Picard Kentz & Rowe LLP

  • People
  • Practice Areas
    • International Trade
    • International Investment and Project Development
    • International Disputes/Rights & Obligations of Sovereign States & Autonomous Regions
    • U.S. & International Regulation and Legislation
    • Board Advisory Work
    • Public Interest and Charitable Activities
  • Global Experience
  • News
  • Careers
  • Contact Us

May 3, 2013 by PKR

CIT Affirms Commerce Circumvention Determination

This week, the Court of International Trade released the public version of its decision Max Fortune Industrial Co. v. United States.  In 2011, the Department of Commerce determined that Max Fortune had circumvented the antidumping duty order on tissue paper products from China.  At the request of a domestic paper company, Commerce had in 2010 initiated a review to assess whether Max Fortune had converted jumbo rolls of Chinese-origin tissue paper in Vietnam between 2005 and 2010 to avoid antidumping duties.  Max Fortune acknowledged the possibility that it may have done so before 2008, but denied having done so afterwards.

During the on-site verification of Max Fortune in Vietnam, Commerce discovered that Chinese jumbo rolls were in inventory through March 2010.  Although Max Fortune attempted to belatedly provide documentation as to these rolls, Commerce refused to accept the untimely information.  Commerce instead applied statutory “adverse facts available” (AFA) to determine that tissue paper produced and exported by Max Fortune in Vietnam circumvented the antidumping duty order.  The CIT affirmed this determination:

  • “Commerce’s decision not to use the information Max Fortune offered is reasonable and consistent with its practice.”;
  • “Commerce’s refusal to accept new information in the last hour of the last day of verification was a proper exercise of its discretion.”; and
  • “Commerce properly applied AFA because Max Fortune failed to provide necessary information and failed to cooperate to the best of its ability.”

This decision is the latest development in a recent series of determinations by Commerce to apply AFA after discovering misconduct.  The CIT found that Commerce’s findings were supported by substantial evidence, particularly because Max Fortune’s record keeping failed to comply with Vietnamese accounting law.  Commerce properly exercised its discretion not only in applying AFA, but also by requiring that Customs and Border Protection collect cash deposits on all tissue paper produced and exported by Max Fortune in Vietnam.  This ruling is a welcome addition to the growing jurisprudence recognizing Commerce’s authority to take strong action in response to documented duty evasion.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Filed Under: International Trade Tagged With: antidumping, CBP, China, CIT, import fraud, International Trade, tissue paper trade, Vietnam

Contact

Picard Kentz & Rowe LLP
1750 K Street NW, Suite 800
Washington, DC 20006
Phone: +1 202 331 4040
Fax: +1 202 331 4011
info@pkrllp.com

Recent Posts

  • U.S. Customs and Border Protection Reports Record Amounts of Imports Subject to Antidumping and Countervailing Duties in FY2021
  • Number of U.S. Industries Filing Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Decreases Significantly in Fiscal Year 2021

Sitemap

PKR LLP Sitemap

© Picard Kentz & Rowe LLP

The materials available at this web site are for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. If you have a particular problem or issue for which you require legal advice, you should consult an attorney. Use of and access to this Web site or any of the e-mail links contained within the site do not create an attorney-client relationship between Picard Kentz & Rowe LLP and the user or browser. The opinions expressed at or through this site are the opinions of the individual author and may not reflect the opinions of the firm or any individual attorney.