International Trade Law News /title <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <head> <title>International Trade Law News

« Home | USTR Requests Comments on Foreign Trade Barriers » | USA*Engage Urges Congress to Retain Cuba Travel Am... » | USDA Publishes Country of Origin Labeling Regulati... » | Is the U.S. Steel Market Showing Signs of Life? » | New Chief Judge of U.S. Court of International Tra... » | New Initiatives on Cuba Do Not Affect Humanitarian... » | WTO Intends to Abide by Doha Round Deadline » | Support Grows for Antidumping Petition on Imported... » | Nations Aim to Prevent Illegal Exports to North Ko... » | House Committee Advances Bill for Repealing Export... » 

October 31, 2003 

CIT Remands Negative Injury Determinations on Cold-Rolled Steel Products to ITC

In Bethlehem Steel, et al. v. United States, the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) recently remanded the ITC's 2000 final negative injury determination in antidumping and countervailing duty investigations involving cold-rolled steel products from Argentina, Brazil, China, Indonesia, Japan, Russia, Slovakia, South Africa, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, and Venezuela.

The Plaintiffs had challenged three aspects of the ITC’s investigation: (1) that the ITC improperly found that the captive production provision of 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(C)(iv) was inapplicable to the Final Determinations; (2) that the ITC improperly relied on information upon which the parties were not given an opportunity to comment; and (3) that the ITC’s findings concerning certain conditions of competition, and the volume and price effects of cold-rolled steel imports, were not supported by substantial evidence and otherwise in accordance with law.

The CIT found that the ITC’s interpretation of 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(C)(iv) was not in accordance with law and remanded the final decision to the ITC to define “internal transfers” consistent with the will of Congress. Additionally, the Court held that the ITC did not observe the proper procedure for applying facts otherwise available in its calculation of the overlap betweencaptively-produced downstream products and downstream products produced from merchant market sales. The Court remanded the Final Determinations and instructed the ITC to clarify how it complied with the statutory framework for applying facts otherwise available. If the ITC determines that it did not adhere to all of the statutory prerequisite conditions, then it must give the Plaintiffs an opportunity to remedy any deficiencies in their data. In addition, in light of the Court’s instruction to the ITC to reconsider its definition of “internal transfers,” the Court declined to rule on whether the Plaintiffs had an opportunity to comment on the perceived shift in methodology by the ITC. The CIT instructed the ITC to issue its findings on remand within 90 days.


Editor

Subscribe

Enter your e-mail address below to be notified of updates to International Trade Law News (privacy assured).

Powered by FeedBlitz (See Preview)

Search Trade Law News

International Trade Jobs

Archives

Site Feeds and Bookmarks

Import/Export Links