Chinese Ribbon Exporter Challenges Commerce's use of AFA Rate for EBCP on Remand

The Commerce Department failed to follow a Court of International Trade directive in its remand results concerning Yama Ribbons and Bows' alleged receipt of benefits from China's Export Buyer's Credit Program, said Yama in its March 17 response brief (Yama Ribbons and Bows v. U.S., CIT # 20-00059). Yama asked the court to instruct Commerce to apply an appropriate rate for the EBCP not based on adverse facts.

Commerce assumed Yama could have used a program previously found to benefit the Chinese coated paper industry, but the department did not point to any record evidence that showed Yama indeed benefited, Yama said. "Commerce applied essentially the same unsupported rationale as before" to justify the use of a punitive AFA rate against a fully cooperative respondent, the company said.

In its December remand order, CIT told Commerce that it needed to reconsider its use of adverse facts available in its countervailing duty rate calculation of 10.54% for Yama, calling the rate "punitive" despite finding that AFA as applied to the EBCP was itself reasonable (see 2212270028).

Commerce stuck by both its use of AFA and its rate calculation in its Feb. 15 remand results, explaining that if there is no non-de minimis rate calculated, Commerce applies the highest rate calculated for a similar program in another CVD proceeding in the same country. The rate did "not unreasonably penalize Yama" but was needed because of the Chinese government's failure to cooperate in the investigation, said Commerce (see 2302150052).