July 1, 2003

Although Commerce is moving forward with the Administrative Review of over 100 Chinese exporters of petroleum wax candles from China, there has been an unexpected delay in verification, due to the SARS epidemic in China.  Other developments concerning this Administrative Review are discussed below.

After initiating the Administrative Review, Commerce forwarded a questionnaire to all 105 companies concerning the total quantity and value of sales to the United States for the purpose of determining the largest exporters to the U.S.  Because Commerce does not have sufficient resources to review responses from all 105 Chinese exporters, Commerce has selected five "mandatory respondents", including the following:

It is Commerce's intention to utilize the questionnaire responses from these five mandatory respondents to determine the new antidumping duty rate for the 105 companies under review.

Questionnaires have already been issued to the five mandatory respondents, and responses have been received.  Commerce has also issued supplemental questionnaires to two of the companies, and is currently waiting for their responses.

It is Commerce's intention to travel to China to verify the questionnaire responses.  However, because of the SARS epidemic in China, the time for the verification has not yet been scheduled.  Thus, it appears that there will be a delay in the publication of the preliminary determination.  Once the Commerce officials return from the verification, they will publish their preliminary determination, which will provide a new proposed antidumping duty rate for the companies under review.  This rate will be determined based upon the questionnaire responses from the five mandatory respondents.  After publication of the preliminary determination, interested parties will have 30 days in which to submit comments.  After receiving and reviewing the comments, Commerce will issue its final determination.  It should be noted that if the five mandatory respondents fail to respond, respond inadequately, or do not pass the verification, Commerce will use "best facts available" to determine the new antidumping duty rate, which will probably be higher than the current 54.21%.

We anticipate that the National Candles Association will file another request for Administrative Review by August 31, 2003, in order to review the antidumping duty rate for the period of 2002-03.  This request will most likely include all of the 105 companies in the current review, as well as other companies that are discovered by the NCA.

Needless to say, the area of antidumping duties is a difficult and complicated one.  Professional advice should be sought with regard to completing a questionnaire and for counsel in participating effectively in these antidumping proceedings. 

Our law firm specializes in the practice of antidumping, Customs, and international trade. Our firm is especially fortunate to have associated itself with a consultant who was a former antidumping analyst at Commerce and who worked on many antidumping cases involving China. 

We have had substantial experience with regard to the AD order on candles from China and other AD cases.  As an example, we represented an exporter of porcelain-on-steel-cookware from China and assisted the exporter in answering the Commerce questionnaire.  As a result of our efforts, Commerce reduced the company’s AD duties from 66.23% to zero. 

If you or any of your suppliers believe you may be subject to the Commerce antidumping administrative review, please do not hesitate to contact us.  We can provide assistance in responding to Commerce questionnaires, as well as advice on other strategies for minimizing final duty obligations.

The Law Offices of George R. Tuttle, PC, specialize in the area of antidumping and international trade.  If you wish any additional information on this matter, please email Steve Spraitzar at sss@tuttlelaw.com, or contact him by telephone at (415) 288-0427.

 

Stephen Spraitzar is an attorney with the Law Offices of George R. Tuttle in San Francisco.  The information in this article is general in nature and is not intended to constitute legal advice or to create an attorney-client relationship with respect to any event or occurrence, and may not be considered such.