On May 1, 2024, the U.S. Department of Commerce (“Commerce”) announced affirmative preliminary determinations in the antidumping investigation of aluminum extrusions from the People’s Republic of China, Colombia, Ecuador, India, Indonesia, Italy, the Republic of Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, Taiwan, Thailand, the Republic of Türkiye, the United Arab Emirates, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. Commerce is conducting concurrent countervailing duty investigations on imports of aluminum extrusions from China, Indonesia, Mexico, and Türkiye, in which it announced affirmative preliminary determinations on March 5, 2024.

Commerce calculated affirmative preliminary dumping margins on a country and/or company specific basis for all 14 countries being investigated. The margins range from 0% for an individual exporter in Italy to rates exceeding 600% based upon adverse inferences applied to an exporter in Turkey. See the factsheet issued by Commerce for the full list of company and country specific rates. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) started collecting antidumping duty cash deposits on May 7, 2024, following publication of Commerce’s preliminary determinations in the Federal Register. For imports from China, Mexico, Indonesia, and Turkey, antidumping dumping duty cash deposits will now be required to be posted in addition to the countervailing duties already being collected effective March 5, 2024.

In its accompanying Scope Decision Memorandum, Commerce included a list of products that it preliminarily determined to be within the scope of the orders, as well as a list of excluded products. Commerce also explained that it has revised the scope language in an effort to describe more clearly the covered products, including by specifying that certain aluminum extrusions contained in unassembled merchandise are excluded from the scope.

The Scope Decision Memorandum also rejects multiple arguments raised in the investigations, including those related to the breath of proposed scope language, as well as its administrability. For example, multiple importers noted their complicated, multi-tier supply chains make retrieving data on the value of every aluminum component impossible, and that administering such a broad and complicated scope will be highly burdensome on CBP. Commerce largely rejected these arguments, noting the modifications to the scope language aimed at addressing such concerns, and that importers will provide CBP the information needed to alleviate its burden. More generally, Commerce noted that it “has a practice of providing ample deference to the petitioner with respect to the products for which it seeks relief, unless there exists an ‘overarching reason to modify’ the scope of an investigation.”

Commerce also acknowledged in the Scope Memorandum that additional clarification on the scope may be necessary and has invited interested parties to submit comments and factual information on the scope by May 22, 2024.  

Commerce will issue its final determination on or about July 15, 2024, but this date could be extended until late September. After that, if the International Trade Commission makes an affirmative final determination of injury, antidumping and countervailing duty orders will be issued.

Husch Blackwell continues to monitor developments relating to Commerce’s aluminum extrusions investigations. In the meantime, for guidance or questions relating to U.S. customs and trade laws, companies can contact Husch Blackwell’s International Trade and Supply Chain team.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Jamie Shookman Jamie Shookman

Jamie’s experience representing federal government agencies in trade and customs matters helps clients navigate U.S. trade laws as they grow their businesses. Jamie’s practice draws on her extensive experience handling cases in the U.S. Court of International Trade and learning the inner workings

Jamie’s experience representing federal government agencies in trade and customs matters helps clients navigate U.S. trade laws as they grow their businesses. Jamie’s practice draws on her extensive experience handling cases in the U.S. Court of International Trade and learning the inner workings of the federal agencies involved. She primarily represents domestic manufacturers, advising on complex regulatory regimes, proactively assessing new trade programs, and handling litigation as it arises.

Daniel Wilson

Dan represents clients in a variety of complex international trade matters, including antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings and high-stakes enforcement matters before U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Dan has substantial experience representing a broad range of both U.S.-based and foreign companies in antidumping…

Dan represents clients in a variety of complex international trade matters, including antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings and high-stakes enforcement matters before U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Dan has substantial experience representing a broad range of both U.S.-based and foreign companies in antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings before the U.S. Department of Commerce and the U.S. International Trade Commission.

Photo of Nithya Nagarajan Nithya Nagarajan

Nithya’s extensive background in U.S. trade issues spans 25 years and includes various roles in a number of federal government agencies, including the Department of Commerce Department of Justice, and the U.S. Court of International Trade. She assists clients with administrative and regulatory…

Nithya’s extensive background in U.S. trade issues spans 25 years and includes various roles in a number of federal government agencies, including the Department of Commerce Department of Justice, and the U.S. Court of International Trade. She assists clients with administrative and regulatory actions before the Department of Commerce, International Trade Commission and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and defends clients in appeals before the Court of International Trade, Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, NAFTA panels and the World Trade Organization. In addition to her body of U.S. experience, Nithya is also well-versed in international trade issues in China and India.