CBP Finds All Imports Subject to AD Order in EAPA Case Despite Scope Ruling

CBP said that all wooden bedroom furniture imported by Aspects Furniture International was covered merchandise subject to an Enforce and Protect Act investigation despite a scope ruling from the Commerce Department finding that only two of six types of Aspects' furniture was covered merchandise. In remand results submitted to the Court of International Trade on March 27, CBP said the finding was justified due to adverse inferences levied against the importer (Aspects Furniture International v. U.S., CIT # 20-03824).

CBP said on two occasions it saw employees of Aspects' Chinese satellite office, Aspects Nantong, destroying information in response to questions from the verifiers.

"Ultimately, because of Aspects’ failure to cooperate, CBP was unable to rely on Aspects’ entry, sales, and shipping documents to determine which of Aspects’ entries contained covered merchandise, and which did not," the remand results said. "As such, CBP is using inferences that are adverse to Aspects’ interests and relying on the facts otherwise available on the record to find that all of Aspects’ entries subject to the EAPA investigation, between August 22, 2016[,] and May 18, 2020, contained covered merchandise."

The trade court previously remanded the case so that CBP can provide public summaries of the confidential information in the investigation, in which the agency said Aspects evaded the antidumping duty order on wooden bedroom furniture from China. In that opinion, the court questioned the truthfulness of CBP's evidence of evasion, which included CBP's account of Aspects Nantong employees destroying information, though it did not reject the evidence. CIT said that on remand CBP could further explain the truthfulness, reasonableness or credibility of the evidence in dispute (see 2211290078).

In response, CBP went into greater detail about the evidence obtained at verification and how it serves as the basis for finding that all of Aspects' imports are covered merchandise. "CBP has no reason to question the truthfulness, reasonableness, or credibility of the CBP employees’ interpretation of the evidence obtained at verification," the remand results said, adding that the verification was carried out by a team of CBP employees "that included experienced professionals." CBP employees are subject to the "CBP Standards of Conduct," which requires them to show the "highest standards of ethical and professional conduct," CBP said.

"Consequently, if CBP employees were to intentionally fabricate information regarding the verification, they would be potentially subject to disciplinary action, and potential removal from employment," CBP said. "As such, CBP finds that the statements in the Verification Report regarding destruction of evidence witnessed by the verification team at Aspects’ facility to be truthful and credible."

Aspects said in comments on CBP's draft remand that the findings on the destruction of evidence "are immaterial" to the evasion finding since CBP failed to identify what "kinds of 'material' records were subject to destruction."