Turkish Exporter Argues Against Use of Turkish Lira to Value Home Market Sales Rather Than USD

The Commerce Department's own precedent means it should have relied on the U.S. dollar price of home market sales in an antidumping duty case instead of foreign currentcy amounts to avoid large exchange rate fluctuations, plaintiff Habas Sinai ve Tibbi Gazlar Istihsal Endustrisi argued in a July 18 reply brief. Filing its arguments at the Court of International Trade, Habas said that the "evidentiary record" shows Commerce should not have valued Habas's sales using the Turkish lira (Habas Sinai ve Tibbi Gazlar Istihsal Endustrisi v. United States, CIT #21-00527).

Habas challenged the final results of the 2018-19 administrative review of the AD order on hot-rolled steel flat products from Turkey. During the review, Habas told Commerce that it was having trouble responding to the case's questionnaire because Turkey was experiencing hyperinflation. It said Commerce strayed from its normal practice of relying on the U.S. dollar when valuing home market sales and used the value of the Turkish lira, with Commerce stating these were the only sale values that can be directly tied to the audited financial records.

The respondent argued that Commerce has consistently calculated margins using the U.S. dollar home market price. The use of lira values is "particularly distortive in the present review" due to hyperinflation, Habas said, and Commerce's use of the accounting currency rather than the transaction currency for home market price was unlawful. The agency disagreed and gave Habas a 24.32% weighted-average dumping margin. Habas took its case to CIT, arguing that the agency's longstanding practice is to use the currency of the sales price based on the currency that controls the ultimate amount a purchaser pays for the sale (see 2110210037).

In reply, the U.S. argued that since it was the lira values that reconciled with Habas' audited statements, Commerce reasonably did not find that the U.S. dollar values were "controlling." Commerce cannot use the U.S. dollar-denominated values for the home market sales since the dollar values did not appear consistent with the amounts paid, the U.S. argued. Commerce further claims it was presented with lira values that were on Habas' invoices, the U.S. said.

Habas responded that this is "inconsistent with the evidentiary record," and that the associated invoice has the unit price in dollars multiplied by the foreign exchange rate to calculate the amount of lira at the time of the invoice. "This unit price is the only key element for pricing," the brief said. "Demonstrated in the customer’s order form and the customer’s e-mail confirmation, the sale was negotiated in USD, and it was that USD price used to calculate the Turkish Lira price at the time of invoicing." While the financial statements had lira values, the U.S. and AD petitioner have shown no autohrity to show that this fact alone means the lira value controlled the ultimate amount the purchaser paid, the brief said.