SEOUL, Dec. 26 (Korea Bizwire) – Research by the Korea International Trade Association (KITA) has revealed that the first year of Donald Trump’s U.S. presidency has been marked by the highest incidence of new anti-dumping investigations in the last ten years.
A total of 54 new investigations were launched, with six of them targeting South Korean industries, also a 10-year high. There are currently 11 South Korean cases being re-investigated by the U.S. Department of Commerce in its annual review.
Instances of “adverse facts available” invoked have also increased this year compared to in the past, numbering in the single digits up until 2013, but jumping from 23 in 2014 to 40 by the end of November in 2017.
Should a company be found to be noncompliant, the Department of Commerce can use adverse facts available (AFA) and levy punitive tariffs.
Companies for which AFA was not used faced average anti-dumping duties of 20.16 percent, but the duties of AFA-applied companies were on average 108.03 percent.
Increasingly, the Department of Commerce has taken a tougher and less forgiving position, with a quicker trigger on using AFA than in years past.
For example, revisions to errors in submitted documents were previously allowed, but the U.S. government has recently taken these occurrences as grounds for AFA.
Reports of demands for excessive information disclosure from companies, to the point where the scale of such revelations would amount to sharing industry secrets, have led to AFA for companies that have refused.
Shorter or frequently no deadline extensions for document submissions, the use of AFA for companies that exhibit a poor understanding of the basics of the Department of Commerce’s anti-dumping investigation procedure, and the adoption of different procedures for re-investigations during the annual review have been stated by KITA as ways in which the United States has changed its anti-dumping investigation process.
Companies that have been on the receiving end of heavy duties via AFA have the option of either applying for a secondary review or appealing to the WTO or the CIT (U.S. Court of International Trade).
However, KITA has strongly advised companies to be fully prepared and to avoid having to utilize these measures due to the costs suffered in lost earnings and time.
Lina Jang (firstname.lastname@example.org)