek out the best official to certify information on behalf of AT&T, which, together with the factors noted above, contributed to the Department’s determination that it is reasonable to conclude that information that [AT&T's legal counsel] provided later in the investigation was accurate and complete without certification," Kinglock said (Communications Workers of America Local 4123, on behalf of Former Employees of AT&T Services Inc. v. U.S. Secretary of Labor, CIT #20-00075).

South Korean steel exporter Hyundai Steel Company filed a proposed judgment in a countervailing duty case after the Court of International Trade told litigants to do so as resolution of the matter was reached following a voluntary remand from the Commerce Department (see 2203100028). The proposed order would have the trade court sustain Commerce's remand results. In the remand, Commerce said that a South Korean sewerage fees program was not countervailable, leading to a de minimis rate for Hyundai Steel. In a March 9 joint status report, Hyundai and the U.S. said that case was resolved following the voluntary remand. The case concerns the 2018 CVD administrative review of cut-to-length carbon-quality steel plate from South Korea (Hyundai Steel Company v. United States, CIT #21-00012).

Nucor Corporation says the Commerce Department should have added countervailing duties in an administrative review for the South Korean government's provision of electricity below cost for certain tariff classes, instead of finding the provision of electricity conferred a "non-measurable benefit." In its March 18 complaint at the Court of International Trade, Nucor took particular issue with Commerce's decision to run a "tier three" analysis into the alleged benefit (Nucor Corporation v. United States, CIT #22-00050).