[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 120 (Thursday, June 20, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31507-31508]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-15683]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[A-583-009]
Color Television Receivers, Except for Video Monitors, From
Taiwan; Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of amendment to final results of antidumping duty
administrative review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On October 21, 1994, in the case of Zenith Electronics
Corporation v. United States, 865 F. Supp. 890 (Zenith), the United
States Court of International Trade (the Court) affirmed the Department
of Commerce's (the Department's) third results of redetermination on
remand and prior remand determinations of the final results of the
first administrative review of the antidumping duty order on color
television receivers, except for video monitors (CTVs), from Taiwan, to
the extent that they were not subsequently modified by the Court. The
Court also vacated its July 29, 1991, order to the extent that the
order held that ``no assessment rate cap may be applied in liquidating
the subject entries unless the importer paid a cash duty for an
estimated dumping duty.'' As a result, the Court ordered the Department
to apply the assessment rate cap to all subject imports entered between
the publication dates of the Department's preliminary affirmative
determination of sales at less than fair value (LTFV) and the
International Trade Commission's (ITC's) final affirmative injury
determination.
Consistent with the decision of the United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) in Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d
337 (CAFC 1990) (Timken), on January 17, 1995, the Department published
a notice in the Federal Register which suspended liquidation of the
subject merchandise entered or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption
until there was a ``final and conclusive'' decision in this case (60 FR
3391). On February 12, 1996, the CAFC upheld the Department's
methodology for determining direct and indirect expenses for purposes
of making a circumstance-of-sale (COS) adjustment in calculating AOC
International, Inc.'s (AOC) final margin and remanded the case back to
the Court for recalculation of dumping margins in a manner consistent
with the CAFC's decision. Although the case is not yet ``final and
conclusive'' for AOC, the other respondents in this proceeding are not
affected by this outstanding issue. We have, therefore, prepared these
amended final results for those respondents.
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 20, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maureen McPhillips or John Kugelman,
Office of Antidumping Compliance, Import Administration, International
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202) 482-
5253.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On December 29, 1986, the Department published in the Federal
Register the final results of the first administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on CTVs from Taiwan (51 FR 46895). In those
results, the Department set forth its finding of weighted-average
margins for nine companies, AOC, Capetronic (BSR) Ltd. (Capetronic),
Fulet Electronic Industrial Co., Ltd. (Fulet), Nettek Corp., Ltd.
(Nettek), RCA Taiwan (RCA), Shinlee Corp. (Shinlee), Shin-Shirasuna
Electric Co. (Shin-Shirasuna), and Tatung Co. (Tatung), for the period
of review (POR) October 19, 1983 through March 31, 1985, and Sampo
Corp. (Sampo) for the POR April 1, 1984 through March 31, 1985, and
announced its intent to instruct the U.S. Customs Service to assess
antidumping duties on all appropriate entries.
Subsequent to the Department's final results, four of the reviewed
companies and a domestic producer, Zenith, filed lawsuits with the
Court challenging these results. Thereafter, on September 11, 1989, the
Court issued an order and opinion remanding the Department's
determination so that the Department could make reasonable allowances
for ``bona fide differences in warranty expenses between the United
States and the home market'', and to reconsider an adjustment for
Sampo's bad debt losses based on its bad debt experience during the
period or another appropriate period. See AOC International, Inc. et.
al. v. United States, 721 F. Supp. 314 (CIT 1989). The Department
requested a voluntary remand for the following reasons: to recalculate
constructed value CV) for Tatung; to recalculate AOC's inland freight
and explain the calculation methodology; to adjust Tatung's foreign
market value (FMV) for discounts and rebates which Tatung paid to
distributors for trade-ins of used CTVs by the dealers in the home
market; to allocate advertising and sales promotion expenses on a
product-line, rather than a model-specific basis; and to add to the
U.S. price (USP) the amount of commodity taxes forgiven upon
exportation of CTVs. On January 31, 1991, the Department filed its
first remand results with the Court.
On July 29, 1991, the Court ordered a second remand for the
Department to do the following: Determine the amount of commodity tax
passed through to home market purchasers and add that amount to the
U.S. price (USP); cease applying an assessment rate cap in liquidating
entries of the subject merchandise unless the importer paid a cash
deposit for an estimated antidumping duty; eliminate the use of sales
adjustments in this case to the extent that they reduce CV general
expenses to less than the statutory minimum amount; remove all home
market export-related expenses from exporter's sale's price (ESP);
request additional information from
[[Page 31508]]
AOC in order to remove from USP the import duties paid with respect to
home market models, and instead add the import duties forgiven with
respect to the exported models; investigate whether Shin-Shirasuna's
sales to Canada were fictitious so as to manipulate the foreign market
value for comparison with imports to the United States and thereby
minimize the antidumping duty liability; recalculate Capetronic's
dumping margins using production data related to a specific sale
instead of using the weighted-average costs of production, remove from
USP the value of certain proprietary selling expenses for Shirasuna;
and correct certain programming errors. See Zenith Electronics
Corporation v. United States, 770 F. Supp. 648 (CIT 1991). In addition,
the Department requested a remand to explain the reasons underlying its
de minimis determination. On January 31, 1992, the Department filed its
second remand results with the Court.
On January 28, 1993, the Court ordered a third remand so that the
Department could reconsider the tax pass-through in a manner consistent
with the constant costs and imperfect competition characteristic of the
Taiwanese color television market. In addition, the Court ordered the
Department to ``cap'' the upward adjustment to USP for foreign tax at
the amount of tax found to be passed through to home market purchasers,
to make an adjustment for the difference in circumstances of sale
included in the U.S. and home market taxable values, to insure that the
general expenses component of CV was not reduced at any time to less
than the statutory minimum amount by reason of adjustments for selling
expenses associated with disregarded home market sales, and to correct
two clerical errors. See Zenith Electronic Corp. v. United States, 812
F. Supp. 228 (CIT 1993). On May 5, 1993, the Department filed its third
remand results with the Court.
On October 21, 1994, the Court, in Zenith, affirmed the
Department's third remand results, and affirmed the prior remand
determinations in this case to the extent that they were not
subsequently modified by the Court. The Court also vacated its July 29,
1991 order to the extent that the order held that ``no assessment rate
cap may be applied in liquidating the subject entries unless the
importer paid a cash duty for an estimated dumping duty.'' As a result,
the Court ordered the Department to apply the assessment rate cap to
all subject imports entered between the publication dates of the
Department's preliminary affirmative determination of sales at LTFV and
the ITC's final affirmative injury determination, and it dismissed the
case.
Because the Court's October 21, 1994 order affirmed the
Department's recalculation of Capetronic's rate at 1.36 percent, the
Department published amended final results of review for Capetronic in
this administrative review. See 60 FR 11955 (March 3, 1995). As a
result of this new rate, the Court issued an order in the third
administrative review of CTVs from Taiwan to rescind its previous
revocation of Capetronic from the antidumping duty order on CTVs from
Taiwan because, as a result of the Department's redetermination of its
rate in the first administrative review, Capetronic did not have three
consecutive years of sales at not less than fair value. See Tatung
Company v. United States, Court No. 90-12-00645 (March 8, 1995); see
also 60 FR 29822 (June 6, 1995).
On January 17, 1995, the Department, consistent with the decision
of the CAFC in Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir.
1990) (Timken), published a notice in the Federal Register stating that
it would not order the liquidation of the subject merchandise entered
or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption prior to a ``final and
conclusive'' decision in this case. Although further action is required
by the Court with regard to the Department's calculation of COS
adjustments for AOC, this issue does not affect the other respondents
in this review and, therefore, the Court's October 21, 1994 decision is
``final and conclusive'' for those respondents.
As a result of the Department's redeterminations on remand, we have
determined the weighted-average dumping margins for CTVs from Taiwan
for the following periods to be:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Margin
Manufacturer/ exporter Time period percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fulet Elect. Industrial, Co...... 10/19/83-03/31/85 0.08
Sampo Corp....................... 04/01/84-03/31/85 6.29
Tatung Co........................ 10/19/83-03/31/85 2.56
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department will determine, and the Customs Service will assess,
antidumping duties on the appropriate entries for the above companies.
Once the Court remands Zenith back to the Department and the case
is ``final and conclusive'' with respect to AOC, we will recalculate
AOC's dumping margin in accordance with the Court's opinion, publish an
amended Federal Register notice, and issue liquidation instructions for
AOC for the first administrative review of CTVs from Taiwan.
This amendment of final results of review and notice are in
accordance with section 751(f) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended
(19 U.S.C. 1675(f)) and 19 CFR 353.28(c).
Dated: June 4, 1996.
Paul L. Joffe,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 96-15683 Filed 6-19-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-M