Trade Cases
Leibowitz Responds to Trade Question
Written by John Packard
July 2, 2017
Steel Market Update received a question from a large service center group regarding the use of the Section 232 process on steel and whether the due diligence being done now could be used “down the road” and applied against another steel product. Here is the question we received and the response from trade attorney Lewis Leibowitz:
Question: “Let’s say they announce tariffs/quotas on flat roll and energy tubulars, which the market thinks is likely. If there were a surge of SBQ bar (or anything not addressed this summer) 1-2 years from now, could the government act immediately because the Section 232 process has already been done, or would they have to start the process all over again?
Leibowitz Response: “A very good question. The statute provides for a determination by Commerce concerning the impact of imports on national security and recommendations on action. The president must determine within 90 days after receiving the report what action to take. The action can consist of a decision to negotiate agreements limiting imports with other countries. If so, the president must try to negotiate such agreements within 180 days. If the negotiations are not successful, the president is authorized by the statute to take such further action to address the national security threat.
“Significantly, the statute provides no other authority for the president to adjust the relief, such as by adding products or extending the period of relief. Taken at face value, this suggests that the president is not authorized to take additional action without a new 232 report. But there could be arguments to the contrary if, for example, a product was found to affect the national security, but the president decides not to take action right away. To my knowledge, no U.S. court has decided the question.”
John Packard
Read more from John PackardLatest in Trade Cases
Domestic steelmakers push back on Ternium’s 232 exclusion requests
Ternium USA Inc. has requested a host of Section 232 tariff exclusions since the US reimposed the duties on Mexican steel earlier this summer. Domestic steelmakers, however, are pushing back.
Leibowitz: The consequences of a new barrage of trade cases on coated steel
Domestic steel producers and the United Steelworkers (USW) union filed a barrage of trade cases last week. This is hardly news. Ever since the Commerce Department ruled that Vietnam is still treated as a nonmarket economy (NME) for antidumping purposes, many in the business expected new cases on the product that Vietnam excels at—“corrosion-resistant steel.” Nor is it a surprise that these cases roped in nine countries in addition to Vietnam: Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, the Netherlands, South Africa, Taiwan, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates. All these countries rank in the top ten exporters of corrosion-resistant steel to the United States. These petitions are a broadside against coated flat-rolled steel imports.
Coated trade case alleges hefty dumping margins
Domestic mills have alleged substantial dumping margins in the trade case targeting imports of corrosion-resistant steel.
US mills file sprawling trade case against coated imports from 10 nations
US mills have filed or soon will file a sprawling trade petition against imports of coated flat-rolled steel from 10 countries. The petition seeks anti-dumping margins against Canada, Mexico, Brazil, the Netherlands, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, Vietnam, Taiwan, Australia, and South Africa. It also seeks countervailing duty margins against Canada, Mexico, Brazil, and Vietnam. That’s according documents dated Sept. 5 and addressed to Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo and International Trade Commission (ITC) Secretary Lisa Barton.
Steel Summit 2024: Trade issues abound ahead of election
Trade is always front and center in an election year. And 2024 is no different. There is no shortage of issues, with questions like the sale of U.S. Steel to Japan’s Nippon Steel, potential cracks in the USMCA, and Chinese overcapacity dominating the headlines. But how do you distinguish between issues that might just last until November, and what are the crucial questions that could affect your business for years to come?