Letter to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance - Enforce Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders on Aluminum Extrusions from China

Letter

Dear Assistant Secretary Piquado:

On behalf of our constituents in the domestic aluminum extrusions industry, we are writing to encourage the Department of Commerce ("Department") to effectively apply the U.S. trade remedy laws and fully enforce the antidumping ("AD") and countervailing duty ("CVD") orders on aluminum extrusions from China.

As the Department is aware, it was only a few years ago that the U.S. aluminum extrusions industry was on the verge of collapse. Dumped and subsidized aluminum extrusions from China were surging into the U.S. market at a rapid pace. At its peak, Chinese producers of aluminum extrusions held 19 percent of what was a $5.4 billion dollar U.S. market, more than any other source of foreign imports combined. This wave of low priced imports crippled domestic production, reduced capacity, and caused mill closures and significant job loss.

In response, the domestic industry petitioned the U.S. Government for relief under the U.S. trade remedy laws. The Department properly concluded that Chinese producers were selling their aluminum extrusions in the U.S. market at dumping and subsidy margins of 33 percent and up to 374 percent, respectively. This dumping and subsidization was found to be injuring U.S. producers and their workers. As a result, in May 2011, the Department imposed trade orders on these Chinese products.

Our constituents now inform us that this relief is at risk due to a number of recent determinations made by the Department regarding whether certain aluminum extrusions are covered under the scope of the AD and CVD orders. It is our understanding that the agency is increasingly and inappropriately narrowing the scope of the orders by excluding aluminum extrusions with incidental non-extruded parts from coverage. This is contrary to the plain language of the scope, which clearly covers all aluminum extrusions whether fabricated and/or incorporated as parts into a subassembly with non-extruded parts. We are concerned that any interpretation otherwise defeats the very purpose of the orders and threatens renewed harm to the domestic industry and its workers and threatens to allow what should otherwise be a limited exception to become the rule.

We have also been informed that in calculating the subsidy for the provision of primary aluminum for less than adequate remuneration, the Department inappropriately relied on a London Metals Exchange ("LME") benchmark in its preliminary determination in the current administrative review of the CVD order. Specifically, we understand that the Department's regulations require that its benchmark reflect the price that a Chinese company would pay if it purchased primary aluminum on the global market. However, the LME cash price selected by the Department does not reflect the full "all-in" price a purchaser would pay without the addition of regional premiums to take physical possession of the product. We also understand that the LME cash settlement price is largely based on distorted pricing for Chinese aluminum. For these reasons, we are concerned that the Department's continued reliance on an LME benchmark will, contrary to its statutory mandate, prevent the agency from calculating an accurate subsidy margin.

In closing, we appreciate the Department's attention to these critical issues and are confident that the agency will take our concerns under serious consideration. Successfully addressing these issues is vital to ensuring the continued health and viability of the domestic aluminum extrusions industry and its workers.

Respectfully submitted,

Congressman Tim Ryan

Congressman Bill Johnson

Congressman Pete Sessions

Congresswoman Diane Black

Congressman Lynn Westmoreland

Congressman Walter Jones

Congressman Paul Tonko

Congressman Collin Peterson

Congresswoman Ann Mclane Kuster

Source