Fastener Shanghai
fastener
fastenerHomefastener
fastener
fastenerNewsfastener
fastener
fastenerfastenerBuyers' Guidefastener
fastener
fastenerStandard Searchfastener
fastener
fastenerFor Buyersfastener
fastener
fastenerFor Suppliersfastener
fastener
fastenerMagazinefastener
fastener
fastenerTrade Showsfastener
fastener
fastenerMy Officefastener
fastener
fastenerPost Inquiriesfastener
Home->Fastener News->Pin Anchor Importer Challenges Chinese Nail Duty A...You are the 256755 visitors
Views:429   |   recommendation:   |   Votes:0   |   Discuss:0
Pin Anchor Importer Challenges Chinese Nail Duty At CIT

New York (September 5, 2017, 1:28 PM EDT) -- A Michigan-based importer of strike pin anchors from China has filed a complaint with the U.S. Court of International Trade protesting a Commerce Department decision last month that the product is subject to anti-dumping duties on certain steel nails from the country.

Midwest Fastener Corp. contended in its filing on Friday that the department ignored substantial evidence showing that the strike pin anchors it imports from China — which involve hammering a steel pin into a wall anchor and are used primarily to attach items like shelf brackets to masonry walls — clearly fall outside the scope of a 2008 anti-dumping duty order which imposed tariffs of steel nails of various lengths, shapes and finishes.

“The department’s decision to include Midwest Fastener’s strike pin anchors in the scope of the China nail AD order is unsupported by substantial evidence on the record and is otherwise not in accordance with law, because the strike pin anchors are not steel nails and, therefore, do not unambiguously fall within the scope of the China nail AD order,” the company wrote on Friday.

The steel nails covered under Commerce’s 2008 anti-dumping duty order included nails that are both cut and made from round wire, produced from any type of steel, and with a variety of finishes, heads, shanks, point types, shaft lengths and shaft diameters. The types of nails subject to the order were classified under various section 7317 subheadings within the harmonized tariff schedule of the U.S., Midwest Fastener noted in its complaint.

In June, the company asked Commerce to issue a scope ruling that certain of the strike pin anchors it imports from China fell outside the scope of that anti-dumping duty order, arguing that the product, which consist of a threaded body, a steel pin, a nut and a flat washer, could hardly be considered a steel nail.

On Aug. 2 though, Commerce issued its final ruling, which found that Midwest Fastener’s strike pin anchors fall within the physical description of the types of steel nails described in the 2008 anti-dumping order.

Commerce also denied an argument by the Midwest Fastener that because its pins were not clearly within the scope of the 2008 anti-dumping order, any decision by the agency that they were could not be applied retroactively.

In its CIT complaint Friday, the strike pin importer explained that its product is used to attach wood, metal, shelf brackets and other items to concrete, brick and other masonry walls by inserting the anchor body into a predrilled hole and then striking the pin with a hammer to expand the body and wedge it against the sides of the hole. The steel pin and anchor body cannot be separated from each other, Midwest Fastener noted.

The company also pointed out that U.S. Customs and Border Protection classifies strike pin anchors under subheading 7318 of the harmonized tariff schedule — a section that relates to screws, bolts, nuts, rivets, washers and similar items made of iron or steel.

“Strike pin anchors are commonly and commercially known as strike pin anchors; strike pin anchors are not commonly or commercially known as steel nails,” Midwest Fastener wrote.

Commerce representatives did not immediately return a request for comment, and counsel information wasn’t immediately available.

Midwest Fastener is represented by R. Kevin Williams and Lara A. Austrins of Clark Hill PLC.

The case is Midwest Fastener Corp. v. United States, case number 17-00231, in the U.S. Court of International Trade.

Source: Law360

2017/9/11 17:15:00

Previous:    Plane purchases expected to top trillion-dollar mark in 20 years
        Next:    China's auto sales rise 4.1% in August

Recent Related News
EU imposes new anti-dumping duties to Chinese steel--2017-08-15
South Africa ITAC urged to remove increased duty on stainless steel fasteners--2017-07-25
CITT Amends Order Concerning Steel Fasteners from China & Taiwan--2017-07-14
Canadian International Trade Tribunal Amends Its Order to Exclude Certain Steel Fasteners from Mainland China and Taiwan--2017-02-23
USITC Will Expedite Five-Year (Sunset) Reviews Concerning Helical Spring Lock Washers from Mainland China and Taiwan--2017-02-08
China urges US to correct unfair anti-dumping duties on steel products--2017-02-06
European Commission Announces Expiry of Anti-dumping Measures on Certain Stainless Steel Fasteners and Parts from PRC, Philippines and Taiwan--2017-01-10
EU Council Breaks Deadlock On Anti-Dumping Trade Talks--2016-12-23
EU Launches New Trade Remedy Investigations into Chinese Steel--2016-12-16
China urges Argentina to abide by WTO anti-dumping rules--2016-12-15
Argentina Launches Provisional Lowest Imported Prices Anti-dumping Measures on Spring Washers from China--2016-12-15
WTO Rules Boeing Received Illegal Tax Subsidy--2016-12-05

Vote for this news?

fastener(Very Good)
fastener(Good)
fastener(Normal)
fastener(Bad)
fastener(Very Bad)


Discuss
More Discuss...
Your Name: Anonymous

Enter the code shown:fastener1fastener