U.S. Supply Chain

On July 1, 2020, Commerce announced in the Federal Register the opportunity to request an annual administrative review for products that are currently subject to antidumping and countervailing duties.

The products and countries that have July anniversary months are the following:

  • Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from Belgium, Colombia, and Thailand
  • Fine Denier Polyester Staple Fiber from India, Korea, Taiwan, and China
  • Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from India, Italy, Korea, Taiwan, and China
  • Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Film from India and Taiwan
  • Certain Pasta from Italy and Turkey
  • Steel Nails from Malaysia, Oman, Vietnam, and Taiwan
  • Welded Stainless Steel Pressure Pipe from Malaysia, Vietnam, and Thailand
  • Carbon Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings from Thailand and China
  • Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bar from Turkey
  • Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from Korea and Taiwan
  • Oil Country Tubular Goods (OCTG) from Ukraine
  • In-Shell Pistachios from Iran
  • Various products from Japan and from China

As part of this annual review process, Commerce intends to select respondents based on an analysis of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports during the period of review which is released only to legal counsel for interested parties. Any party wishing to participate in the antidumping and countervailing duty review process or who may be affected by duties on the products identified in the Federal Register notice should file a request for review no later than July 31, 2020.  In order to be eligible to participate in the review, a party must either be an exporter or importer of the specific products and during the specific time periods identified in the Federal Register notice.

If your company or your suppliers are affected by these reviews, please contact Husch Blackwell’s International Trade and Supply Chain group for assistance on how the annual review process works.

In Husch Blackwell’s June 2020 Trade Law Newsletter, you’ll learn about the following updates in international trade and supply chain law:

  • U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (“USMCA”) will displace NAFTA and become effective today, July 1, 2020
  • USTR is soliciting input on products subject to tariffs in the Large Civil Aircraft Section 301 action
  • USTR initiated a Section 301 Digital Services Tax (“DST”) investigation covering India, the EU, and several other countries
  • An update on U.S. Department of Commerce decisions
  • U.S. International Trade Commission – Section 701/731 proceedings
  • An update from U.S. Customs & Border Protection
  • Summary of decisions from the Court of International Trade
  • Updates from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • June export controls and sanctions

If you have questions about our June Trade Law Update, please contact a member of Husch Blackwell’s International Trade & Supply Chain team.

On June 30, 2020, Insteel Industries Inc., Mid-South Wire Company, National Wire LLC, Oklahoma Steel &Wire Co., and Wire Mesh Corp. (“Petitioners”), filed a petition for the imposition of antidumping and countervailing duties on standard steel welded wire mesh from Mexico.

SCOPE OF THE INVESTIGATION

The scope of this investigation covers uncoated standard welded steel reinforcement wire mesh (“Standard Welded Wire Mesh”) produced from smooth or deformed wire. Subject Standard Welded Wire Mesh is produced in square and rectangular grids of uniformly spaced steel wires that are welded at all intersections. Sizes are specified by combining the spacing of the wires in inches or millimeters and the wire cross-sectional area in hundredths of square inch or millimeters squared. Subject standard welded wire mesh may be packaged and sold in rolls or in sheets.

Subject standard welded wire mesh is currently produced to ASTM specification A1064/A1064M, which covers carbon-steel wire and welded wire reinforcement, smooth and deformed, for concrete in the following seven styles:

  1. 6X6 W1.4/W1.4 or D1.4/D1.4
  2. 6X6 W2.1/W2.1 or D2.1/D2.1
  3. 6X6 W2.9/W2.9 or D2.9/D2.9
  4. 6X6 W4/W4 or D4/D4
  5. 6X12 W4/W4 or D4/D4
  6. 4X4 W2.9/W2.9 or D2.9/D2.9
  7. 4X4 W4/W4 or D4/D4

The first number in the style denotes the spacing between the longitudinal wires and the second number denotes the spacing between the transverse wires. In the first style listed above, for example, “6X6” denotes a grid size of six inches by six inches. “W” denotes the use of smooth wire, and “D” denotes the use of deformed wire in making the mesh. The number following the W or D denotes the cross-sectional area of the transverse and longitudinal wires in hundredths of a square inch (i.e., W1.4 or D1.4 is .014 square inches).

Smooth wire is wire that has a uniform cross-sectional diameter throughout the length of the wire. Deformed wire is wire with indentations or raised transverse ribs, which results in wire that does not have a uniform cross-sectional diameter throughout the length of the wire.

Rolls of Subject standard welded wire mesh are currently produced in the following styles and actual width and length combinations:

Style: 6X6 W1.4/W1.4 or D1.4/D1.4 (i.e., 10 gauge)

Roll Sizes:

5′ X 50′

5′ X 150′

6′ X 150′

5′ X 200′

7′ X 200′

7.5′ X 200′

Style: 6X6 W2.1/W2.1 or D2.1/D2.1 (i.e., 8 gauge)

Roll Sizes:

5′ X 150′

Style: 6X6 W2.9/W2.9 or D2.9/D2.9 (i.e., 6 gauge)

Roll Sizes:

5′ X 150′

7′ X 200′

All rolled standard welded wire mesh is included in scope regardless of length.

Sheets of subject standard welded wire mesh are currently produced in the following styles and actual width and length combinations:

Style: 6X6 W1.4/W1.4 or D1.4/D1.4 (i.e., 10 gauge)

Sheet Size:

3’6″ X 7′

4′ X 7′

4′ X 7’6″

5′ X 10′

7′ X 20′

7’6″X20′

8′ X 12’6″

8′ X 15′

8′ X 20′

Style: 6X6 W2.1/W2.1 or D2.1/D2.1 (i.e., 8 gauge)

Sheet Size:

5′ X 10′

7′ X 20′

7’6″ X 20′

8′ X 12’6″

8′ X 15′

8′ X 20′

Style: 6X6 W2.9/W2.9 or D2.9/D2.9 (i.e., 6 gauge)

Sheet Size:

3’6″ X 20′

5′ X 10′

7′ X 20′

7’6″ X 20′

8′ X 12’6″

8′ X 15′

8′ X 20′

Style: 6X12 W4/W4 or D4/D4 (i.e., 4 gauge)

Sheet Size:

8′ X 20′

Style: 4X4 W2.9/W2.9 or D2.9/D2.9 (i.e., 6 gauge)

Sheet Size:

5′ X 10′

7′ X 20′

7’6″ X 20′

8′ X 12’6″

8′ X 12’8″

8′ X 15′

8′ X 20′

Style: 4X4 W4/W4 or D4/D4 (i.e., 4 gauge)

Sheet Size:

5′ X 10′

8′ X 12’6″

8′ X 12’8″

8′ X 15′

8′ X 20′

Any product imported, sold, or invoiced in one of these size combinations is within the scope.

ASTM specification A1064/A1064M provides for permissible variations in wire gauges, the spacing between transverse and longitudinal wires, and the length and width combinations. To the extent a roll or sheet of welded wire mesh falls within these permissible variations, it is within this scope.

ASTM specification A1064/A1064M also defines permissible oversteeling, which is the use of a heavier gauge wire with a larger cross-sectional area than nominally specified. It also permits a wire diameter tolerance of ±0.003 inches for products up to W5/D5 and ±0.004 for sizes over W5/D5. A producer may oversteel by increasing smooth or deformed wire diameter up to two whole number size increments on Table 1 of A1064. Subject standard welded wire mesh has the following wire diameter ranges, which account for both oversteeling and diameter tolerance:

W/D No. Maximum Oversteeling No. Diameter Range (inch)
1.4 (i.e., 10 gauge) 3.4 0.093 to 0.211
2.1 (i.e., 8 gauge) 4.1 0.161 to 0.231
2.9 (i.e., 6 gauge) 4.9 0.189 to 0.253
4.0 (i.e., 4 gauge) 6.0 0.223 to 0.280

To the extent a roll or sheet of welded wire mesh falls within the permissible variations provided above, it is within this scope.

In addition to the tolerances permitted in ASTM specification A1064/A1064M, Standard welded wire mesh within this scope includes combinations where:

  1. A width and/or length combination varies by ± one grid size in any direction, i.e., ± 6 inches in length or width where the wire mesh’s grid size is “6X6”; and/or
  2. The center-to-center spacing between individual wires may vary by up to one quarter of an inch from the nominal grid size specified.

Length is measured from the ends of any wire and width is measured between the center-line of end longitudinal wires. Additionally, although the subject Standard welded wire mesh typically meets ASTM A1064/A1064M, the failure to include certifications, test reports or other documentation establishing that the product meets this specification does not remove the product from the scope. Standard welded wire mesh made to comparable foreign specifications (e.g., DIN, JIS, etc.) or proprietary specifications is included in the scope.

Excluded from the scope is wire mesh that is galvanized (i.e., coated with zinc) or coated with an epoxy coating. In order to be excluded as galvanized, the excluded welded wire mesh must have a zinc coating thickness meeting the requirements of ASTM specification A641/A641M. Epoxy coating is a mix of epoxy resin and hardener that can be applied to the surface of steel wire. Merchandise subject to this investigation is classified under HTSUS categories 7314.20.0000 and 7314.39.0000. While HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and Customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive.

 

PETITIONERS

Insteel Wire Products Company

1373 Boggs Drive

Mount Airy, NC 27030

Tel: (336) 786-2141

Fax: (336)783-4473

Website: http://www.insteel.com/

Contact: H.O. Woltz III, President and CEO

Email: hwoltz@insteel.com

 

Mid-South Wire Company

1070 Visco Drive

Nashville, TN 37210

Tel: (615) 743-2850

Fax: (615) 256-5836

Website: https://www.midsouthwire.com/

Contact: John T. Johnson, Jr., Owner and President

Email: jtjohnson@midsouthwire.com

 

National Wire LLC

12262 FM 3083 Road

Conroe, TX 77301

Tel: (936) 760-2040

Fax: (936) 760-4080

Website: www.nationalwirellc.com

Contact: Alejandra Abbott, Vice President

Email: alejandra@nationalwirellc.com

 

Oklahoma Steel & Wire Co.

1041 S. 1st Street

Madill, OK 73446

Tel: (580) 795-6200

Fax: (580) 795-7422

Website: www.okbrandwire.com

Contact: Lou Richards, Vice President of Sales

Email: lrichards@okbrandwire.com

Wire Mesh Corp.

25219 Kuykendahl Rd.

Houston, TX 77375

Tel: (706) 922-5179

Fax: (904) 714-3935

Website: https://wmc-us.com/

Contact: Jordi Barrenechea, President

Email: jordi@wmc-us.com

 

COUNSEL FOR PETITIONERS

Kathleen W. Cannon

KELLEY DRYE & WARREN LLP

3050 K Street NW

Suite 400

Washington, DC 20007

(202) 342-8400

 

NAMED PRODUCERS/EXPORTERS

For a list of foreign producers/exporters alleged by Petitioner, please see Attachment I

 

NAMED IMPORTERS

For a list of importers alleged by Petitioner, please see Attachment II

 

ESTIMATED SCHEDULE

Event Earliest Date
Petition Filed June 30, 2020
DOC Initiation July 20, 2020
ITC Preliminary Investigation:
Questionnaires Due July 14, 2020
Request to appear at hearing July 20, 2020
Hearing July 22, 2020
Briefs July 27, 2020
ITC Vote August 14, 2020
DOC Investigation Schedule:
DOC Preliminary Antidumping Determination December 7, 2020
DOC Preliminary Countervailing Determination September 23, 2020
DOC Final Antidumping Determination February 22, 2021
DOC Final Countervailing Determination December 7, 2020
ITC Final AD Determination April 6, 2021
ITC Final CVD Determination January 21, 2021

 

ALLEGED DUMPING MARGINS

Mexico: 55.90% – 160.74%

 

ALLEGED SUBSIDIES

For a list of alleged countervailing duty programs, please see Attachment III .

 

IMPORTS OF SUBJECT MERCHANDISE

 

2017 2018 2019 YTD 2019 YTD 2020
Mexico
Quantity(Short Tons) 27,003 35,910 41,696 10,646 12,223
Value ($) 18,956,732 37,994,605 46,729,150 15,441,544 9,075,591
AUV ($/Short Tons) 702.02 1,058.05 1,120.70 1,450.46 742.52

 

CONTACT US

For more information concerning this petition and how it may affect your business, please contact Jeffrey Neeley, Nithya Nagarajan, or Stephen Brophy.

On June 30, 2020, American Copper Tube Coalition (“ACTC” or “Coalition”) (“Petitioners”), filed a petition for the imposition of antidumping duties on seamless refined copper pipe and tube from Vietnam.

 

SCOPE OF THE INVESTIGATION

The products covered by the petition are all seamless circular refined copper pipes and tubes, including redraw hollows, greater than or equal to 6 inches (152.4 mm) in length and measuring less than 12.130 inches (308.102 mm) (actual) in outside diameter (“OD”), regardless of wall thickness, bore (e.g., smooth, enhanced with inner grooves or ridges), manufacturing process (e.g., hot finished, cold-drawn, annealed), outer surface (e.g., plain or enhanced with grooves, ridges, fins, or gills), end finish (e.g., plain end, swaged end, flared end, expanded end, crimped end, threaded), coating (e.g., plastic, paint), insulation, attachments (e.g., plain, capped, plugged with compression or other fitting), or physical configuration (e.g., straight, coiled, bent, wound on spools.

The scope of the petition covers, but is not limited to, seamless refined copper pipe and tube produced or comparable to the American Society for Testing and Materials (“ASTM”) ASTM-B42, ASTM-B68, ASTM-B75, ASTMB88, ASTM-B88M, ASTM-Bl88, ASTM-B251, ASTM-B251M, ASTMB280, ASTM-B302, ASTM-B306, ASTM-B359, ASTM-B743, ASTMB819, and ASTM-B903 specifications and meeting the physical parameters described therein.

Also included within the scope of the petition are all sets of covered products, including “line sets” of seamless refined copper tubes (with or without fittings or insulation) suitable for connecting an outdoor air conditioner or heat pump to an indoor evaporator unit. The phrase “all sets of covered products” denotes any combination of items put up for sale that is comprised of merchandise subject to the scope.

“Refined copper” is defined as: (1) metal containing at least 99.85 percent by weight of copper; or (2) metal containing at least 97.5 percent by weight of copper, provided that the content by weight of any other element does not exceed the following limits:

Element Limiting Content Percent by Weight
Ag – Silver .25
As – Arsenic .5
Cd – Cadmium 1.3
Cr – Chromium 1.4
Mg – Magnesium .8
Pb – Lead 1.5
S – Sulfur .7
Sn – Tin .8
Te – Tellurium .8
Zn – Zinc 1.0
Zr – Zirconium .3
Other elements (each) .3

 

Excluded from the scope of the petition are all seamless circular hollows of refined copper less than 12 inches in length whose OD (actual) exceeds its length.

The products subject to the petition are currently classifiable under subheading 7411.10.1030 and 7411.10.1090 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”). Products subject to the petition may also enter under HTSUS subheadings 7407.10.1500, 7419.99.5050, 8415.90.8065, and 8415.90.8085. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of the petition is dispositive.

 

PETITIONERS

Mueller Group

150 Schilling Blvd.,

Suite 100

Collierville, TN 38017

Tel: (901) 753-3200

Fax: (901) 753-3254

Email: cjmiritello@muellerindustries.com

Website: www.muellerindustries.com

 

Cerro Flow Products, LLC

3000 Mississippi Avenue

Sauget, IL 62206

Tel: (618) 337-6000

Fax: (618) 337-6958

Email: greg.heidt@marmon.com

Website: www.cerroflow.com

 

COUNSEL FOR PETITIONERS

Jack A. Levy

CASSIDY LEVY KENT (USA) LLP

900 19th Street, NW

Suite 400

Washington, DC 20006

(202) 567-2300

 

NAMED PRODUCERS/EXPORTERS

For a list of foreign producers/exporters alleged by Petitioner, please see Attachment I.

 

NAMED IMPORTERS

For a list of importers alleged by Petitioner, please see Attachment II.

 

ESTIMATED SCHEDULE

Event Earliest Date
Petition Filed June 30, 2020
DOC Initiation July 20, 2020
ITC Preliminary Investigation:
Questionnaires Due July 14, 2020
Request to appear at hearing July 20, 2020
Hearing July 22, 2020
Briefs July 27, 2020
ITC Vote August 14, 2020
DOC Investigation Schedule:
DOC Preliminary Antidumping Determination December 7, 2020
DOC Final Antidumping Determination February 22, 2021
ITC Final AD Determination April 6, 2021

 

ALLEGED DUMPING MARGINS

Vietnam: 110.51%

 

IMPORTS OF SUBJECT MERCHANDISE

 

2017 2018 2019 Q1 2019 Q1 2020
Vietnam
Quantity(1,000lbs) 34,470 40,377 44,629 8,192 12,543
Value ($ est.) 113,716,530 143,015,334 151,783,229 28,696,576 41,216,298
AUV ($/lb.) 3.299 3.542 3.401 3.503 3.286

 

CONTACT US

For more information concerning this petition and how it may affect your business, please contact Jeffrey Neeley, Nithya Nagarajan, or Stephen Brophy.

On June 30, 2020, Globe Specialty Metals, Inc. and Mississippi Silicon LLC (“Petitioners”), filed a petition for the imposition of antidumping duties on silicon metal from the Bosnia and Herzegovina (“Bosnia”), Iceland, and Malaysia. In addition, the petition alleges that imports of silicon metal from the Republic of Kazakhstan (“Kazakhstan”) are unfairly subsidized and requests the imposition of countervailing duties.

 

SCOPE OF THE INVESTIGATION

The scope of this investigation covers all forms and sizes of silicon metal, including silicon metal powder. Silicon metal contains at least 85.00 percent but less than 99.99 percent silicon, and less than 4.00 percent iron, by actual weight. Semiconductor grade silicon (merchandise containing at least 99 .99 percent silicon by actual weight and classifiable under Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheading 2804.61.0000) is excluded from the scope of this investigation.

Silicon metal is currently classifiable under subheadings 2804.69.1000 and 2804.69.5000 of the HTSUS. While the HTSUSnumbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, thewritten description of the scope remains dispositive.

 

PETITIONERS

Globe Specialty Metals, Inc.

County Road 32

P.O. Box 157

Beverly. OH 45715

Website: https://www .ferroglobe.com/

Contact: Brian D’ Amico

General Counsel, Americas

Phone: (786)509-6942

Email: bdamico@ferroglobe.com

 

Mississippi Silicon LLC

80 County Road 210

P.O. Box 316

Burnsville, MS 38833

Website: https://www.missilicon.com/

Contact; John Lalley

Vice President, Finance .and Chief Financial Officer

Phone: (662) 696-2600

Email: jlalley@missilicon.com

 

COUNSEL FOR PETITIONERS

Adam H. Gordon

The Bristol Group PLLC

1707 L Street NW

Suite 570

Washington, DC 20036

(202) 991-2701

 

NAMED PRODUCERS/EXPORTERS

For a list of foreign producers/exporters alleged by Petitioner, please see Attachment I.

 

NAMED IMPORTERS

For a list of importers alleged by Petitioner, please see Attachment II.

 

ESTIMATED SCHEDULE

Event Earliest Date
Petition Filed June 30, 2020
DOC Initiation July 20, 2020
ITC Preliminary Investigation:
Questionnaires Due July 14, 2020
Request to appear at hearing July 20, 2020
Hearing July 22, 2020
Briefs July 27, 2020
ITC Vote August 14, 2020
DOC Investigation Schedule:
DOC Preliminary Antidumping Determination December 7, 2020
DOC Preliminary Countervailing Determination September 23, 2020
DOC Final Antidumping Determination February 22, 2021
DOC Final Countervailing Determination December 7, 2020
ITC Final AD Determination April 6, 2021
ITC Final CVD Determination January 21, 2021

 

ALLEGED DUMPING MARGINS

Bosnia: 62.65%

Iceland: 60.46% – 84.79%

Malaysia: 54.22%

 

ALLEGED SUBSIDIES

For a list of alleged countervailing duty programs, please see Attachment III.

 

IMPORTS OF SUBJECT MERCHANDISE

 

2017 2018 2019 Jan-Mar 2019 Jan-Mar 2020
Bosnia
Quantity(Short Tons) 7,211 9,350 10,493 3,237 2,818
Value ($) 14,897,284 21,652,890 20,078,706 6,655,152 4,447,452
AUV ($/Short Tons) 2,066 2,316 1,913 2,056 1,578
Iceland
Quantity(Short Tons) 1,471 1,259 6,947 1,798 1,519
Value ($) 2,413,136 2,369,156 11,711,069 3,278,309 2,221,467
AUV ($/Short Tons) 1,641 1,882 1,686 1,824 1,463
Kazakhstan
Quantity(Short Tons) 10,360 3,045 8,522 2,378 345
Value ($) 17,466,034 6,063,600 15,171,412 4,486,784 518,140
AUV ($/Short Tons) 1,686 1,991 1,780 1,887 1,504
Malaysia
Quantity(Short Tons) 125 0 3,894 0 1,905
Value ($) 178,790 0 6,594,584 0 2,743,161
AUV ($/Short Tons) 1,430 1,693 1,440

 

CONTACT US

For more information concerning this petition and how it may affect your business, please contact Jeffrey Neeley, Nithya Nagarajan, or Stephen Brophy.

The U.S.-Mexico-Canada Free Trade Agreement (USMCA) will displace NAFTA and become effective July 1, 2020. Though similar to NAFTA in many ways, key changes in the USMCA include provisions for digital trade, implementation of new local labor standards in the automotive sector, and the adjustment of the rules of origin for a wide variety of products.  Companies entering goods under the USMCA should be sure to have a properly completed USMCA Certificate of Origin at the time of entry. Also, irrespective of the eligibility of the goods under NAFTA, USMCA eligibility should be verified independently since the USMCA rules could be more stringent or more lenient for any number of products.  Also, the USMCA de minimus provisions and various exceptions in the USMCA rules of origin may affect whether goods might qualify thereunder. Although concerns about the timing of the implementation due to the ongoing COVID-19 outbreak were raised, the administration is holding to its July 1 implementation date. Husch Blackwell will continue to monitor and review the USMCA and encourages those who may have questions or concerns to contact Robert Stang or other members of Husch Blackwell’s International Trade and Supply Chain group.

Entering October Term 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court had never reviewed a Section 337 investigation.  However, some court-watchers thought that Comcast Corporation v. International Trade Commission might have the right ingredients to break that 90-year streak: a former U.S. Solicitor General representing the petitioners; allegations that Chevron deference had led to regulatory overreach; and a handful of sophisticated amici curiae supporting cert.  But the Court denied the petition without even a relist, leaving intact the U.S. International Trade Commission’s assertion of broad authority over patent infringement that occurs wholly within the United States after importation.

Comcast’s cert petition arose out of ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-1001.  The complainant, Rovi, argued that certain set-top boxes (“STBs”) used in Comcast’s cable-television system infringed two patents involving “an interactive television program guide system for remote access to television programs.”  The Commission found that when Comcast customers use the STBs in a particular way, in conjunction with Comcast’s system, those customers infringe the asserted patents.  The Commission further found that Comcast induced that infringement by instructing customers how to use the system.  Thus, the Commission found that the STBs constitute infringing articles under Section 337 and issued a limited exclusion order and cease and desist order.

Before the Federal Circuit and in its cert petition, Comcast argued that the Commission had overstepped its jurisdiction.  Comcast explained that all of the infringing conduct—both the customers’ direct infringement using the STBs, and also Comcast’s inducement by providing instructions to its customers—occurred within the United States.  In Comcast’s view, then, the STBs were not “articles that . . . infringe” a patent at the time of importation and thus fall outside the scope of Section 337.

Siding with the Commission, the unanimous Federal Circuit panel rejected this argument.  The court noted that Section 337 expressly defines unfair trade practices to include “sale within the United States after importation” of infringing articles.  The court concluded that so long as the articles are imported and they infringe a patent, they fall within the scope of Section 337, regardless of whether the articles were infringing at the time they entered the United States.

The denial of cert in Comcast solidifies the Commission’s broad assertion of authority over all infringement by imported products, regardless of the nature of that infringement and regardless of when it occurs.  Even before this development, the Commission had become a preferred forum for many patent holders given its powerful remedies, fast pace, and patent-savvy personnel.  This trend is likely to accelerate now that the courts have passed on the opportunity to curtail the Commission’s broad view of its jurisdiction.

We encourage those who may have questions regarding this issue to contact Husch Blackwell’s Section 337 Team.

On June 26, 2020, The Mosaic Company, (“Petitioner”), filed a petition for the imposition of countervailing duties on Phosphate Fertilizers from the Morocco and Russia.

SCOPE OF THE INVESTIGATION

The merchandise covered by these investigations is phosphate fertilizers in all physical forms (i.e., solid or liquid form), with or without coating or additives such as anti-caking agents. Phosphate fertilizers in solid form are covered whether granular, prilled (i.e., pelletized), or in other solid form (e.g., powdered)

The covered merchandise includes phosphate fertilizers in the following forms: ammonium dihydrogenorthophosphate or monoammonium phosphate (MAP), chemical formula NH4H2PO4; diammonium hydrogenorthophosphate or diammonium phosphate (DAP), chemical formula (NH4)2HPO4; normal superphosphate (NSP), also known as ordinary superphosphate or single superphosphate, chemical formula Ca(H2PO4)i-CaSO4; concentrated superphosphate, also known as double, treble, or triple superphosphate (TSP), chemical formula Ca(H2PO4)2·H2O; and proprietary formulations of MAP, DAP, NSP, and TSP.

The covered merchandise also includes other fertilizer formulations incorporating phosphorous and non-phosphorous plant nutrient components, whether chemically-bonded, granulated (e.g., when multiple components are incorporated into granules through, e.g., a slurry process), or compounded (e.g., when multiple components are compacted together under high pressure), including nitrogen, phosphate, sulfur (NPS) fertilizers, nitrogen, phosphorous, potassium (NPK) fertilizers, and proprietary formulations thereof that may or may not include other nonphosphorous plant nutrient components. For phosphate fertilizers that contain non-phosphorous plant nutrient components, such as nitrogen, potassium, sulfur, zinc, or other non-phosphorous components, the entire article is covered, including the non-phosphorous content, provided that the phosphorous content (measured by diphosphorous pentaoxide, chemical formula P2O5) is at least 5% by weight.

Phosphate fertilizers that are otherwise subject to this investigation are included when commingled (i.e., mixed or blended) with phosphate fertilizers from sources not subject to this investigation. Phosphate fertilizers that are otherwise subject to this investigation are included when commingled with substances other than phosphate fertilizers subject to this investigation (e.g., granules containing only non-phosphate fertilizers such as potash or urea). Only the subject component of such commingled products is covered by the scope of this investigation.

The Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) numbers for covered phosphate fertilizers include, but are not limited to: 7722-76-1 (MAP); 7783-28-0 (DAP); and 65996-95-4 (TSP). The covered products may also be identified by Nitrogen-Phosphate-Potash composition, including but not limited to: NP 11-52-0 (MAP); NP 18-46-0 (DAP); and NP 0-46-0 (TSP).

The covered merchandise is currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTS US”) at subheadings 3103 .11.0000; 3103.19.0000; 3105.20.0000; 3105.30.0000; 3105.40.0010; 3105.40.0050; 3105.51.0000; and 3105.59.0000. Phosphate fertilizers subject to these investigations may also enter under subheadings 3103.90.0010, 3105.10.0000, 3105.60.0000, 3105.90.0010, and 3105.90.0050. Although the HTSUS subheadings and CAS registry numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description is dispositive.

 

PETITIONER

The Mosaic Company

Attn: Mark Isaacson, Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary

3033 Campus Drive, Suite E490

Plymouth, MN 55441

Tel: (763) 577-2700

Fax: (763) 559-2860

Email: Mark.isaacson@mosaicco.com

 

COUNSEL FOR PETITIONERS

David J. Ross

Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP

1875 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20006

(202) 663-6000

 

NAMED PRODUCERS/EXPORTERS

For a list of foreign products/exporters alleged by Petitioner, please see Attachment I.

 

NAMED IMPORTERS

For a list of importers alleged by Petitioner, please see Attachment II.

 

ESTIMATED SCHEDULE

Event Earliest Date
Petition Filed June 26, 2020
DOC Initiation July 16, 2020
ITC Preliminary Investigation:
Questionnaires Due July 10, 2020
Request to appear at hearing July 15, 2020
Hearing July 17, 2020
Briefs July 22, 2020
ITC Vote August 10, 2020
DOC Investigation Schedule:
DOC Preliminary Countervailing Determination September 21, 2020
DOC Final Countervailing Determination December 3, 2020
ITC Final CVD Determination January 18, 2021

 

ALLEGED SUBSIDIES

For a list of alleged countervailing duty programs, please see Attachment III.

 

IMPORTS OF SUBJECT MERCHANDISE

2017 2018 2019 Jan-Apr 2019 Jan-Apr 2020
Morocco
Quantity(Short Tons) 1,519,089 2,014,458 2,258,804 925,023 742,784
Value ($) 493,787,715 788,881,314 751,026,133 358,070,130 198,149,067
AUV ($/Short Tons) 325 392 332 387 267
Russia
Quantity(Short Tons) 577,236 1,032,067 845,948 658,049 307,890
Value ($) 189,769,637 400,251,972 314,956,404 255,731,493 82,671,173
AUV ($/Short Tons) 329 388 372 389 269

 

CONTACT US

For more information concerning this petition and how it may affect your business, please contact Jeffrey Neeley, Nithya Nagarajan, or Stephen Brophy.

On June 26, 2020, Bedford Industries, Inc. (“Petitioner”), filed a petition for the imposition of antidumping and countervailing duties on twist ties from the People’s Republic of China.

 

SCOPE OF THE INVESTIGATION

The merchandise covered by these investigations consists of twist ties, which are thin, bendable ties for closing containers, such as bags, bundle items, or identifying objects. A twist tie is comprised of one or more metal wires encased in a covering material, which allows the tie to retain its shape and bind against itself. The metal wire in a twist tie is typically stainless or galvanized steel and typically measures between the gauges of 19 (.0410” diameter) and 31 (.0132”) (American Standard Wire Gauge). A twist tie usually has a width between .075” and 1” in the cross-machine direction (width of the tie – measurement perpendicular with the wire); a thickness between .015” and .045” over the wire or other metal; and a thickness between .002” and .020” in areas without wire or other metal. Twist ties are commonly available individually in pre-cut lengths (“singles”), wound in large spools to be cut later by machine or hand, or in perforated sheets of spooled or single twist ties that are later slit by machine or by hand (“gangs”).

The covering material of a twist tie may be paper (metallic or plain), plastic, or polyethylene, and can be dyed in a variety of colors with or without printing. A twist tie may have the same covering material on both sides or one side of paper and one side of plastic. When comprised of two sides of paper, the paper material is bound together with an adhesive or plastic. A twist tie also may have a tag or label attached to it or a pre-applied adhesive attached to it.

The scope includes ties used for television cable, computer cords, other appliances and household ties, all of which are manufactured by Petitioner. Twist ties without metal wire also are covered in the scope. An all plastic tie contains a plastic core as well as a plastic covering (the wing) over the core, just like paper and/or plastic in a metal tie. The scope does not include products with wire and plastic material (e.g., pipe cleaners used in craft activities, wire bristle brushes), or plastic “zip” ties.

Twist ties are imported into the United States under Harmonized Tariff System of the United States (“HTSUS”) subheadings 8309.90.0000 and 5609.00.3000. Subject merchandise may also enter under HTSUS subheadings 3906.90.2000, 3920.51.5000, 3923.90.0080, 3926.90.9990, 4811.59.6000, 4821.10.4000, 4821.90.2000, and 4823.90.8600. These HTSUS subheadings are provided for reference only. The written description of the scope of the investigations is dispositive.

 

PETITIONER

Bedford Industries, Inc.

1659 Rowe Ave

Worthington, Minnesota 56187

Telephone 1(507) 376-4136

Facsimile 1 (507) 376-8297

 

COUNSEL FOR PETITIONERS

Roy Goldberg

STINSON LLP

1775 Pennsylvania Ave, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20006

(202) 728-3005

roy.goldberg@stinson.com

 

NAMED PRODUCERS/EXPORTERS

For a list of foreign products/exporters alleged by Petitioner, please see Attachment I.

 

NAMED IMPORTERS

For a list of importers alleged by Petitioner, please see Attachment II.

 

ESTIMATED SCHEDULE

Event Earliest Date
Petition Filed June 26, 2020
DOC Initiation July 16, 2020
ITC Preliminary Investigation:
Questionnaires Due July 10, 2020
Request to appear at hearing July 15, 2020
Hearing July 17, 2020
Briefs July 22, 2020
ITC Vote August 10, 2020
DOC Investigation Schedule:
DOC Preliminary Antidumping Determination December 3, 2020
DOC Preliminary Countervailing Determination September 21, 2020
DOC Final Antidumping Determination February 16, 2021
DOC Final Countervailing Determination December 3, 2020
ITC Final AD Determination April 2, 2021
ITC Final CVD Determination January 18, 2021

 

ALLEGED DUMPING MARGINS

China: 67.92%

 

ALLEGED SUBSIDIES

For a list of alleged countervailing duty programs, please see Attachment III.

 

IMPORTS OF SUBJECT MERCHANDISE

 

The petition does not make public the volume and value of imports of subject merchandise.

 

CONTACT US

For more information concerning this petition and how it may affect your business, please contact Jeffrey Neeley, Nithya Nagarajan, or Stephen Brophy.

U.S. Supply Chain

The U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) issued a draft Federal Register notice outlining its process to review the Section 301 duties imposed on imported goods pursuant to the Large Civil Aircraft Dispute with the European Union (EU).  This review is required by statute (Section 306(b)(2) of the Trade Act of 1974) and may result in goods being added to or removed from the list of products subject to Section 301 tariffs.  It may also result in a change in the tariff level.

To collect comments USTR has created a new electronic portalThe portal opens Friday, June 26, 2020 and we anticipate will close July 26, 2020.   We further anticipate a USTR review decision on or about August 12, 2020.  We strongly recommend that clients and companies interested in submitting comments not wait until the last day of the comment period to submit comments through the electronic portal.  USTR is expecting approximately 25,000 comments and heavy last minute traffic may slow the electronic portal considerably.

As previously reported, the initial assessment of Section 301 duties in this dispute occurred in October 2019 when the U.S. imposed a 10 percent tariff on new European large civil aircraft and a 25 percent tariff on certain EU agricultural goods and other products, including products Irish whiskey, various European cheeses, and certain apparel.  USTR received nearly 26,000 comments in response to its review announced on December 12, 2019, which resulted in certain revisions to the list of tariffed goods on February 14, 2020.

In this most recent review, USTR is seeking comments on the following topics:

  • Whether products listed in Annex I of the Notice should be removed from or remain on the list of goods subject to Section 301 duties;
  • Whether Section 301 duties on specific products should be increased, up to a level of 100 percent;
  • Whether additional duties should be imposed on specific products listed in Annex II or Annex III of the Notice; and
  • The rate of additional duty (up to 100 percent) to be applied to any products drawn from Annex II or Annex III of the Notice.

We encourage clients and companies interested in submitting comments on the list of goods potentially subject to tariffs to contact Husch Blackwell’s International Trade and Supply Chain Team.