Overview
Title
Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts From Thailand: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2018-2019
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The government checked and found that two companies from Thailand were selling a kind of sour powder, called citric acid, to the U.S. for less money than usual, so they have to pay extra fees. But another company did everything right and doesn’t have to pay extra money.
Summary AI
The Department of Commerce has determined that two Thai companies, COFCO Biochemical and Niran, sold citric acid and citrate salts in the U.S. at prices below normal value during the specified review period, leading to antidumping duties being assessed on these sales. However, they found that Sunshine Biotech did not sell these products below normal value. The final results of this review mean that these antidumping duties will be applied to affected entries, and specific cash deposit rates are now being implemented for future imports from these firms, except when the margins are minimal. The notice also reminds importers of their responsibilities regarding antidumping duties and the handling of proprietary information.
Abstract
The Department of Commerce (Commerce) finds that sales of citric acid and certain citrate salts (citric acid) from Thailand were made by COFCO Biochemical (Thailand) Co., Ltd. (COFCO) and Niran (Thailand) Co., Ltd. (Niran) at less than normal value (NV) during the period of review (POR) January 8, 2018, through June 30, 2019. We also find that Sunshine Biotech International Co., Ltd. (Sunshine) did not sell citric acid at less than NV during the POR.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document issued by the Department of Commerce provides the final results of an antidumping duty administrative review concerning citric acid and certain citrate salts imported from Thailand. Specifically, it finds that two Thai companies, COFCO Biochemical and Niran, sold these products in the United States at less than their normal value. As a result, antidumping duties will be assessed on their entries for the review period from January 8, 2018, through June 30, 2019. Meanwhile, Sunshine Biotech International was found not to have sold these products below normal value during the same period.
General Summary
The document outlines findings from a review that involved examining the sales practices of specific Thai companies. Two companies were found to have engaged in unfair pricing strategies—selling goods at prices lower than what they normally would in their own markets—which is considered dumping. As a result, the U.S. is imposing additional duties on these companies' imports to level the playing field for domestic manufacturers.
Significant Issues or Concerns
Several issues arise from the document's technical nature:
Technical Language: Terms like "weighted-average dumping margins," "ad valorem," and "de minimis" are used without clear definitions, which may confuse readers unfamiliar with trade law.
Complex Legal References: The document references specific legal provisions and sections of the Tariff Act of 1930 without adequately explaining them. This requires readers to have prior legal knowledge or to seek out these documents separately.
Footnotes: Important information is distributed across multiple footnotes, making it difficult for a reader to follow the document without interruption.
Complexity in Procedures: The explanation of how antidumping duties are calculated is intricate and could benefit from simplification or illustrative examples.
Impact on the Public
The general public may not feel an immediate impact from these results, as this type of regulatory action is most relevant to businesses directly involved in the import and export of these goods. However, such measures can ultimately affect product prices and availability, as importers adjust to any new economic constraints placed upon them by the government.
Impact on Stakeholders
Importers and Exporters: Thai exporters, particularly COFCO and Niran, will be directly impacted by the imposition of antidumping duties. U.S. importers of their products may face increased costs, which could lead to higher prices for end consumers or adjustments in sourcing strategies.
U.S. Manufacturers: Domestic citric acid producers may benefit from these measures as they could enhance market competition by curbing aggressive pricing strategies by foreign entities.
Legal and Compliance Teams: Companies involved in international trade will need to navigate these duties carefully and ensure compliance with evolving regulations, impacting how businesses plan their operations and logistics.
In summary, while the document represents a regulatory action focused on ensuring fair trade practices, it uses complex language that could hinder understanding for non-specialists. The findings enforce changes that can influence costs and trading behaviors within the involved sectors, emphasizing the ongoing dynamics of international trade and regulatory oversight.
Issues
• The document uses technical terms such as 'weighted-average dumping margins', 'ad valorem', and 'de minimis' without clear definitions or explanations, which could be difficult for general readers to understand.
• The document references specific sections of laws (e.g., section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930) without providing context or summaries of those sections, which may hinder understanding for those unfamiliar with these laws.
• The document includes multiple footnotes that require readers to look elsewhere for additional information, which may disrupt the reading flow and comprehension.
• The document specifies complex procedures for assessment rates and cash deposit requirements that could be made clearer with examples or additional context.
• The reference to specific tariff codes (HTSUS) might not be helpful for readers without expertise in customs or international trade, and could benefit from additional explanation.
• The process for calculating the antidumping duty assessment rates is described in a complex manner that may be difficult for non-experts to follow.