In Husch Blackwell’s December 2019 Trade Law Newsletter, you’ll learn about the following updates in international trade and supply chain law.
In Husch Blackwell’s November 2019 Trade Law Newsletter, you’ll learn about the following updates in international trade and supply chain law.
In Husch Blackwell’s October 2019 Trade Law Newsletter, you’ll learn about the following updates in international trade and supply chain law.
In Husch Blackwell’s September 2019 Trade Newsletter you’ll find international trade and supply chain updates including presidential actions, U.S. Department of Commerce Decisions, U.S. International Trade Commission Proceedings, U.S. Customs & Border Protection Decisions, Court of International Trade Decisions, Federal Court of Appeals Decisions, and Export Controls and Sanctions.
If you have questions about September’s
In May of 2019, the US Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (“BIS”) added Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd. (“Huawei”) and sixty-eight of its affiliated companies to BIS’s Entity List. These designations prohibit anyone, anywhere
Summary of Decisions
On August 1, 2019, the CIT remanded Commerce’s remand redetermination in the administrative review of carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod from Mexico. The court found that Commerce’s remand results did not comply with the court’s order and the decision by Commerce to apply a 40.52% AFA-rate to Plaintiff Deacero is unsupported by substantial evidence.
On August 1, 2019, the court sustained Commerce’s remand redetermination in the first administrative review of steel concrete reinforcing bar from Mexico. The CIT found that Commerce’s decision not to collapse six non-producing fixed asset owning companies on remand complied with the court’s order and was supported by substantial evidence. Additionally, Commerce’s reliance on the cost experiences of the collapsed fixed asset owners to value the non-collapsed companies and decision not to apply total or partial facts available with an adverse inference to the respondent were sustained.
Section 701/731 Proceedings
Investigations
Investigations
President Trump Announces Tariffs on $300 Billion of Chinese Products
On Thursday, August 1, 2019, President Trump announced via twitter an additional 10% tariff on $300 billion worth of Chinese products (“List 4”). This is the fourth round of tariffs in the ongoing trade war between the U.S. and China. The List 4 tariffs were proposed on May 13, 2019 (see our previous post here).
President Trump indicated that the tariffs will begin on September 1, 2019 at a 10% duty rate and come as a result of China not purchasing large quantities of U.S. agricultural products and its continued sales of fentanyl. To see the full post on President Trump’s tariffs, click here.
Summary of Decisions
On July 1, 2019, in the ongoing antidumping and countervailing duty orders on aluminum extrusions from the People’s Republic of China, the Court concluded that jurisdiction over this action exists because Plaintiff Perfectus’s complaint seeking review of the scope ruling was filed within thirty days of the mailing by post of that ruling as required by statute and was therefore timely and the Court sustains Commerce’s finding that the pallet products fall within the plain language of the scope of the Orders.
On July 2, 2019, in the classification case of stringed light sets, the Court granted Plaintiff Target’s motion for summary judgment and denied the Defendant’s cross-motion. The CIT concluded that the subject merchandise based on the principal of use and commercial fungibility with other products was incorrectly classified by Customs. In the Opinion, the CIT stated, “there can be no genuine issue of material fact that the lighting sets at issue are not principally used as Christmas tree lights and are not fungible with Christmas tree lights.”