Commerce Didn't Adjust AD Rates for Export Subsidies, Indian Quartz Group Tells CIT
The Commerce Department unlawfully failed to adjust non-selected companies' cash deposit and assessment rates to account for export subsidy offsets in an antidumping duty review, an association of Indian producers and exports of quartz surface products said in a Feb. 27 complaint at the Court of International Trade (Federation of Indian Quartz Surface Industry v. U.S., CIT # 23-00026).
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 complaint contests the final results of the antidumping duty administrative review on quartz surface products from India. In those final results, Commerce used the 3.19% all-others rate from the original investigation as the rate for the non-selected respondents, but Commerce did not adjust the cash deposit rate by 2.17%, the amount of export subsidies countervailed in the companion CVD investigation, the complaint said.
Three importers -- Arizona Tile, M S International and PNS Clearance -- subsequently filed a ministerial error allegation arguing that Commerce failed to make the adjustments and that the all-others rate from the original investigation was not properly used in the administrative review. Commerce found the allegation did not constitute a ministerial error because it was not unintentional and the department never stated its intent to adjust for export subsidies, the complaint said.