The Commerce Department unlawfully expanded the scope of antidumping and countervailing duty orders on magnesia alumina carbon bricks (MAC bricks) from China in a covered merchandise inquiry during an Enforce and Protect Act remand investigation regarding Fedmet's importation of MAC bricks, Fedmet argued in a June 12 complaint at the Court of International Trade (Fedmet Resource Corporation v. U.S., CIT # 23-00117).

The Court of International Trade granted the Commerce Department's request for a remand to reconsider its calculations of constructed value, CV profit cap and constructed export price profit for countervailing duty respondent Hyundai Steel in the 2019-20 review of the CVD order on oil country tubular goods from South Korea. Hyundai claimed that Commerce's use of exporter SeAH Steel Corp.'s third-country sales data for calculating these figures unreasonably used data that failed to represent Hyundai's actual experience.

Federal Circuit judges cautioned counsel for importer Katana Racing against arguing whether the U.S. actually stated a claim for which relief can be granted, despite the fact that the Court of International Trade dismissed the case due to an expired statute of limitations. During the June 7 oral argument in the customs penalty suit, Judge Alvin Schall pointed out that the CIT judge did not decide the failure to state a claim issue, while Judge Todd Hughes said he thought it was "very unwise" to make this claim, seeing as argument over the issue would be precluded at the trade court if the appellate court were to rule on it (U.S. v. Katana Racing, Fed. Cir. # 22-1832).

The Court of International Trade correctly dismissed appellant Glob Energy's claims for lack of jurisdiction in an Enforce and Protect Act case in which CBP said the company and others were transshipping Chinese xanthan gum through India to avoid antidumping duties, the U.S. said in a reply brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. CBP liquidated Glob's entries and the company did not appeal the liquidations "through channels that would permit the trial court to exercise jurisdiction over those entries," and as a result, the liquidations become final and unreviewable, the brief said (All One God Faith v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1078).

DOJ is looking to collect over $10 million in unpaid duties and penalties from Florida businessman Zhe "John" Liu and one of his companies, AB MA Distribution, alleging Liu and AB MA transshipped steel wire hangers through India and Thailand to avoid the payment of antidumping and other duties on steel wire hangers from China, according to a June 7 complaint at the Court of International Trade (U.S. v. Zhe "John" Liu and AB MA Distribution Corporation, CIT # 23-00116).

The Court of International Trade on June 7 upheld the Commerce Department's classification of the surrogate values for aluminum ash byproduct and rolling oil inputs in the first antidumping duty administrative review on aluminum foil from China, as well as the agency's decision to use Maersk data to calculate surrogate freight costs and its refusal to grant respondent Jiangsu Zhongji Lamination Materials Co. a double remedies adjustment for input subsidies the respondent said were countervailable.

The Court of International Trade remanded aspects of the final results of the Commerce Department's less-than-fair-value investigation of raw honey from Argentina, finding that Commerce's decision to use exporter Nexco's acquisition costs as a proxy for Argentinian beekeeper's production costs and its decision to compare Nexco's third-country sales and U.S. sales were not properly explained. However, the court did agree with Commerce's decision to compare Nexco's costs on a monthly basis for the purposes of the sales below cost test and sustained that aspect of the final determination.

A rehearing of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's decision in PrimeSource Building Products v. U.S., upholding President Donald Trump's decision to expand Section 232 duties on "derivatives" of steel and aluminum products, is "unwarranted," the U.S. argued in a reply brief. While the petitioners, led by PrimeSource, continue to "demur," the U.S. said that the Federal Circuit's decision is "consistent with" Supreme Court and past Federal Circuit decisions, namely Transpacific Steel v. U.S., in which the court said that the president can take action beyond the procedural time limits set in the statute as long as it comports with the original duties' plan of action (PrimeSource Building Products v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 21-2066).

Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

The Commerce Department's new methodology for evaluating compliance with a 2019 antidumping duty suspension agreement's requirement to eliminate 85% of dumping has forced industry players to "bet their compliance" on "speculation and estimation," exporter International Greenhouse Produce (IGP) argued in a complaint at the Court of International Trade. The exporter added that Commerce also erred by "treating certain transactions involving U.S. brokers as U.S. sales," jettisoning the definition of "broker" seemingly settled in the 1960s (International Greenhouse Produce v. U.S., CIT # 23-00093).