FR 2021-01906

The document from the Federal Register details an administrative review conducted by the Department of Commerce focusing on imports of glycine from China during the period from March 1, 2019, to February 29, 2020. This review primarily aimed to determine whether certain Chinese companies shipped glycine to the United States and to apply appropriate antidumping duties.

General Summary

The Department of Commerce concluded that certain companies did not ship glycine to the U.S. during the specified period. Additionally, Avid Organics Private Limited is grouped into what is termed the "China-wide entity," which implies these entities are collectively subject to an antidumping duty rate of 155.89 percent. The document further outlines the administrative procedures for assessing duties and sets forth cash deposit requirements that apply to future shipments.

Significant Issues or Concerns

One prominent issue is the lack of detailed information on how the antidumping duty rate of 155.89 percent applicable to the China-wide entity was calculated. This could lead to ambiguity and perceptions of arbitrariness. The technical language and references to various sections of the Tariff Act and CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) might be difficult for non-specialists to understand and could pose a barrier to fully grasping the implications of the review for general readers.

Furthermore, the document does not clearly explain why Avid Organics Private Limited is included as part of the China-wide entity, an omission that could raise concerns about fairness or bias. Also, there is no detailed guidance on the consequences for importers who fail to file a certificate of reimbursement for antidumping duties, leaving unclear the enforcement measures that might be pursued as a result.

Impact on the Public

For the public, particularly consumers and businesses that depend on imports, this document clarifies the trade policies in place, impacting the cost and availability of Chinese glycine in the U.S. market. It may lead to higher prices due to increased duties, which could influence the market for products that rely on glycine as a raw material.

Impact on Stakeholders

For importers and companies directly involved in this trade, the results of this administrative review—and the associated high antidumping duties—could negatively impact their cost structures and competitive advantage. Companies like Avid Organics, included in the China-wide entity, may need to navigate substantial financial and regulatory challenges due to these duties.

Conversely, domestic producers of glycine and entities advocating for fair trade practices might view this as a positive development. The duties could potentially level the playing field by mitigating price advantages held by foreign companies that may have engaged in dumping.

In conclusion, while ensuring compliance with international trade regulations, the document's complexity and potential implications present both challenges and opportunities to various stakeholders involved in the trade of glycine from China.