With no legislative action on a proposal to end China's eligibility for de minimis shipments, one of its authors, Sen. Sherrod Brown, is asking the Biden administration to end de minimis treatment for all e-commerce purchases, or, at least, stop de minimis treatment for goods subject to partner government agency review, products that are trade priorities, and goods subject to Section 301 and Section 232 tariffs.

Allowing large numbers of electric vehicles from Chinese companies assembled in Mexico would be an "extinction event," warned the Alliance for American Manufacturing, a nonprofit co-founded by large domestic manufacturers and the United Steelworkers union.

Importer Sterling Products, doing business as Auxiliaries Group, voluntarily dismissed its customs suit at the Court of International Trade on its chillers and parts of shredders and granulators. CBP classified the chillers under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 8418.69.0180, along with Section 301 duties under secondary subheading 9903.88.01, and the parts of shredders and granulators under subheading 8479.90.9496, along with Section 301 duties under secondary subheading 9903.88.01. The importer said the goods are free of the Section 301 duties under secondary subheadings 9903.88.10 and 9903.88.07, respectively (Sterling Products d/b/a ACS Auxiliaries Group v. U.S., CIT # 20-03877).

The Court of International Trade on Feb. 22 again remanded the Commerce Department's use of total adverse facts available against exporter Meihua and its affiliate in an antidumping duty review on xanthan gum from China. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves said Meihua properly submitted information on the duties it paid, and its submission of its data 56 days before the antidumping review's preliminary results wasn't "untimely."

The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:

Exporter Shanghai Tainai Bearing Co. and importer C&U Americas brought a suit to the Court of International Trade on Feb. 20 challenging the 2021-22 review of the antidumping duty order on tapered roller bearings from China. The five-count complaint alleges a host of errors in the review, including on Commerce's use of partial adverse facts available (Shanghai Tainai Bearing Co. v. United States, CIT # 24-00025).

A Chinese ball bearings exporter asked for another remand of an antidumping duty review on its products after the Commerce Department exchanged its adverse facts available AD rate for one based on neutral facts, saying the department double-counted when constructing its products’ values and wrongly capped its revenue related to Section 301 duties (Shanghai Tainai Bearing Co. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00038).

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Feb. 12-18:

CBP granted an importer's protest that an automatic aerosol dispenser is classified as an appliance part, rather than as an appliance itself, in a recently released ruling.

A vehicle accessories exporter's products are “steps bars,” as demonstrated by their usual industry use, designs and marketing, not “side protective attachments,” as the exporter claims, the government said Feb. 16 at the Court of International Trade (Keystone Automotive Operations v. U.S., CIT # 21-00215).