Trade Cases
Final AD/CVD Decisions on LDW Pipe from China and India
Written by Sandy Williams
February 12, 2019
A recently published report by the U.S. International Trade Commission concerning the import of large diameter welded pipe from China and India had mixed results regarding injury to domestic producers.
The Commission made a final affirmative determination of injury in the antidumping investigation of LDW line pipe from China, but voted to terminate the accompanying countervailing duty investigation.
LDW line pipe from India received an affirmative determination of injury in both the antidumping and countervailing investigations.
The Commission affirmed the antidumping and countervailing investigations into imports of LDW structural pipe from China, as well as the antidumping investigation of structural pipe from India. The countervailing investigation of India imports of the product was terminated.
AD/CVD investigations into imports of LDW stainless steel pipe from both India and China were terminated.
Antidumping and countervailing duty orders will be issued on the products cited by Commerce.
Publication of the USITC determination was delayed until Feb. 5 due to the partial government shutdown. The American Line Pipe Producers Association were the petitioners in the investigations.,
The report is significant in that it is the first AD/CVD decision made by the ITC since Section 232 tariffs went into effect in March 2018. LDW line and structural pipe were among those steel products hit by quotas and 25 percent tariffs.
“Although duties under Section 232 cover subject imports from all sources, the duties do not appear likely to slow the influx of subject imports,” said the Commission’s report. “Moreover, the Section 232 duties have increased raw material costs for the domestic producers, rendering them more susceptible to further injury from the subject imports.”
The report notes that importers said they were experiencing supply constraints from quotas and were unable to fill orders last year.
“Importers also reported additional arranged subject imports for 2019. These arranged imports alone indicate that increased volumes of subject imports were likely in the second half of 2018 and that the Section 232 measures have not halted the increase in subject imports,” the report adds.
The impermanent nature of the Section 232 measures may impact future AD and CVD investigations, said one trade lawyer in comments to Inside U.S. Trade. “You don’t know how long it’s going to be there – it could end tomorrow.”
Sandy Williams
Read more from Sandy WilliamsLatest in Trade Cases
Leibowitz: With ‘reciprocal’ tariffs struck down again in court, what happens next?
President Trump’s “reciprocal” tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Policy Act (IEEPA) were struck down again, this time on Aug. 29 by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC). The legal and policy mess continues, with the next stop being the US Supreme Court.
Market unfazed by US circuit court’s IEEPA decision
Repealing any reciprocal tariffs placed by President Donald Trump on US imports of direct reduced iron (DRI), iron ore, hot-briquetted iron (HBI), and pig iron would have only a nominal impact on the US steel market, market participants said.
ITC votes to keep HR duties after sunset review
The US government determined this week that hot-rolled steel imports from a handful of countries continue to threaten the domestic steel industry.
Steel Summit: Zekelman advocates for ‘Fortress North America’
Barry Zekelman has a unique vantage point from which to view today’s trade landscape. A Canadian national who owns operations in both the US and Canada, he has also had dialogue with both Canadian and American administrations.
Steel Summit: Execs urge clarity on trade/tariff policy, want stronger USMCA
Tariff policy dominated the discussion of the SMU Steel Summit trade panel on Tuesday afternoon. The message was clear: uncertainty is rattling the steel supply chain.