Trade Cases
Vietnam Circumvention Ruling Coming Oct. 17
Written by John Packard
September 12, 2017
Over the weekend, we received a message from trade attorney Lewis Leibowitz regarding the status of the Vietnam circumvention suit. This is the one where the domestic steel mills filed a circumvention suit alleging China is circumventing the duties on cold rolled and CORE (corrosion resistant) steels by sending substrate to Vietnam and having it converted there before shipment to the U.S. as Vietnamese material.
Lewis told us, “Commerce announced today that it will issue a preliminary determination in the Vietnam circumvention proceedings (cold-rolled and corrosion resistant steel) on Oct. 16. The decision will be publicly available on the next business day (Oct. 17). The Commerce Department previously announced that the final determinations will be issued on Feb. 15, 2018.”
One of the core questions at issue is how to define “significant transformation,” when steel is converted and in the process changes from one product to another. For example, when hot rolled substrate is converted by “cold rolling,” thus reducing the thickness of the steel and the surface. Hot rolled then becomes cold rolled. The same happens when cold rolled steel is converted to galvanized steel by adding zinc to the surface of the substrate (limited changes to thickness).
The expectation is that the U.S. Department of Commerce will take some action, probably against Chinese substrate being converted into another product as a means of sending it to the United States. However, as one steel mill executive told SMU, “My take is the petitioners will ‘win’ something on Vietnam. But the only way to shut Vietnam off is to go with a straight dumping case, something the mills should have done a long time ago. But they decided to back the wrong horse with the Section 232 instead.” Vietnam has made a change away from Chinese substrate, so there may be no impact of a decision in favor of the domestic mills, he added.
We will learn more on Oct. 17 when the public is made aware of the DOC preliminary recommendation.
Written by: John Packard, John@SteelMarketUpdate.com
John Packard
Read more from John PackardLatest in Trade Cases
Price on trade: Should billions in Section 232 revenue go to foreign manufacturers or to the American people?
Do we want the benefits of the Section 232 tariffs to flow to the bottom lines of foreign steel and aluminum producers or to the US government and, ultimately, domestic manufacturers and their workers? In our view, the answer is simple. Section 232 exceptions do nothing more than lead to underserved profits for foreign manufacturers who are harming the US industrial base. That revenue could be used to pursue the Trump administration’s other policy priorities - such as deficit reduction or expanded tax cuts.
Mills allege ‘critical circumstances’ in CORE trade case vs. South Africa, UAE
"Recent activity in the marketplace strongly indicates that these imports are being rushed into the United States in an effort to avoid the imposition of antidumping duties," petitioners said.
European Commission eyes retaliation vs. Trump steel tariffs: Report
The European Commission is looking into making current quotas on steel imports stricter as a countermeasure to President Trump’s recently announced tariffs on steel and aluminum imports to the US, according to an article in Reuters.
Trump could levy tariffs on auto imports in April: Report
President Donald Trump said last week that he could place tariffs on auto imports, according to an article in Politico.
Section 232 tariffs are headed downstream
The Trump administration has revealed the list of derivative steel products being added to the Section 232 tariff list.