Exporter SeAH Steel VINA Corp. filed a trio of complaints at the Court of International Trade on Jan. 5 to contest the Commerce Department's finding that pipes and tubes it exports from Vietnam, made using hot-rolled steel from China, South Korea and India, are circumventing antidumping duty orders on steel pipes from those three countries (SeAH Steel VINA Corp. v. U.S. , CIT # 23-00256, -00257, -00258).

The Commerce Department has not established an "irrebuttable presumption" of state control for exporters in nonmarket economies, antidumping duty petitioner the United Steelworkers labor union argued in a Jan. 5 reply brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Pirelli Tyre Co. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-2266).

Russian exporter JSC Apatit took to the Court of International Trade to contest the Commerce Department's 2020-21 administrative review of the countervailing duty order on phosphate fertilizers from Russia, in which it received a 28.5% CVD rate (Joint Stock Company Apatit v. U.S., CIT # 23-00254).

A less stringent "reasonable cause" standard for adding companies to the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act Entity List is justified on statutory and policy grounds, the U.S. told the Court of International Trade in a brief opposing Chinese exporter Ninestar Corp.'s motion for a preliminary injunction. Using a higher standard, such as a preponderance of the evidence standard, for making listing decisions, would undermine the UFLPA's goal of placing a burden on exporters to show that their goods are not made with forced labor (Ninestar Corp. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00182).

Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

U.S. solar cell maker Auxin Solar and solar module designer Concept Clean Energy launched a lawsuit at the Court of International Trade on Dec. 29 to contest the Commerce Department's pause of antidumping and countervailing duties on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells and modules from Southeast Asian found to be circumventing the AD/CVD orders on these products from China (Auxin Solar v. U.S., CIT # 23-00274).

Indian exporter Kumar Industries took to the Court of International Trade to contest the adverse facts available rate it received for purportedly failing to cooperate to the best of its ability in the 2021-22 review of the antidumping duty order on glycine from India. Filing a complaint on Jan. 1, Kumar said Commerce erred in using AFA due to the noncooperation of two entities which the agency said were related to Kumar (Kumar Industries v. United States, CIT # 23-00263).

Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top 20 stories published in 2023. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference numbers.

The South Korean government's provision of port usage rights to exporter Hyundai Steel Co. is not a countervailable benefit since it is the repayment of a debt, Hyundai told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a Dec. 29 opening brief. Because the port usage rights allowed Hyundai to "recoup its costs" from building the Incheon North Harbor port, the rights did not provide a "gift-like transfer of funds that provided an advantage or profit to Hyundai Steel," the brief said (Hyundai Steel Co. v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 24-1100).

The Court of International Trade won't order the Commerce Department "to ignore information" antidumping duty respondent Navneet Education "voluntarily put on the record," the trade court ruled in Dec. 29 decision sustaining the 2019-20 AD review on notebook paper from India.