CHICAGO Automotive parts supplier Valeo Group has won a push to narrow the scope of anti-dumping and countervailing duty orders on aluminum extrusions from China.
The U.S. Commerce Department has determined that components for automotive heating and cooling systems imported by Valeo Inc., Valeo Engine Cooling Inc. and Valeo Climate Control Corp. are subassemblies that are finished goods and therefore not covered by the duty orders, according to a July 10 notice signed by Paul Piquado, assistant secretary of the Commerce Departments International Trade Administration.
The Commerce Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection that the cash deposit rate will be zero for Valeos automotive heating and cooling systems components, the notice said.
The ruling caps a long fight by Valeo to narrow the scope of duties on aluminum extrusions from China.
In 2012, Commerce declined a petition by Valeo asking that two types of automotive heating and cooling components be considered outside the scope of existing duty orders on aluminum extrusions from China. Valeo appealed to the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT), and in February this year Commerce asked the CIT to remand the case to the department, and after re-examining the issue decided that components for Valeos automotive heating and cooling systems were finished goods and excluded from the scope of the duties.
Domestic extruders won a trade petition against aluminum extrusions imported from China. The duty orders covered a wide breadth that have protected the domestic industry but also invited challenges (amm.com, March 18).
U.S. aluminum extruders and the United Steelworkers union in 2010 filed anti-dumping and countervailing duty petitions with the U.S. Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission (ITC), asking for relief against what it called unfairly traded imports from China (amm.com, March 31, 2010). The ITC in 2011 determined that dumped and subsidized imports from China were hurting the domestic industry (amm.com, April 28, 2011), and duties were implemented soon after. But the scope of those duties was challenged by Valeo (amm.com, Nov. 28, 2012).