Trade Cases

US DOC Finds Dumping of Imports of Heavy Walled Rectangular Welded Pipe

Written by John Packard


On Friday, July 15th, the U.S. Department of Commerce announced its affirmative final determinations in the antidumping (AD) investigations of heavy walled rectangular welded carbon steel pipe and tubes from Korea, Mexico and Turkey, and the countervailing duty (CVD) on imports of the same products from Turkey.

The following determinations came directly from the U.S. Department of Commerce “fact sheet:”

As a reminder to our readers, antidumping occurs when a foreign company sells a product in the United States at less than its fair value. For the purpose of countervailing duty investigations, a countervailable subsidy is financial assistance from a foreign government that benefits the production of goods from foreign companies and is limited to specific enterprises or industries, or is contingent either upon export performance or upon the use of domestic goods over imported goods.

In the Korea investigation, Commerce found dumping has occurred by mandatory respondents Dong-A Steel Company and HiSteel Co., Ltd. at dumping margins of 2.34 percent and 3.82 percent, respectively. Commerce calculated a final dumping margin of 3.24 percent for all other producers/exporters in Korea.

In the Mexico investigation, Commerce found dumping has occurred by mandatory respondents Maquilacero S.A. de C.V. and Productos Laminados de Monterrey S.A. de C.V. at dumping margins of 3.83 percent and 5.21 percent, respectively. Commerce calculated a final dumping margin of 4.91 percent for all other producers/exporters in Mexico.

In the Turkey AD investigation, Commerce found dumping has occurred by mandatory respondent MMZ Boru Profil Uretim Sanayi Ve Tic. A.S. (MMZ) at a dumping margin of 35.66 percent. Commerce determined that MMZ’s final dumping margin was based on adverse facts available as a result of its failure to cooperate to the best of its ability in the investigation. Additionally, Commerce determined that no dumping has occurred by mandatory respondent Ozdemir Boru Profil San. Ve Tic. Ltd. Sti. (Ozdemir). Because Commerce calculated a weighted-average dumping margin of zero for Ozdemir, it would be excluded from an AD order. Commerce calculated a final dumping margin of 17.83 percent for all other producers/exporters in Turkey.

In the Turkey CVD investigation, Commerce calculated final subsidy rates of 23.37 percent and 15.08 percent for mandatory respondents MMZ and Ozdemir, respectively. Commerce calculated a final subsidy rate of 19.06 percent for all other producers/exporters in Turkey.

As a result of the affirmative final AD determinations, Commerce will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to collect cash deposits equal to the applicable weighted-average dumping margins, except where these rates are zero or de minimis. Further, as a result of the affirmative final CVD determination, if the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) issues an affirmative injury determination, Commerce will order the resumption of the suspension of liquidation and will require cash deposits for CVD duties equal to the final subsidy rates established during the investigation. For Turkey, Commerce will also adjust the AD cash deposit rates by the amount of the CVD export subsidies, where appropriate. If the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) issues negative injury determinations, the investigations will be terminated and no producers or exporters will be subject to future cash deposits for either AD or CVD duties. In such an event, all previously collected cash deposits will be refunded.

The petitioners for these investigations are Atlas Tube, a division of JMC Steel Group (IL); Bull Moose Tube Company (MO); EXLTUBE1 (MO); Hannibal Industries, Inc. (CA); Independence Tube Corporation (IL); Maruichi.

Latest in Trade Cases

Leibowitz: Trump 2.0 signals Cold War 2.0 trade and China policies

China is one of the elephants in the room as the transition to Trump 2.0 continues. While the people and policies are still being formulated, it’s possible to detect a strategy for the new Trump administration. I think there are two imperative issues that the new administration needs to balance. The Trump strategy will, I believe, follow the following points. First, trade is one of the issues that got President Trump elected in 2016 and 2024—it nearly got him elected in 2020, save for the pandemic. If President Trump had won in 2020, I might be writing chronicles about the end of his eight years in the White House now instead of projecting what the next Trump administration would accomplish or break. Oh, well—that’s life. Trade will necessarily be a key feature of relations with China for the next four years.