US Steel Maker Rails Against ITC Decision Not to Cumulate Brazilian Imports With Other Countries'
The International Trade Commission's decision not to cumulate imports from Brazil with imports from Australia, Japan, the Netherlands, Russia, South Korea, Turkey and the U.K. in a hot-rolled steel injury proceeding violated the law, U.S. steel maker Cleveland-Cliffs argued in a Jan. 25 complaint at the Court of International Trade. The ITC focused on the likely volume of the Brazilian imports in the cumulation analysis, failing to support the decision with substantial evidence and failing to address its departure from its past practice (Cleveland-Cliffs v. United States, CIT #22-00355).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
The case concerns the ITC's negative likely injury finding for Brazil in the five-year sunset reviews of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on hot-rolled steel from Australia, Brazil, Japan, the Netherlands, Russia, South Korea, Turkey and the UK. In a divided decision, the commission chose not to cumulate Brazil's imports with the shipments from the other countries. Three of the commissioners said that the Brazilian imports would compete under different conditions of competition than the other imports, relying on the fact that the quota imposed on the imports from Brazil under Section 232 was 143,416 short tons.
Cleveland-Cliffs took issue with this finding, filing a case at the trade court. The company said that CIT has previously held that when the ITC bases its conditions of competition analysis on the absolute likely import volumes as part of its cumulation analysis, it is engaged in an illegal circular likely injury analysis. "By focusing so heavily on the likely volume of the Brazilian imports in its cumulation analysis in the hot-rolled steel investigation, the Commission conducted the same 'circular' injury analysis that the Court has described as 'impermissible,'" the brief said.
The ITC also said that the record does not show that the Section 232 quota on Brazil will likely be terminated in the near future. "These findings are not supported by substantial evidence. Cleveland-Cliffs and the other members of the domestic industry placed on undisputed record evidence indicating that, in the months leading up to the Commission’s determination in the hot-rolled steel review, the President had revised the section 232 tariffs for the European Union, the United Kingdom and Japan," the complaint said. "Moreover, Cleveland-Cliffs and the other domestic producers also placed on record evidence indicating that the governments of Brazil and South Korea were both urging the Administration to weaken Section 232 relief with respect to those countries."