Trade Cases
Commerce rules four countries are unfairly trading tin mill products
Written by Laura Miller
January 5, 2024
On the afternoon of Friday, Jan. 5, the US Department of Commerce issued its final determination in the trade case involving tin mill products from a handful of countries.
The trade case was brought by Cleveland-Cliffs and the United Steelworkers (USW) union last January. Under investigation is the alleged dumping of tin mill products by Canada, China, Germany, South Korea, the Netherlands, Taiwan, Turkey, and the United Kingdom, as well as the subsidization of the imports from China.
In its final ruling, Commerce determined the following dumping rates:
| Country | Dumping rate |
| Canada | 5.27% |
| China | 122.52% (deposit rate set at 111.98%) |
| Germany | 6.88% |
| South Korea | 0-2.69% |
| Netherlands | 0% |
| Taiwan | 0% |
| Turkey | 0% |
| United Kingdom | 0% |
In the CVD portion of the case investigating imports from China, Commerce set the following subsidy rates:
| Company | Subsidy rate |
| Baoshan Iron & Steel | 649.98% |
| Shougang Jingtang United Iron & Steel Co. and related companies | 331.88% |
| China-wide entity | 331.88% |
The US International Trade Commission (ITC), the agency responsible for the injury determinations in trade cases, held a final hearing in this trade case on Thursday, Jan. 4. It will make its final injury ruling next month.
Since Commerce determined that the Netherlands, Taiwan, Turkey, and the UK did not dump tin mill steel into the US market, the ITC will not make injury determinations for those countries and imports from there will not face any duties.
Cliffs’ response
Cleveland-Cliffs applauded Commerce’s decision regarding Canada, Germany, South Korea, and China.
“Together with the existing Section 232 tariffs and quotas, these dumping calculations will provide a check against unfairly traded products from all the major sources of tin mill imports,” Cliffs said in a statement.
“With the heightened levels of both geopolitical uncertainty and supply chain disruptions in the world, we continue to expect disturbances in international trade. Today’s outcome should put importers on notice that the United States will not tolerate unfair trade that harms employers, workers and communities,” Cliffs’ chairman, president, and CEO Lourenco Goncalves added.
Laura Miller
Read more from Laura MillerLatest in Trade Cases
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.
Leibowitz: In Trump’s brave new world of tariffs, what will stick and what will courts challenge?
With a chronic trade deficit, the administration will continue to cite more tariffs as necessary. This is in error, as noted above. Yet the base of President Trump’s support does not see it that way. More tariffs are possible. But the only way to reduce the US trade deficit substantially is to close the gap between savings and investment in the United States.