Steel Importer Seeks Refund for Section 232 Tariffs on Steel 'Derivatives' Following Key CIT Decision

Following a key decision from the Court of International Trade striking down Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum "derivatives" (see 2104050049), steel nail importer Hilti filed a lawsuit of its own in the court seeking to reap the benefits. In a May 5 complaint, Hilti made several arguments similar to those in PrimeSource Building Products, Inc. v. United States, et al. Among other things, Hilti said the already struck-down Section 232 tariff expansion to include steel derivatives was improper because there was no underlying report from the Commerce Department (Hilti, Inc., v. U.S. et al., CIT # 21-00216).

The initial challenge to the tariff expansion began following President Donald Trump's decision to expand the Section 232 tariffs to cover steel derivatives in January 2020. PrimeSource successfully argued that the tariffs were announced well after the 105-day deadline for tariff action following the Commerce Department's report that led to the initial imposition of Section 232 steel tariffs in 2018 (see 2101280034). The PrimeSource lawsuit prompted many other companies to file similar cases at CIT, but Hilti is the first to file a CIT case following the ruling. The April 5 decision granted refunds to PrimeSource for any payments made toward the 25% steel derivative tariffs and also barred the implementation of the duties on other importers' entries. However, refunds will only be granted on a per-company basis by the court for imports that have already been liquidated, a condition that likely will prompt legal action from Hilti. Commerce may yet appeal the PrimeSource decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.