|
|---|
|
Certain Passenger Vehicles and Light Truck Tires From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Results of Antidumping Administrative Review; Notice of Amended Final Results Publication: Federal Register Agency: International Trade Administration Byline: Lisa W. Wang Date: 3 June 2022 Subjects: American Government  , Tires
|
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 107 (Friday, June 3, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33717-33720]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-11939]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-016]
Certain Passenger Vehicles and Light Truck Tires From the
People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony
With the Results of Antidumping Administrative Review; Notice of
Amended Final Results
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On May 19, 2022, the U.S. Court of International Trade (the
Court) issued its final judgment in Qingdao Sentury Tire Co., Ltd., et
al. v. United States, Consol. Court No. 18-00079, sustaining the U.S.
Department of Commerce's (Commerce) third remand results pertaining to
the administrative review of the antidumping duty (AD) order on certain
passenger vehicles and light truck tires (passenger tires) from the
People's Republic of China (China), covering the period January 27,
2015, through July 31, 2016. Commerce is notifying the public that the
Court'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 dumping margin assigned to Qingdao Sentury
Tire Co., Ltd. and certain separate rate respondents. In addition,
Commerce is amending the final results for Pirelli Tyre Co., Ltd.
(Pirelli Tyre Co.) for a portion of the period of review (POR) (i.e.,
January 27, 2015, through October 19, 2015).
DATES: Applicable May 29, 2022.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles DeFilippo, AD/CVD Operations,
Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3979.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On March 16, 2018, Commerce published its Final Results in the
2015-2016 AD administrative review of passenger tires from China. In
the Final Results, Commerce determined that Pirelli Tyre Co. did not
qualify for a separate rate because it failed to rebut the presumption
of de facto or de jure Chinese government control of its operations
during the POR.\1\ In addition, Commerce also denied Pirelli Tyre Co. a
separate rate for the portion of the administrative review before China
National Chemical Corporation (Chem China) acquired majority indirect
ownership in the company, January 2015 to October 2015.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the
People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and Final Determination of No Shipments; 2015-
2016, 83 FR 11690 (March 16, 2018) (Final Results), and accompanying
Issues and Decision Memorandum (IDM).
\2\ Id. at 28.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pirelli \3\ appealed Commerce's Final Results. On November 27,
2019, the Court remanded the Final Results to Commerce for a more
fulsome discussion of the criteria for de jure and de facto government
control regarding Commerce's finding that Pirelli does not qualify for
a separate rate, stating that Commerce failed to
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Pirelli Tyre Co., Pirelli Tyre LLC. and Pirelli Tyre S.p.A.
(collectively ``Pirelli'').
adequately explain how the acquisition of Pirelli S.p.A. by Chem
China in Italy altered the ownership of Pirelli entities in China
such that the rebuttable presumption of government ownership applies
or that if the presumption applies, that evidence on the record was
not sufficient to rebut the presumption.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Shandong Yongtai Grp. Co., Ltd. v. United States, 415 F.
Supp. 3d 1303, 1317 (CIT 2019).
In the Passenger Tires First Remand Redetermination issued in March
2020, Commerce continued to find that Pirelli Tyre Co. failed to rebut
the presumption of de facto Chinese-government control during the
POR.\5\ On December 21, 2020, the Court sustained Commerce's finding on
remand that Pirelli Tyre Co. failed to rebut the presumption of
government control and Commerce's assignment of the China-wide entity
rate to Pirelli Tyre Co. for the period October 20, 2015, through July
31, 2016. However, the Court remanded Commerce's irrecoverable value-
added tax (VAT) determination, ordering Commerce to recalculate Qingdao
Sentury's \6\ export price without any adjustment for its irrecoverable
VAT.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court
Remand, Shandong Yongtai Group Co., Ltd. et al. v. United States,
Court No. 18-00077, Slip Op. 19-150, dated November 27, 2019
(Passenger Tires First Remand Redetermination).
\6\ Qingdao Sentury Tire Co., Ltd.; Sentury Tire USA Inc., and
Sentury (Hong Kong) Trading Co., Limited (collectively, Qingdao
Sentury).
\7\ See Shandong Yongtai Group Co., Ltd. v. United States, 487
F. Supp. 3d 1335, 1346, 1348 (CIT 2020). The Court also sustained
Commerce's successor-in-interest determination regarding Shandong
Yongtai Group Co., Ltd., formerly known as Shandong Yongtai Chemical
Co., Ltd. Id., 487 F. Supp. 3d at 1348. The Court then severed the
consolidated cases in Shandong Yongtai Grp. Co. v. United States,
493 F. Supp. 3d. 1342 (CIT 2021), entering a final judgment for
Shandong Yongtai Grp. Co. v. United States and ordering that all
further proceedings occur under Qingdao Sentury Co., Ltd. v. United
States, Court No. 18-79. Commerce issued amended final results with
respect to the antidumping duty margin assigned to Shandong Yongtai
Chemical Co., Ltd. and its successor-in-interest Shandong Yongtai
Group Co., Ltd. and ordered liquidation of those entries. See
Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the People's
Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony with the
Results of Antidumping Administrative Review; Notice of Amended
Final Results, 86 FR 20659 (April 21, 2021); CBP Message 1127401,
dated May 7, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the Passenger Tires Second Remand Redetermination issued on
March 1, 2021, Commerce removed the downward adjustment to Qingdao
Sentury's export price accounting for its irrecoverable VAT from our
final calculations, and accordingly, revised the weighted-average
dumping margin for Qingdao Sentury as well as for certain separate rate
respondents.\8\ The
[[Page 33718]]
Court sustained Commerce's recalculation of the weighted-average
dumping margin for Qingdao Sentury and certain separate rate
respondents, but remanded the issue of whether Pirelli Tyre Co. was
eligible for separate rate status for the period prior to Chem China's
acquisition, January 27, 2015, through October 19, 2015.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court
Order, Pirelli Tyre Co., Ltd., Pirelli Tyre S.p.A., and Pirelli Tire
LLC v. United States, Court No. 18-00079, Slip Op. 20-182, dated
December 21, 2020 (Passenger Tires Second Remand Redetermination).
\9\ See Qingdao Sentury Tire Co., Ltd. v. United States, 539 F.
Supp. 3d 1278, 1285 (CIT 2021). (Passenger Tires Third Remand
Order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the Passenger Tires Third Remand Redetermination, issued on
December 3, 2021, Commerce found that Pirelli Tyre Co. rebutted the
presumption of de jure and de facto Chinese government control, and as
a result, found that Pirelli Tyre Co. is eligible for a separate rate
during the period January 27, 2015, through October 19, 2015.\10\ On
May 19, 2022, the Court sustained Commerce's final redetermination.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court
Order, Pirelli Tire LLC v. United States, Court No. 18-00079, Slip
Op. 21-128, dated December 3, 2021 (Passenger Tires Third Remand
Redetermination).
\11\ See Qingdao Sentury Tire Co., Ltd. v. United States, Court
No. 18-00079, Slip Op. 22-48, dated May 19, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,\12\ as clarified by Diamond
Sawblades,\13\ 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 Court's May 19, 2022, judgment constitutes a final decision of the
Court that is not in harmony with Commerce's Final Results. Thus, this
notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of
Timken.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir.
1990) (Timken).
\13\ 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 Qingdao Sentury Tire Co., Ltd.,
certain separate rate companies, and Pirelli Tyre Co., Ltd. as follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second final
Final results: remand:
weighted- weighted-
Producer/exporter average dumping average dumping
margin margin
(percent) (percent)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Qingdao Sentury Tire Co., Ltd./Sentury Tire USA Inc./Sentury (Hong Kong) 4.41 \14\ 1.27
Trading Co., Limited.........................................................
Actyon Tyre Resources Co., Limited............................................ 2.96 1.45
Shandong Anchi Tyres Co., Ltd................................................. 2.96 1.45
Briway Tire Co., Ltd.......................................................... 2.96 1.45
Shandong Changfeng Tyres Co., Ltd............................................. 2.96 1.45
Qingdao Crown Chemical Co., Ltd............................................... 2.96 1.45
Crown International Corporation............................................... 2.96 1.45
Qingzhou Detai International Trading Co., Ltd................................. 2.96 1.45
Shandong Duratti Rubber Corporation Co. Ltd................................... 2.96 1.45
Shouguang Firemax Tyre Co., Ltd............................................... 2.96 1.45
Fleming Limited............................................................... 2.96 1.45
Qingdao Fullrun Tyre Corp., Ltd............................................... 2.96 1.45
Qingdao Fullrun Tyre Tech Corp., Ltd.......................................... 2.96 1.45
Guangrao Taihua International Trade Co., Ltd.................................. 2.96 1.45
Shandong Guofeng Rubber Plastics Co., Ltd..................................... 2.96 1.45
Hankook Tire China Co., Ltd................................................... 2.96 1.45
Haohua Orient International Trade Ltd......................................... 2.96 1.45
Shandong Hengyu Science & Technology Co., Ltd................................. 2.96 1.45
Hongkong Tiancheng Investment & Trading Co., Limited.......................... 2.96 1.45
Hongtyre Group Co............................................................. 2.96 1.45
Jiangsu Hankook Tire Co., Ltd................................................. 2.96 1.45
Jinyu International Holding Co., Limited...................................... 2.96 1.45
Qingdao Jinhaoyang International Co., Ltd..................................... 2.96 1.45
Jilin Jixing Tire Co., Ltd.................................................... 2.96 1.45
Kenda Rubber (China) Co., Ltd................................................. 2.96 1.45
Qingdao Keter International Co., Limited...................................... 2.96 1.45
Koryo International Industrial Limited........................................ 2.96 1.45
Kumho Tire Co., Inc........................................................... 2.96 1.45
Qingdao Lakesea Tyre Co., Ltd................................................. 2.96 1.45
Liaoning Permanent Tyre Co., Ltd.............................................. 2.96 1.45
Shandong Longyue Rubber Co., Ltd.............................................. 2.96 1.45
Macho Tire Corporation Limited................................................ 2.96 1.45
Maxon Int'l Co., Limited...................................................... 2.96 1.45
Mayrun Tyre (Hong Kong) Limited............................................... 2.96 1.45
Qingdao Nama Industrial Co., Ltd.............................................. 2.96 1.45
Nankang (Zhangjiagang Free Trade Zone) Rubber Industrial Co., Ltd............. 2.96 1.45
Shandong New Continent Tire Co., Ltd.......................................... 2.96 1.45
Qingdao Odyking Tyre Co., Ltd................................................. 2.96 1.45
Prinx Chengshan (Shandong) Tire Co., Ltd...................................... 2.96 1.45
Riversun Industry Limited..................................................... 2.96 1.45
Roadclaw Tyre (Hong Kong) Limited............................................. 2.96 1.45
Safe & Well (HK) International Trading Limited................................ 2.96 1.45
[[Page 33719]]
Sailun Jinyu Group Co., Ltd. \15\............................................. 2.96 1.45
Sailun Jinyu Group (Hong Kong) Co., Limited \16\.............................. 2.96 1.45
Shandong Jinyu Industrial Co., Ltd. \17\...................................... 2.96 1.45
Sailun Tire International Corp................................................ 2.96 1.45
Seatex International Inc...................................................... 2.96 1.45
Dynamic Tire Corp............................................................. 2.96 1.45
Husky Tire Corp............................................................... 2.96 1.45
Shandong Province Sanli Tire Manufactured Co., Ltd............................ 2.96 1.45
Shandong Linglong Tyre Co., Ltd............................................... 2.96 1.45
Shandong Yonking Rubber Co., Ltd.............................................. 2.96 1.45
Shandong Shuangwang Rubber Co., Ltd........................................... 2.96 1.45
Shengtai Group Co., Ltd....................................................... 2.96 1.45
Techking Tires Limited........................................................ 2.96 1.45
Triangle Tyre Co., Ltd........................................................ 2.96 1.45
Tyrechamp Group Co., Limited.................................................. 2.96 1.45
Shandong Wanda Boto Tyre Co., Ltd............................................. 2.96 1.45
Windforce Tyre Co., Limited................................................... 2.96 1.45
Winrun Tyre Co., Ltd.......................................................... 2.96 1.45
Weihai Zhongwei Rubber Co., Ltd............................................... 2.96 1.45
Shandong Zhongyi Rubber Co., Ltd.............................................. 2.96 1.45
Zhaoqing Junhong Co., Ltd..................................................... 2.96 1.45
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See Memorandum, ``Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
to Second Remand of Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires
from the People's Republic of China: Amended Analysis Memorandum for
Qingdao Sentury Tire Co., Ltd.,'' dated February 26, 2021.
\15\ Sailun Group Co., Ltd. is the successor-in-interest to
Sailun Jinyu Group Co. Ltd. for purposes of antidumping duty cash
deposits and liabilities. See Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light
Truck Tires from the People's Republic of China: Final Results of
Changed Circumstances Reviews, 85 FR 14638 (March 13, 2020) (Sailun
Changed Circumstances Final Results).
\16\ Sailun Group (Hong Kong) Co., Limited is the successor-in-
interest to Sailun Jinyu Group (Hong Kong) Co., Limited for purposes
of antidumping duty cash deposits and liabilities. See Sailun
Changed Circumstances Final Results.
\17\ Sailun (Dongying) Tire Co., Ltd. is the successor-in-
interest to Shangong Jinyu Industrial Co., Ltd. for purposes of
antidumping duty cash deposits and liabilities. See Sailun Changed
Circumstances Final Results.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Third final
remand: weighted-
average dumping
Final results: margin (percent)
Producer/exporter weighted-average (applicable to
dumping margin the period
(percent) January 27, 2015
through October
19, 2015)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pirelli Tyre Co., Ltd....................................................... 76.46 1.45 \18\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 33720]]
Cash Deposit Requirements
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See Memorandum ``Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
to Second Remand of Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires
from the People's Republic of China: Amended Final Calculation
Memorandum for Separate Rate Coompanies,'' dated February 26, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because (1) Qingdao Sentury Tire Co., Ltd./Sentury Tire USA Inc./
Sentury (Hong Kong) Trading Co., Limited; \19\ (2) Shandong Anchi Tyres
Co., Ltd.; \20\ (3) Crown International Corporation; \21\ (4) Shandong
Duratti Rubber Corporation Co. Ltd.; \22\ (5) Shouguang Firemax Tyre
Co., Ltd.; \23\ (6) Qingdao Fullrun Tyre Corp., Ltd.; \24\ (7) Qingdao
Fullrun Tyre Tech Corp., Ltd.; \25\ (8) Hankook Tire China Co., Ltd.;
\26\ (9) Shandong Hengyu Science & Technology Co., Ltd.; \27\ (10)
Hongkong Tiancheng Investment & Trading Co., Limited; \28\ (11) Jiangsu
Hankook Tire Co., Ltd.; \29\ (12) Kenda Rubber (China) Co., Ltd.; \30\
(13) Shandong Longyue Rubber Co., Ltd.; \31\ (14) Mayrun Tyre (Hong
Kong) Limited; \32\ (15) Shandong New Continent Tire Co., Ltd.; \33\
(16) Qingdao Odyking Tyre Co., Ltd.; \34\ (17) Shandong Province Sanli
Tire Manufactured Co., Ltd.; \35\ (18) Shandong Linglong Tyre Co.,
Ltd.; \36\ (19) Shandong Shuangwang Rubber Co., Ltd.; \37\ (20)
Shandong Wanda Boto Tyre Co., Ltd.; \38\ (21) Winrun Tyre Co., Ltd.;
\39\ (22) Zhaoqing Junhong Co., Ltd.; \40\ and (23) Pirelli Tyre Co.,
Ltd.\41\ each have a superseding cash deposit rate, i.e., each company
has been assigned a cash deposit rate in the published final results of
a subsequent administrative review, we will not issue revised cash
deposit instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). This
notice will not affect the current cash deposit rate for those
exporters/producers. For all producers/exporters that do not have a
superseding cash deposit rate, Commerce will issue revised cash deposit
instructions to CBP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from
the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and Final Determination of No Shipments; 2016-
2017, 84 FR 17781 (April 26, 2019) (2016-2017 Final Results).
\20\ See Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from
the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2017-2018, 85 FR 22396 (April 22, 2020)
(2017-2018 Final Results).
\21\ Id.
\22\ Id.
\23\ See 2016-2017 Final Results.
\24\ See 2017-2018 Final Results.
\25\ See 2016-2017 Final Results.
\26\ See 2017-2018 Final Results.
\27\ Id.
\28\ See 2016-2017 Final Results.
\29\ See 2017-2018 Final Results.
\30\ Id.
\31\ Id.
\32\ Id.
\33\ Id.
\34\ Id.
\35\ Id.
\36\ See 2016-2017 Final Results.
\37\ Id.
\38\ Id.
\39\ See 2017-2018 Final Results.
\40\ Id.
\41\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Liquidation of Suspended Entries
At this time, Commerce remains enjoined by Court order from
liquidating entries that: Were exported by Qingdao Sentury Tire Co.,
Ltd. or Pirelli Tyre Co., Ltd., and were entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption during the period January 27, 2015, through
July 31, 2016. These entries will remain enjoined pursuant to the terms
of the injunction during the pendency of any appeals process.
In the event the Court's ruling is not appealed, or, if appealed,
upheld by a final and conclusive court decision, in accordance with 19
CFR 351.212(b), Commerce intends to instruct CBP to assess antidumping
duties on unliquidated entries of subject merchandise exported by: (1)
Qingdao Sentury Tire Co., Ltd. at the rate noted above; and (2) Pirelli
Tyre Co., Ltd. at 1.45 percent for the period January 27, 2015, through
October 19, 2015 and at 76.46 percent for the period October 20, 2015,
through July 31, 2016.
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: May 27, 2022.
Lisa W. Wang,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2022-11939 Filed 6-2-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P