Trade Cases
Commerce Issues CVDs on Fabricated Structural Steel from Mexico
Written by Sandy Williams
July 9, 2019
A new tariff on fabricated structural steel from Mexico adds another complication to U.S./Mexico relations, but is not expected to threaten ratification of the USMCA.
The U.S. Department of Commerce issued a preliminary ruling in a countervailing investigation that U.S. producers are being harmed by imports of fabricated structural steel from Mexico and China. Canada was also included in the investigation, but received a negative preliminary determination from Commerce.
Commerce assigned preliminary subsidy rates to Mexican producers ranging from 0.01 to 74.01 percent. The investigation was prompted by a petition filed in February by the American Institute of Steel Construction.
Mexico’s deputy foreign minister Jesus Seade said on Tuesday that the CVD determination “does not put in danger the ratification of the North American trade deal USMCA.”
Seade noted that the U.S. subsides are against certain private companies in Mexico and not the “wider steel industry.”
“U.S. tariffs on Mexican structural steel is a ‘new problem’ and Mexico will have to be very active supporting its steelmakers,” he added.
The Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum products from Mexico were lifted in May clearing the way for USMCA ratification. Last month, Mexico narrowly escaped general tariffs of 25 percent on its exports to the U.S. after acceding to demands by the Trump administration to step up efforts to slow immigration across the U.S./Mexico border.
The final determinations by the Department of Commerce and the U.S. International Trade Commission in the CVD investigation are due Nov. 18, 2019, and Jan. 2, 2020, respectively. Issuance of orders, if the decisions are affirmative, will be Jan. 9, 2020. In the meantime, Customs and Border Protection will collect cash deposits from imports of fabricated structural steel from Mexico and China.
Sandy Williams
Read more from Sandy WilliamsLatest in Trade Cases
Price: 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.