[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 135 (Thursday, July 17, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33367-33368]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-13390]
[[Page 33367]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-570-968]
Aluminum Extrusions From the People's Republic of China: Notice
of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Results of Countervailing
Duty Administrative Review; Notice of Amended Final Results
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On July 9, 2025, the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT)
issued its final judgment in Kingtom Aluminio, S.R.L., et al v. United
States, Consol. Court No. 22-00079, sustaining the U.S. Department of
Commerce's (Commerce) first remand results pertaining to the
administrative review of the countervailing duty (CVD) order on
aluminum extrusions from People's Republic of China (China) covering
the period of review (POR) January 1, 2019, through December 31, 2019.
Commerce is notifying the public that the CIT's final judgment is not
in harmony with Commerce's final results of the administrative review,
and that Commerce is amending the final results with respect to the
countervailable subsidy rate assigned to producer and/or exporter
Kingtom Aluminio S.R.L. (Kingtom).
DATES: Applicable July 19, 2025.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Janae Martin, AD/CVD Operations,
Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20230; phone: (202) 482-0238.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On February 9, 2022, Commerce published its Final Results in the
2019 CVD administrative review of aluminum extrusions from China. In
the Final Results, Commerce rejected Kingtom's claim that it had no
entries of subject merchandise during the POR.\1\ Specifically,
Commerce found that Kingtom did have entries of subject merchandise
during the POR because U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) had
recategorized Kingtom's entries as type 03 (i.e., entry for consumption
subject to AD/CVD duties) based upon its determination of evasion.\2\
Commerce made it clear in both the Preliminary Results and the Final
Results that treatment of the entries under review as type 03 was made
to be consistent with CBP's determinations of evasion and the resultant
recategorization of Kingtom's entries.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Aluminum Extrusions from the People's Republic of China:
Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review and
Rescission of Review, in Part; 2019, 87 FR 7423 (February 9, 2022)
(Final Results), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum
(IDM) at Comment 1.
\2\ See Aluminum Extrusions from the People's Republic of China:
Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review and
Intent to Rescind, in Part; 2019, 86 FR 43173 (August 6, 2021)
(Preliminary Results), and accompanying Preliminary Decision
Memorandum (PDM) at 4.
\3\ See Final Results IDM at Comment 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kingtom appealed Commerce's Final Results. On August 1, 2022, the
CIT granted Commerce's request to stay Kingtom's appeal pending the
outcome of remand proceedings in the two cases involving the EAPA
determinations, Global Aluminum and H&E Home.\4\ On November 6, 2024,
the CIT granted Commerce's request for a voluntary remand of the Final
Results.\5\ In its Request for Voluntary Remand, Commerce cited the
CIT's decisions sustaining CBP's determinations to reverse its
affirmative evasion finding with respect to Kingtom.\6\ The CIT granted
Commerce's request to reconsider its Final Results in light of the
remand results in Global Aluminum and H&E Home.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See See Kingtom Aluminio S.R.L., et al v. United States,
Court No. 22-00079, ECF No. 29 (August 1, 2022) (citing Global
Aluminum Distrib. LLC v. United States, 585 F. Supp. 3d 1338 (CIT
2022) (Global Aluminum); and H&E Home, Inc. v. United States, 714 F.
Supp.3d 1353 (CIT 2024) (H&E Home).
\5\ See Kingtom Aluminio S.R.L., et al v. United States, Court
No. 22-00079, ECF No. 44 (November 6, 2024).
\6\ See Kingtom Aluminio S.R.L., et al v. United States, Court
No. 22-00079, ECF No. 43 (October 18, 2024) (Request for Voluntary
Remand) (citing Global Aluminum and H&E Home).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its final remand redetermination, issued March 5, 2025, Commerce
reviewed its Final Results in light of Global Aluminum and H&E Home,
accepting Kingtom's certification of no shipments \7\ and determining
that Kingtom had no dutiable entries to the United States during the
POR.\8\ The CIT sustained Commerce's Final Redetermination.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Kingtom's Letter, ``Certification of No Sales,
Shipments, or Entries,'' dated August 10, 2020.
\8\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court
Remand, Kingtom Aluminio, S.R.L., et al v. United States, Court No.
22-00079, March 4, 2025 (Final Redetermination).
\9\ See Kingtom Aluminio, S.R.L., et al v. United States, Slip
Op. 25-88 (CIT July 9, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,\10\ as clarified by Diamond
Sawblades,\11\ the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held
that, pursuant to section 516A(c) and (e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act), Commerce must publish a notice of court decision
that is not ``in harmony'' with a Commerce determination and must
suspend liquidation of entries pending a ``conclusive'' court decision.
The CIT's July 9, 2025, judgment constitutes a final decision of the
CIT that is not in harmony with Commerce's Final Results. Thus, this
notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of
Timken.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir.
1990) (Timken).
\11\ See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers Coalition v. United
States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amended Final Results
Because there is now a final court judgment, Commerce is amending
its Final Results with respect to Kingtom as follows: (1) we are
accepting Kingtom's no shipments certification and making a final
determination of no shipments with respect to Kingtom, and (2) because
there are no reviewable entries during the POR by Kingtom, we are
rescinding the 2019 administrative review with respect to Kingtom.
Cash Deposit Requirements
Kingtom did not have a company-specific rate in a prior segment of
this proceeding, and because we find that Kingtom had no shipments
during the POR, we have revised the cash deposit rate for Kingtom. As
such, the all-others cash deposit rate of 7.37 \12\ percent ad valorem
will apply to Kingtom.\13\ Accordingly, Commerce will issue revised
cash deposit instructions to CBP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Aluminum Extrusions from the People's Republic of
China: Amended Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination
Pursuant to Court Decision, 80 FR 69640 (November 10, 2015).
\13\ Kingtom does not have a superseding cash deposit rate,
i.e., there have been no final results published in a subsequent
administrative review of the CVD order on aluminum extrusions from
China in which Kingtom was under review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Liquidation of Suspended Entries
At this time, Commerce remains enjoined by CIT order from
liquidating entries that: were produced and/or exported by Kingtom and
were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the
period January 1, 2019, through December 31, 2019. These entries will
remain enjoined pursuant to the terms of the injunction
[[Page 33368]]
during the pendency of any appeals process.
In the event the CIT's ruling is not appealed, or, if appealed,
upheld by a final and conclusive court decision, Commerce intends to
instruct CBP to assess countervailing duties on unliquidated entries of
subject merchandise produced and/or exported by Kingtom in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.212(b). We will instruct CBP to assess countervailing
duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review when the ad
valorem rate is not zero or de minimis. Where an ad valorem subsidy
rate is zero or de minimis,\14\ we will instruct CBP to liquidate the
appropriate entries without regard to countervailing duties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections
516A(c) and (e) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: July 11, 2025.
Christopher Abbott,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Negotiations, performing the
non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for
Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2025-13390 Filed 7-16-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P