Defendant-Intervenor Supports Commerce Dropping CVD Subsidy Calculation in Order to Raise Issue on Appeal

The Court of International Trade should affirm the Commerce Department's remand results in order to allow a countervailing duty petitioner to potentially appeal aspects of those results to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, petitioner Daikin America said in its March 9 remand comments to the Court of International Trade (Gujarat Fluorochemicals Ltd. v. United States, CIT # 22-00120).

Daikin, defendant-intervenor in the case, said that while it disagreed with the court’s remand opinion directing Commerce to drop a 26.5% subsidy rate on Gujarat Fluorochemicals (GFCL), it supported the court's decision "in order to permit parties to appeal the issue to the Federal Circuit."

In its final countervailing duty determination, Commerce included in its CVD calculation a 26.5% subsidy rate imposed for a 30-year lease of a land tract offered by the State Industrial Development Corp. to Inox, a GFCL affiliate. Commerce initially found that the lease was for less than adequate remuneration but reversed its ruling on remand under protest (see 2302240038).

In its own March 9 remand comments, GFCL said it supported the court's order and Commerce's removal of the land lease subsidy from the calculation. Commerce’s separate 0.12% benefit calculation for the Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation’s provision of land remains unsupported by evidence, GFCL said, but the company said it would decline to pursue this argument in favor of an "expedient resolution of this case" and supports Commerce's final remand redetermination.