Search Results for keywords:"suspended investigations"

The United States International Trade Commission (USITC) has initiated a review under the Tariff Act of 1930 to decide if ending the suspended investigations on sugar imports from Mexico would cause significant harm to U.S. industries. Interested parties are asked to respond to this notice by April 2, 2025, with comments on response adequacy due by May 14, 2025. The review process will evaluate various factors, including the likely effects on domestic markets and industries, and involves input from U.S. sugar producers, importers, and exporters. The USITC emphasizes the importance of receiving accurate information from relevant parties to make informed decisions.

In accordance with the Tariff Act of 1930, the Department of Commerce is starting its automatic five-year reviews (Sunset Reviews) of certain antidumping and countervailing duty orders and suspended investigations. The International Trade Commission is also publishing a similar notice. These reviews help determine whether the existing duties or investigations should continue or be revoked. Interested parties can participate by following specific procedures detailed by the Department of Commerce, and they must respond within set deadlines.

The Department of Commerce's International Trade Administration is preparing to conduct sunset reviews in February 2025 to assess whether revoking certain trade duties or terminating certain suspended investigations would likely result in continued unfair practices or harm to U.S. industries. These reviews are required by the Tariff Act and happen every five years. The document outlines procedures and deadlines for interested parties wishing to participate, including submitting substantive comments and executive summaries. This notice serves to inform the international trading community and is not mandated by law.

In a recent notice, the U.S. Department of Commerce corrected errors in a previous announcement about Sunset Reviews scheduled for March 2025. Originally, the notice incorrectly named China as the country involved in the antidumping duty order on sugar from Mexico. It also incorrectly listed those orders under "Antidumping Duty Proceedings" and "Countervailing Duty Proceedings" instead of under "Suspended Investigations." The corrected notice clarifies these errors and updates the information accordingly.