The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) has voted to institute an investigation of certain radiotherapy systems and treatment planning software and components thereof.  The products at issue in the investigation are medical systems that employ radiotherapy to treat cancer.

The investigation is based on a complaint filed by Varian Medical Systems, Inc., of Palo Alto, CA, and Varian Medical Systems International AG of Cham, Switzerland, on September 25, 2015.  The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 in the importation into the United States and sale of certain radiotherapy systems and treatment planning software and components thereof that infringe patents asserted by the complainants.  The complainants request that the USITC issue an exclusion order and a cease and desist order.

The USITC has identified the following as respondents in this investigation:

Elekta AB of Stockholm, Sweden;
Elekta Ltd. of Crawley, United Kingdom;
Elekta GmbH of Hamburg, Germany;v Elekta Inc. of Atlanta, GA;
IMPAC Medical Systems, Inc., of Sunnyvale, CA;
Elekta Instrument (Shanghai) Limited of Shanghai, China; and
Elekta Beijing Medical Systems Co. Ltd. of Beijing, China.

By instituting this investigation (337-TA-968), the USITC has not yet made any decision on the merits of the case.  The USITC’s Chief Administrative Law Judge will assign the case to one of the USITC’s administrative law judges (ALJ), who will schedule and hold an evidentiary hearing.  The ALJ will make an initial determination as to whether there is a violation of section 337; that initial determination is subject to review by the Commission.

The USITC will make a final determination in the investigation at the earliest practicable time.  Within 45 days after institution of the investigation, the USITC will set a target date for completing the investigation.  USITC remedial orders in section 337 cases are effective when issued and become final 60 days after issuance unless disapproved for policy reasons by the U.S. Trade Representative within that 60-day period.

India has made significant changes to some of its policies that discriminate against U.S. trade and investment since Narendra Modi became Prime Minister on May 26, 2014 according to the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) report, Trade and Investment Policies in India, 2014–2015.

The USITC, an independent, nonpartisan, factfinding federal agency, prepared the report at the request of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Ways and Means and the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance.

As requested, the USITC report describes significant changes to India’s trade and investment policies by the government of Narendra Modi since it took office in May 2014. It also describes changes to policies identified in the USITC report, Trade, Investment, and Industrial Policies in India: Effects on the U.S. Economy, which was published in December 2014.

The new USITC report identifies significant policy changes or new policies by the Modi government during May 2014–July 2015 in four areas: foreign direct investment, tariffs and customs procedures, local-content and localization requirements, and standards and technical regulations. Highlights follow.

• Since May 2014 India has raised foreign direct investment (FDI) equity caps in the insurance and defense industries, removed the requirement for pre-investment authorizations in several industries and permitted FDI in certain segments of the railway industry.  These changes have helped to improve India’s overall investment regime. [Read More]
• India has made a small number changes in its tariffs and customs procedures.  It has reduced tariffs on some information, communications, and telecommunications (ICT)-related products, but increased tariff on several telecommunications-related products. Some changes have improved U.S. access to the Indian market. [Read More]
• India has made changes to policies and practices regarding local-content requirements and localization measures.  The changes expand or propose to expand several local-content and localization requirements affecting certain ICT, electronics, and defense and civil aerospace products.  The changes affect measures that require foreign firms to purchase Indian inputs, conduct a share of business in India, conduct certain business activities in India, or submit to India-specific testing or registration. [Read More]
• The Modi government has expressed a commitment to harmonize India’s standards with international standards and to increase engagement with the United States on standards. Nevertheless, U.S. industry and government representatives report that the Modi government has created new India-unique mandatory standards and technical requirements that increase costs, delay time to market, and operate to exclude certain U.S. products from the Indian market.
• Six case studies highlight the effects of specific policies in selected industries of concern to U.S. companies.  Four case studies examine the impact of India-unique standards and technical requirements concerning agricultural products, food products, alcoholic beverages, and cosmetics and personal care products.  Two case studies examine developments in India’s healthcare sector concerning medical devices and clinical trials. [Read More]
• The Modi government introduced no new IPR laws during May 2014–June 2015 to address barriers to the protection of trade secrets, regulatory test data, patents, trademarks, and copyrights.  Nevertheless, U.S. industry and government representatives noted the willingness of Modi government officials to engage in discussions with the United States on IPR issues. [Read More]
• The Modi government also pursued several broad policy changes to enhance India’s business climate during May 2014–July 2015.  Changes in the following areas particularly may positively affect India’s trade and investment climate: improving India’s economic infrastructure, improving the ease of doing business, creating greater bureaucratic transparency and accountability, changing taxation policy, and encouraging state-level policy changes in India. [Read More]

Trade and Investment Policies in India, 2014–2015 (Investigation No. 332-550, USITC Publication 4566, September 2015) is available on the USITC's Internet site at http://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub4566.pdf.

USITC general factfinding investigations cover matters related to tariffs or trade and are generally conducted at the request of the U.S. Trade Representative, the House Committee on Ways and Means, or the Senate Committee on Finance. The resulting reports convey the USITC’s objective findings and independent analyses on the subject investigated. The USITC makes no recommendations on policy or other matters in its general factfinding reports. Upon completion of each investigation, the USITC submits its findings and analyses to the requester. General factfinding reports are subsequently released to the public, unless they are classified by the requester for national security reasons.

The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) today determined that revoking the existing antidumping and countervailing duty orders on certain steel grating from China would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury within a reasonably foreseeable time. 

As a result of the Commission’s affirmative determinations, the existing orders on imports of this product from China will remain in place. 

All six Commissioners voted in the affirmative. 

Today’s action comes under the five-year (sunset) review process required by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act.  See the attached page for background on these five-year (sunset) reviews.

The Commission’s public report Certain Steel Grating from China (Inv. Nos. 701-TA-465 and 731-TA-1161 (Review), USITC Publication 4578, October 2015) will contain the views of the Commission and information developed during the review.

The report will be available by October 19, 2015; when available, it may be accessed on the USITC website at: http://pubapps.usitc.gov/applications/publogs/qry_publication_loglist.asp.

---

BACKGROUND

The Uruguay Round Agreements Act requires the Department of Commerce to revoke an antidumping or countervailing duty order, or terminate a suspension agreement, after five years unless the Department of Commerce and the USITC determine that revoking the order or terminating the suspension agreement would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping or subsidies (Commerce) and of material injury (USITC) within a reasonably foreseeable time.

The Commission’s institution notice in five-year reviews requests that interested parties file responses with the Commission concerning the likely effects of revoking the order under review as well as other information.  Generally within 95 days from institution, the Commission will determine whether the responses it has received reflect an adequate or inadequate level of interest in a full review.  If responses to the USITC’s notice of institution are adequate, or if other circumstances warrant a full review, the Commission conducts a full review, which includes a public hearing and issuance of questionnaires.

The Commission generally does not hold a hearing or conduct further investigative activities in expedited reviews.  Commissioners base their injury determination in expedited reviews on the facts available, including the Commission’s prior injury and review determinations, responses received to its notice of institution, data collected by staff in connection with the review, and information provided by the Department of Commerce.

The five-year (sunset) reviews concerning Certain Steel Grating from China were instituted on June 1, 2015.

On September 4, 2015, the Commission voted to conduct expedited reviews.  All six Commissioners concluded that the domestic group response for these reviews was adequate and the respondent group response was inadequate and voted for expedited reviews.

A record of the Commission’s vote to conduct expedited reviews is available from the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436.  Requests may be made by telephone by calling 202-205-1802.

The United States International Trade Commission (USITC) today determined that a U.S. industry is materially injured by reason of imports of sugar from Mexico that the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) has determined are subsidized and sold in the United States at less than fair value.

All six Commissioners voted in the affirmative.

As a result of the USITC’s affirmative determinations, suspension agreements that Commerce previously entered concerning sugar from Mexico will remain in effect. 

The Commission’s public report Sugar from Mexico (Investigation Nos. 701-TA-513 and 731-TA-1249 (Final), USITC Publication 4577, November 2015) will contain the views of the Commissioners and information developed during the investigations.

The report will be available by November 23, 2015; when available, it may be accessed on the USITC website at: http://pubapps.usitc.gov/applications/publogs/qry_publication_loglist.asp.

---

UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
Office of Industries
Washington, DC 20436

FACTUAL HIGHLIGHTS

Sugar from Mexico
Investigation Nos. 701-TA-513 and 731-TA-1249 (Final)

 

Product Description:  Sugar, or sucrose, is a natural sweetener derived from sugarcane and sugar beets. Sugar is primarily used for human consumption as a caloric sweetening agent in food and beverages such as bakery products, cereals, confectionery, dairy products, coffee, tea, and cocoa. The products covered by these investigations include sugar in raw, refined, and liquid forms, as well as organic sugar.

Status of Proceedings:
1. Type of investigation: Final antidumping and countervailing duty.
2. Petitioners:  American Sugar Coalition and its members:  American Sugar Cane League, Thibodaux, LA; American Sugarbeet Growers Association, Washington, DC; American Sugar Refining, Inc., West Palm Beach, FL; Florida Sugar Cane League, Washington, DC; Hawaiian Commercial and Sugar Company, Puunene, HI; Rio Grande Valley Sugar Growers, Inc., Santa Rosa, TX; Sugar Cane Growers Cooperative of Florida, Belle Glade, FL; and United States Beet Sugar Association, Washington, DC.
3. Investigation instituted by USITC: March 28, 2014.
4. USITC hearing: September 16, 2015.
5. USITC vote: October 20, 2015.
6. USITC notification to the Department of Commerce: November 2, 2015.

U.S. Industry:
1. Number of U.S. producers in 2014:  13 sugarcane millers; 7 sugarcane refiners; 7 sugar beet processors.
2. Location of producers’ plants:  California, Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming.
3. Employment of production and related workers in crop year 2013/14: ^{[1], [2]}
4. U.S. producers’ U.S. shipments in crop year 2013/14: ^{1, 2}
5. Apparent U.S. consumption in crop year 2013/14: ^{1, 2}
6. Ratio of subject imports to apparent U.S. consumption in crop year 2013/14: ^{1, 2}

U.S. Imports in Crop Year 2013/14:¹
1. From the subject country during crop year 2013/14: $945 million.¹
2. From other countries during crop year 2013/14: $490 million.¹
3. Leading sources during crop year 2013/14: Mexico, Brazil, Philippines, Dominican Republic, and Guatemala (in terms of total volume). ¹

The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) today determined that revoking the existing antidumping duty orders on carbazole violet pigment 23 from China and India and the existing countervailing duty order on this product from India would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury within a reasonably foreseeable time. 

As a result of the Commission’s affirmative determinations, the existing orders on imports of this product from China and India will remain in place. 

All six Commissioners voted in the affirmative. 

Today’s action comes under the five-year (sunset) review process required by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act.  See the attached page for background on these five-year (sunset) reviews.

The Commission’s public report Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 from China and India (Inv. Nos. 701-TA-437 and 731-TA-1060-1061 (Second Review), USITC Publication 4575, November 2015) will contain the views of the Commission and information developed during the reviews.

The report will be available by November 23, 2015; when available, it may be accessed on the USITC website at: http://pubapps.usitc.gov/applications/publogs/qry_publication_loglist.asp.

---

BACKGROUND

The Uruguay Round Agreements Act requires the Department of Commerce to revoke an antidumping or countervailing duty order, or terminate a suspension agreement, after five years unless the Department of Commerce and the USITC determine that revoking the order or terminating the suspension agreement would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping or subsidies (Commerce) and of material injury (USITC) within a reasonably foreseeable time.

The Commission’s institution notice in five-year reviews requests that interested parties file responses with the Commission concerning the likely effects of revoking the order under review as well as other information.  Generally within 95 days from institution, the Commission will determine whether the responses it has received reflect an adequate or inadequate level of interest in a full review.  If responses to the USITC’s notice of institution are adequate, or if other circumstances warrant a full review, the Commission conducts a full review, which includes a public hearing and issuance of questionnaires.

The Commission generally does not hold a hearing or conduct further investigative activities in expedited reviews.  Commissioners base their injury determination in expedited reviews on the facts available, including the Commission’s prior injury and review determinations, responses received to its notice of institution, data collected by staff in connection with the review, and information provided by the Department of Commerce.

The five-year (sunset) reviews concerning Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 from China and India were instituted on April 1, 2015.

On July 6, 2015, the Commission voted to conduct expedited reviews.  All six Commissioners concluded that the domestic group response for these reviews was adequate and the respondent group responses were inadequate and voted for expedited reviews.

A record of the Commission’s vote to conduct expedited reviews is available from the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436.  Requests may be made by telephone by calling 202-205-1802.

The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) today determined that revoking the existing antidumping duty order on barium chloride from China would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury within a reasonably foreseeable time. 

As a result of the Commission’s affirmative determination, the existing order on imports of this product from China will remain in place. 

All six Commissioners voted in the affirmative. 

Today’s action comes under the five-year (sunset) review process required by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act.  See the attached page for background on this five-year (sunset) review.

The Commission’s public report Barium Chloride from China (Inv. No. 731-TA-149 (Fourth Review), USITC Publication 4574, October 2015) will contain the views of the Commission and information developed during the review.

The report will be available by November 17, 2015; when available, it may be accessed on the USITC website at: http://pubapps.usitc.gov/applications/publogs/qry_publication_loglist.asp.

---

BACKGROUND

The Uruguay Round Agreements Act requires the Department of Commerce to revoke an antidumping or countervailing duty order, or terminate a suspension agreement, after five years unless the Department of Commerce and the USITC determine that revoking the order or terminating the suspension agreement would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping or subsidies (Commerce) and of material injury (USITC) within a reasonably foreseeable time.

The Commission’s institution notice in five-year reviews requests that interested parties file responses with the Commission concerning the likely effects of revoking the order under review as well as other information.  Generally within 95 days from institution, the Commission will determine whether the responses it has received reflect an adequate or inadequate level of interest in a full review.  If responses to the USITC’s notice of institution are adequate, or if other circumstances warrant a full review, the Commission conducts a full review, which includes a public hearing and issuance of questionnaires.

The Commission generally does not hold a hearing or conduct further investigative activities in expedited reviews.  Commissioners base their injury determination in expedited reviews on the facts available, including the Commission’s prior injury and review determinations, responses received to its notice of institution, data collected by staff in connection with the review, and information provided by the Department of Commerce.

The five-year (sunset) review concerning Barium Chloride from China was instituted on May 5, 2015.

On August 4, 2015, the Commission voted to conduct an expedited review.  All six Commissioners concluded that the domestic group response for this review was adequate and the respondent group response was inadequate and voted for an expedited review.

A record of the Commission’s vote to conduct an expedited review is available from the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436.  Requests may be made by telephone by calling 202-205-1802.

International customs officials at the World Customs Organization (WCO) have agreed to category changes within the global Harmonized System, which categorizes products that are imported and exported around the world, for certain fish, wood and wood products, and bed nets of warp knit fabrics.  Countries are now beginning their individual processes to incorporate those changes into their own domestic product category systems.

The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) maintains and updates the United States' product category system, the U.S. Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS).  The USITC today instituted an investigation that will lead to recommendations to the President on necessary modifications to the U.S. HTS for these products.

The U.S. and other countries have until January 1, 2018, to incorporate the changes.  The USITC has posted the WCO document outlining the changes on its website at: http://www.usitc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/wco_council_recommendation_june_11_2015.pdf.  As a first step, importers and exporters can view the document to determine whether they are affected.

The USITC expects to issue proposed recommendations on HTS category changes for the products in February 2016.  At that time, the USITC will seek public comments on the proposed recommendations.  Detailed information on how to submit comments and related deadlines will be provided at that time.

The USITC will consider all public comments, as well as comments from other U.S. agencies, in making its final recommendations.  The recommendations will be submitted to the President (through the U.S. Trade Representative) by July 2016.  Following expiration of a 60 day layover period before the Congress, the President may proclaim the modifications to the HTS.

More information about the USITC investigation can be found in the notice of investigation dated October 2, 2015.

The overall effect of the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (CBERA) on the U.S. economy and U.S. consumers continues to be negligible while the effect on beneficiary countries is small but positive, reports the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) in its publication Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act: Impact on U.S. Industries and Consumers and on Beneficiary Countries, Twenty-second Report, 2013-14.

The USITC, an independent, nonpartisan, factfinding federal agency, recently issued its 22nd in a series of biennial reports monitoring imports under CBERA. The CBERA program, operative since January 1, 1984, affords preferential tariff treatment to most products of the designated Caribbean countries. During the period covered in the report, 17 countries received CBERA benefits including. Curaçao, which was designated a CBERA beneficiary effective January 1, 2014.

The USITC report covers the impact of CBERA, as modified by the Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act of 2000 (CBTPA), and the HOPE and HELP Acts, on the United States, with particular emphasis on calendar year 2014. CBERA requires the USITC to prepare a biennial report assessing both the actual and the probable future effect of CBERA on the U.S. economy generally, on U.S. industries, and on U.S. consumers. The report also covers the impact of the preference program on the beneficiary countries themselves. Following are highlights of the 2013-14 report.

• Total U.S imports from CBERA countries (with and without trade preferences) declined for a third consecutive year to $8.5 billion in 2014. The decline was mainly due to the sharp drop in the value of imports of crude petroleum and refined petroleum products, according to the report. In contrast, U.S. imports of textiles and apparel from Haiti increased sharply in 2014, attributed in large part to new apparel manufacturing facilities built to take advantage of the trade preference program established by the HOPE/HELP Acts. The decline in imports from CBERA countries in 2013 reflected slower growth in commodity prices and a decline in U.S. demand for energy imports, among other factors.
• The overall effect of CBERA-exclusive imports (imports that could receive tariff preferences only under CBERA provisions) on the U.S. economy generally and on U.S. industries and consumers continued to be negligible in 2014. The USITC identified one U.S. industry – methanol -- that might face significant negative effects due to competition from CBERA-exclusive imports.
• U.S imports under the CBERA program totaled $2.0 billion in 2014, a decline of 16.8 percent from $2.4 billion in 2013. Energy products accounted for 62.0 percent of total imports under CBERA in 2014, with Trinidad and Tobago supplying 97.3 percent of energy imports. Textiles and apparel, supplied mainly by Haiti, accounted for 19.8 percent of imports under CBERA in 2014; other mining and manufacturing products, 10.7 percent; and agricultural products, 7.6 percent. Increasing U.S. production and a slight drop in U.S. consumption of crude petroleum, as well as the shutdown for maintenance of several petroleum refineries in Trinidad and Tobago, and other factors, such as changes in the U.S. ethanol program on December 31, 2011, contributed to this trend.
• CBERA has encouraged several beneficiary countries to develop niche exports to the United States. Most notably, The Bahamas is exporting polystyrene Belize, fruits and fruit juices, and St. Kitts and Nevis, electronic products.
• The report found that investment for the near-term production and export of CBERA-eligible products is not likely to result in imports that would have a measurable economic impact on the U.S. economy generally and on U.S. producers. Although investment in Haiti's export-oriented apparel sector increased significantly in 2013-2014, Haiti will likely remain a small U.S. apparel supplier.
• Exporting CBERA-eligible goods is a challenge for many CBERA beneficiaries because of supply-side constraints, including inadequate infrastructure. However, special CBERA provisions for Haiti have had a strong, positive effect on export earnings and job creation in Haiti's apparel sector.

Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act: Impact on U.S. Industries and Consumers and on Beneficiary Countries, Twenty-second Report, 2013-14 (Inv. No. 332-227, USITC Publication No. 4567, September 2015) is available at http://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub4567.pdf.

USITC general factfinding investigations, such as this one, cover matters related to tariffs or trade and are generally conducted at the request of the U.S. Trade Representative, the House Committee on Ways and Means, or the Senate Committee on Finance. The resulting reports convey the Commission's objective findings and independent analyses on the subjects investigated. The Commission makes no recommendations on policy or other matters in its general factfinding reports. Upon completion of each investigation, the USITC submits its findings and analyses to the requestor. General factfinding investigation reports are subsequently released to the public, unless they are classified by the requestor for national security reasons.

Meredith M. Broadbent, Chairman of the United States International Trade Commission (USITC), announced today that William M. Powers has been named Chief Economist and Director, Office of Economics, at the USITC.

Powers will serve as the Commission’s chief economic adviser; direct the agency’s professional economists; and support the Commission in its role as adviser to Congress and the President on international trade matters.

“Bill Powers has shown strong leadership in the Office of Economics as it has worked to find innovative solutions to new challenges,” said Chairman Broadbent.  “The Commission looks forward to benefiting from his expertise and creativity as we respond to increasingly complex analytical requests from the U.S. Trade Representative and our congressional oversight committees.”

Powers served as the Acting Director of the USITC Office of Economics from April 2015 until his appointment.  He was Chief of the Office of Economics Research Division from February 2014 until March 2015.  He joined the USITC as an International Economist in 2005, and in that role he contributed to numerous USITC general factfinding and probable economic effect investigations, served as a project leader or reviewer on such studies, and led the Commission’s global value chain research portfolio.  He has published on empirical trade topics including trade agreements, trade financing, and global value chains.  He worked with the President’s Council of Economic Advisors in the White House from 2008-2009.

Prior to his USITC employment, Powers was an adjunct lecturer in the Department of Economics and Management at Albion College in Albion, MI.  He taught English in Osaka, Japan, from 1992-1995, and he worked as a computer engineer at IBM in Poughkeepsie, NY, from 1990-1992.

Powers holds a Ph.D. in Economics and a Master of Arts degree in Economics from the University of Michigan and a Bachelor of Science degree in electrical engineering from the University of Virginia. 

The U.S. International Trade Commission is an independent, nonpartisan, quasi-judicial federal agency that provides trade expertise to both the legislative and executive branches of government, determines the impact of imports on U.S. industries, and directs actions against certain unfair trade practices in import trade, such as patent and trademark infringement.

The United States International Trade Commission (USITC) today determined that there is a reasonable indication that a U.S. industry is materially injured by reason of imports of certain hot-rolled steel flat products from Australia, Brazil, Japan, Korea, the Netherlands, Turkey, and the United Kingdom that are allegedly sold in the United States at less than fair value and allegedly subsidized by the governments of Brazil, Korea, and Turkey. 

Chairman Meredith M. Broadbent, Vice Chairman Dean A. Pinkert, and Commissioners Irving A. Williamson, David S. Johanson, and Rhonda K. Schmidtlein voted in the affirmative.  Commissioner F. Scott Kieff did not participate in these investigations.

As a result of the Commission’s affirmative determinations, the U.S. Department of Commerce will continue to conduct its investigations on imports of these products from Australia, Brazil, Japan, Korea, the Netherlands, Turkey, and the United Kingdom, with its preliminary countervailing duty determinations due on or about November 4, 2015, and its preliminary antidumping duty determinations due on or about January 18, 2016. 

The Commission’s public report Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from Australia, Brazil, Japan, Korea, the Netherlands, Turkey, and the United Kingdom (Investigation Nos. 701-TA-545-547 and 731-TA-1291-1297 (Preliminary), USITC Publication 4570, October 2015) will contain the views of the Commission and information developed during the investigations.

The report will be available after October 23, 2015.  After that date, it may be accessed on the USITC website at:  http://pubapps.usitc.gov/applications/publogs/qry_publication_loglist.asp. 

---

UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
Office of Industries
Washington, DC 20436

FACTUAL HIGHLIGHTS

Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products
from Australia, Brazil, Japan, Korea, the Netherlands, Turkey, and the United Kingdom
Investigation Nos. 701-TA-545-547 and 731-TA-1291-1297 (Preliminary)

 

Product Description: The products covered by these investigations are certain hot-rolled steel flat products. The products covered include coils that have a width or other lateral measurement (“width”) of 12.7 mm or greater, regardless of thickness, and regardless of form of coil (e.g., in successively superimposed layers, spirally oscillating, etc.). The products covered also include products not in coils (e.g., in straight lengths) of a thickness of less than 4.75 mm and a width that is 12.7 mm or greater and that measures at least 10 times the thickness. Covered products include those with or without patterns in relief, and whether or not annealed, painted, varnished, or coated with plastics or other non-metallic substances. Covered products do not include those that are clad, plated, or coated with metal.

Status of Proceedings:

1.   Type of investigations: Preliminary antidumping and countervailing duty.
2.   Petitioners: AK Steel Corporation (West Chester, Ohio), ArcelorMittal USA, LLC (Chicago, Illinois), Nucor Corporation (Charlotte, North Carolina), SSAB Enterprises, LLC (Lisle, Illinois), Steel Dynamics, Inc. (Fort Wayne, Indiana), and United States Steel Corporation (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania).
3.   Preliminary investigations instituted by the USITC: August 11, 2015.
4.   Commission’s conference: September 1, 2015.
5.   USITC vote: September 24, 2015.
6.   USITC determinations due: September 25, 2015.
7.   USITC views due: October 2, 2015.

U.S. Industry:

1.   Number of producers in 2014: Ten.
2.   Location of producers’ plants: Alabama, Arkansas, California, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina.
3.   Employment of production and related workers in 2014: 13,014.
4.   Apparent U.S. consumption in 2014: $44.3 billion ($21.3 billion merchant market).
5.   Ratio of the value of total U.S. imports to total U.S. consumption in 2014: 9.6%  (20.0% for merchant market).

U.S. Imports:

1.   From subject countries during 2014: $1.9 billion.
2.   From other countries during 2014: $2.3 billion.
3.   Leading sources during 2014, in terms of value: Canada, Korea, Russia, and Japan.

Subscribe to U.S. International Trade Commission