July 10, 2020

Volume X, Number 192

July 10, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

July 09, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

July 08, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

July 07, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

Department of Commerce Expected to Revoke (Again) Antidumping Duty Orders on Ball Bearings from Japan and the UK

The U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) has notified the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) that it received no notice of intent from domestic ball bearings producers to participate in the sunset review the DOC initiated on January 2, 2014, regarding ball bearings and parts thereof from Japan and the UK.  This means that the DOC will revoke both antidumping duty orders.

These orders date back to 1989.  In 2006, the DOC and the ITC conducted five-year “sunset” reviews of these orders, which initially resulted in affirmative determinations and decisions to continue both orders.  However, Japanese and British ball bearings manufacturers filed lawsuits challenging the ITC sunset review determination.  After several remand proceedings, the DOC first revoked the orders, and then, after further appeals, the DOC reinstated the orders effectiveNovember 29, 2013.  The DOC has resumed the process of annual administrative reviews of the orders, which had been suspended while the orders were revoked but litigation still pending in the U.S. courts.

As a result of the reinstatement, the DOC and ITC announced that they would conduct new five-year sunset reviews.  The DOC set a deadline of January 17, 2014, for domestic producers to file a notice of intent to participate in the DOC sunset reviews.  However, no domestic producer filed the required notice letters.  As a result, the DOC has now informed the ITC that no domestic producer is participating.  Under U.S. law, the DOC and ITC must terminate their new sunset reviews and the DOC must revoke the antidumping duty orders.

Ordinarily, following a revocation resulting from the sunset review procedure, the revocation is effective with imports entered on or after the date that is five years after the date that the DOC last announced continuation of the antidumping duty orders.  However, given the extensive litigation and revocation followed by later reinstatement of the orders, it is not clear at this time precisely when the latest revocation will be effective.  The DOC has not yet published a formal revocation notice, and we understand it is still contemplating what the correct effective date of revocation should be.

It is also unclear at this point whether the Timken Company, which is the largest U.S. bearings producer, simply missed the January 17 notice deadline or made a deliberate decision not to file the notice and wait for the orders to be revoked.  Stay tuned for further developments.

© 2020 Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP. All Rights Reserved.National Law Review, Volume IV, Number 25

TRENDING LEGAL ANALYSIS


About this Author

Douglass Heffner, International trade lawyer, Drinker Biddle
Partner

Douglas J. Heffner litigates customs and international trade matters including antidumping duty, countervailing duty and safeguard cases. He represents foreign companies in Canada, Europe, Japan and Mexico, as well as domestic producers in industries that range from high-tech to heavy industry, to consumer and industrial goods. He also represents trade associations, government agencies and embassies in a broad range of matters.

202-230-5802
Richard P Ferrin, International Trade Lawyer, Drinker Biddle
Counsel

Richard P. Ferrin advises clients about international trade regulations, particularly antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings at both the administrative and appellate levels. He advocates for his client in global “safeguards” proceedings and on customs matters involving classification issues and country-of-origin determinations. Richard has represented foreign manufacturers, foreign exporters, and U.S. importers in antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings before the U.S. International Trade Commission, and in judicial review of administrative actions at the U.S. Court of International Trade, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and North American Free Trade Agreement binational panels. In addition, Richard advises importers on how to minimize antidumping duty liability.

202-230-5803
William Rucker, Drinker Biddle Law Firm, International Trade and Customs Specialist
Partner

William R. “Randy” Rucker assists clients with all aspects of U.S. Customs law, including the classification and valuation of merchandise, country of origin and marking determinations, quantitative import restraints, duty-preference and savings programs, understanding and receiving the benefits of free trade agreements, compliance audits, enforcement actions and other trade-related matters.

In order to assist clients with their compliance efforts and satisfy "reasonable care" requirements, Randy frequently performs reviews of companies' internal...

312-569-1157