AD Petitioner Challenges Affiliation, Collapsing Decisions in AD Investigation
Antidumping duty petitioner The Coalition for Fair Trade in Ceramic Tile challenged the Commerce Department's AD investigation on ceramic tile from India, arguing that the agency erred in its collapsing and affiliation analyses regarding the two mandatory respondents. The result of the investigation was a zero percent margin for the respondents, Antiqa Minerals and Win-Tel Ceramics (The Coalition for Fair Trade in Ceramic Tile v. United States, CIT # 25-00095).
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!
During the investigation, Antiqa asked that two of its affiliates, Antique Marbonite and Segam Tiles, be excluded from the reporting requirements. The agency obliged, though it rejected the respondent's subsequent request to exclude another affiliate, referred to in the complaint as "Affiliate A," from its reporting obligations.
In the investigation's preliminary results, Commerce said Antiqa is affiliated with Antiqa Ceramic, Shivam Enterprises, Antiek Vitrified, Antique Non Woven, Antique Marbonite, Segam Tiles and Affiliate A. However, the agency refused to collapse Antiqa with Marbonite, Segam or Affiliate A. Commerce also declined to find that Win-Tel and its supplier Neelson are affiliated.
Regarding the initial exclusion of Antique Marbonite and Segam from the agency's reporting requirements, the petitioner said Commerce "abused its discretion when it unlawfully departed from its practice of requiring companies to initially report information requested from all affiliated producers and sellers of merchandise under investigation before granting reporting exclusions." The complaint said the "arbitrary nature" of this decision is supported by the rejection of a similar exclusion for Affiliate A.
The complaint also said Commerce didn't "properly conduct the collapsing analysis and erred in its decision to not collapse Marbonite and Segam with the Antiqa entity," nor did it adequately support the "non-affiliation determination regarding Win-Tel and its input supplier, Neelson."
The petitioner also took issue with Commerce's decision to accept new information from Antiqa and Win-Tel during and after certification "that was methodological in nature."