Commerce Flips Position, Grants LOT Adjustment in AD Review on Remand at Trade Court

The Commerce Department decided to grant Universal Tube and Plastic Industries a level of trade adjustment in an antidumping duty review on remand at the Court of International Trade. Submitting its redetermination on Oct. 13, Commerce found Universal made its home market sales at two LOTs, though it continued to deny Universal a constructed export price offset. The result was a weighted-average dumping margin of 1.18% for Universal (Universal Tube and Plastic Indus. v. United States, CIT #20-03944).

The plaintiffs, made up of Universal, THL Tube and Pipe Industries, and KHK Scaffolding and Framework (Universal) -- three affiliates treated as a single respondent -- challenged the final results of the antidumping duty administrative review on circular welded carbon-quality steel pipe from the United Arab Emirates. After deciding to use CEP for Universal's U.S. sales since they were all made through one of two affiliated resellers, Commerce made adjustments to the resellers' price to get the CEP by deducting reseller profit and selling expenses.

Commerce had found that there was only one level of trade in the plaintiffs' UAE sales. Universal, though, said that there were actually two levels of trade: sales made directly to unaffiliated customers and reviewed sales made by affiliated resellers to unaffiliated customers. Commerce used the indirect sales to compare against the CEP and find normal value, refusing to perform either a LOT adjustment or a CEP offset. At CIT, the plaintiffs argued that Commerce should have identified the two LOTs based on more and different selling activities. In the opinion, the court remanded the issue since the agency "failed to confront the central issue raised by plaintiffs’ claim," and said the agency ignored detracting evidence placed on the record by the plaintiffs (see 2207180045).

On remand, Commerce said it reconsidered the record evidence and found that Universal made its home market sales at two LOTs, granting Universal an LOT adjustment. "However, because we find that Universal’s U.S. LOT is equivalent to its LOT for sales from the Universal producers to unaffiliated HM customers (i.e., HM LOT 1) and data are available with which to make an LOT adjustment, we continue to find that a CEP offset is not warranted," the remand results said. Universal said it fully agreed with the draft remand results.