The Commerce Department illegally rejected importer LE Commodities' requests for exclusion from Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs on its imports of stainless steel round bar, the importer argued in an Oct. 16 complaint at the Court of International Trade. LE Commodities argued that looking at the record, the "only reasonable conclusion" was that the company cannot obtain these goods in the U.S. market in a "sufficient quantity or quality, on a timely basis to replace the steel it currently imports" (LE Commodities v. United States, CIT # 23-00220).
The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
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.
Lydia Childre, former international trade and logistics senior associate at Venable, has joined boutique trade law firm Lighthill, the firm announced on LinkedIn. Childre worked at Venable for nearly two years after serving as a senior project adviser on Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs at the Commerce Department's International Trade Administration. Her practice at Lighthill will center on "national security and trade policy," the firm said. Lighthill was founded earlier this year by former Crowell & Moring attorney John Anwesen (see 2307050026).
Importer Metal One America moved Aug. 31 to dismiss its customs case at the Court of International Trade concerning its imports of hot-rolled high carbon wire rod tire cord made of steel. In the case, the importer said its product, classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 7213.91.3011, qualifies for exclusions from Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs (Metal One America v. U.S., CIT # 21-00503).
Researchers at the Center for Strategic and International Studies expect the U.S. will get "a taste of its own medicine” when China appeals its loss over Section 232 retaliatory tariffs at the World Trade Organization, adding that China likely won't have to drop the tariffs since there is no appellate body to take that appeal.
The Court of International Trade on Aug. 23 upheld the Commerce Department's deduction of Section 232 duties paid by Turkish exporter Noksel Celik Boru Sanayi from its U.S. price in the 2018-19 review of the antidumping duty order on light-walled rectangular pipe and tube from Turkey. Judge Jane Restani said she saw "no reason to vary" this finding, as previously made by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, regarding the government's move to raise the duties solely on Turkish goods.
A World Trade Organization dispute panel rejected China's claim that its retaliatory tariffs in response to Section 232 tariffs were justified because the U.S. steel and aluminum tariffs were a safeguard in disguise.
Steel and aluminum importers should expect the Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security to "conduct additional quantity certification reviews and more closely scrutinize the data points included in exclusion requests" following a Government Accountability Office report on the exclusion process, global firm Crowell & Moring said. The firm said importers could also face further scrutiny from CBP, who will be more closely examining Section 232 exclusion claims that are not properly filed.
Counsel for steel importer California Steel Industries requested a status conference regarding a pending motion from the Commerce Department for voluntary remand in a Section 232 steel and aluminum tariff exclusion case. Since the last brief in the proceeding was filed over a year ago, on June 9, 2022, California Steel called for the conference regarding the "next steps to resolve" the company's claims while being "mindful of [Judge M. Miller Baker's] busy schedule" (California Steel Industries v. U.S., CIT # 21-00015).