Taiwan Polyvinyl Alcohol: Preliminary Affirmative AD Duty Determination

The International Trade Administration has made a preliminary affirmative antidumping determination that polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) from Taiwan is being, or is likely to be, sold in the U.S. at less than fair value.

Investigation Resumed After 2004 ITC Negative Injury Determination Reversed

In 2004, the International Trade Commission made a preliminary negative injury determination for PVA from Taiwan, and the ITA therefore did not continue the investigation at that time. The petitioner appealed to the Court of International Trade and, on remand from the CIT, the ITC reversed its negative preliminary determination.

Pursuant to an appeal, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the ITC's decision in December 2009, and the ITA therefore resumed this AD investigation.

AD Suspension of Liquidation Instructions

The ITA will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to suspend liquidation of all entries of PVA from Taiwan with a time of entry on or after September 13, 2010.

AD Cash Deposit/Bond Requirements

The ITA will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit or the posting of a bond for entries of PVA from Taiwan with a time of entry on or after September 13, 2010 at the AD duty rates below.

(The ITA notes that if the exporter is not a firm identified in this investigation but the producer is, the AD duty rate will be the rate established for the producer of the subject merchandise.)

ITA Preliminarily Finds Targeted Dumping

In July 2010, the petitioner submitted an allegation of targeted dumping with respect to CCPC. As a result of its analysis, the ITA preliminarily determines that there is a pattern of export prices (EPs) for comparable merchandise that differ significantly among certain customers and time periods for CCPC.

The ITA determines that the differences in the patterns of EPs cannot be taken into account using the average-to-average methodology; therefore, it has applied the average-to-transaction methodology to all U.S. sales that CCPC reported and has not offset any margins found.

(Note that in December 2008, the ITA issued an interim final rule for the purposes of withdrawing the regulations governing targeted dumping analysis in AD duty investigations. See ITT's Online Archives or 12/15/08 and 01/15/09 news, 08121525 and 09011535, for BP summaries of the interim final rule and extension of the comment period.)

Due Date for Final AD Determination Postponed

The ITA is also postponing the due date for the final AD duty determination until no later than 135 days after September 13, 2010, and extending provisional measures from a four-month period to not more than 6 months.

Scope of the Investigation Amended

According to the ITA, the scope of investigation has been amended at the petitioner’s request to additionally exclude “PVB-grade low-ash” PVA. The amended scope, in its entirety, is as follows¹:

The merchandise covered by this investigation is PVA. This product consists of all PVA hydrolyzed in excess of 80 percent, whether or not mixed or diluted with commercial levels of defoamer or boric acid.

Excluded from scope. PVA in fiber form and PVB-grade low-ash PVA are not included in the scope of this investigation. PVB-grade low-ash PVA is defined to be PVA that meets the following specifications: Hydrolysis, Mole % of 98.40 ± 0.40, 4% Solution Viscosity 30.00 ± 2.50 centipois, and ash—ISE, wt% less than 0.60, 4% solution color 20mm cell, 10.0 maximum APHA units, haze index, 20mm cell, 5.0, maximum.

HTS. The merchandise under investigation is currently classifiable under HTS subheading 3905.30.00.

Although the HTS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise under investigation is dispositive.

¹CCPC requested that the ITA exclude 14 categories of merchandise that were excluded from the scope of the AD duty orders on PVA from Japan and from China, arguing that the petitioner still cannot manufacture these products, and because doing so would allow CBP to administer the three AD duty orders on PVA consistently. However, the ITA stated that CCPC’s assertion that the petitioner cannot manufacture the products at issue is incorrect. The petitioner noted, among other things, that it has the competence to manufacture products that fall within or that are functionally equivalent to and commercially competitive with products that fall within all of CCPC’s proposed exclusions. Therefore, the ITA has not approved CCPC’s exclusion request.

(See ITT’s Online Archives or 09/09/10 news, 10090923, for BP summary of ITA’s fact sheet on this preliminary determination.

See ITT’s Online Archives or 07/02/10 news, 10070219, for BP summary stating that the ITA has resumed this 2004 investigation pursuant to the ITC's remanded affirmative injury determination.

See ITT’s Online Archives or 10/07/04 news, 04100730, for BP summary of the ITA’s 2004 initiation of this investigation.)

ITA contact -- Thomas Schauer (202) 482-0410

(FR Pub 09/13/10, ITA Case No. A-583-841)