U.S. International Trade Commission Announces Investigation Examining Global Competitive Conditions Affecting the U.S. Aluminum Industry

Apr 8, 2016

Reading Time : 2 min

Scope and Timing of the ITC’s Investigation

The ITC’s investigation will cover all major foreign producers of aluminum, with a particular focus on countries with substantial and growing production capacity, such as China, Russia, Canada and certain countries in the Middle East. China’s production alone, according to a letter from the Congressional Aluminum Caucus urging initiation of the ITC’s investigation, increased from 10-50 percent of global supply over the last 10 years.

The ITC’s investigation will cover primary, secondary and semifinished aluminum products. The investigation will focus on the time period between 2011 and 2015, but will also examine capacity, production, trade and other trends since 2001.

The investigation, launched pursuant to the ITC’s fact-finding authority under Section 332(g) of the Tariff Act of 1930, will include at least the following areas of inquiry specified in the request of the Committee:

  • production, production capacity, supply chains and exports of the U.S. and foreign aluminum industries
  • trends in the global market for aluminum
  • competitive strengths and weaknesses of U.S. and foreign aluminum production, including exchange rates, input costs and government policies, that directly or indirectly affect production and exportation
  • factors driving the recent significant increase in production capacity in certain countries, including the impact of foreign government policies and programs
  • impact of foreign government policies and programs on their aluminum production, exports, consumption and domestic prices.

The ITC will hold a public hearing in September 2016. Written submissions from parties should be submitted before February 21, 2017. The ITC expects to issue its final report in June 2017.

Context for, and Potential Implications of, the ITC’s Investigation

Although Section 332 investigations do not result in the imposition of duties or other restraints on trade, they are seen as potential precursors to action under U.S. trade remedy law, such as AD and CVD investigations. Section 332 investigations include findings that may support U.S. producer allegations of unfair trade practices by foreign suppliers to the U.S. market.

The U.S. Department of Commerce, which administers U.S. trade remedy law, already has AD/CVD orders in place on certain extruded aluminum products from China. U.S. producers have alleged significant circumvention of the AD/CVD orders by Chinese suppliers to the U.S. market.

In addition to mounting concerns about growing Chinese capacity and production, the Aluminum Association — a group of U.S. and Canadian aluminum producers — has alleged that aluminum production in China is significantly more carbon-intensive than in North America and inconsistent with China’s commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The ITC’s notice of initiation does not expressly address the environmental factors associated with aluminum production, but interested parties are likely to raise them for consideration by the ITC. Parties involved in the aluminum trade should prepare for participation in the investigation and for potential related action by the aluminum industry or U.S. authorities.

Share This Insight

Categories

Previous Entries

Trade Law

July 19, 2024

Views expressed by Alan Yanovich.1

...

Read More

Trade Law

February 9, 2023

With the enactment of the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and the announcement of the European Union (EU) Green Deal Industrial Plan, there is now a full-fledged subsidy war between the United States and the European Union. While these subsidies are meant to encourage green technologies, incentivizing firms to produce locally would seem to be an almost as important policy goal. And it is not limited to the U.S. and the EU. Global Trade Alert recently reported that, in 2022, production subsidies accounted for half of all trade-distorting measures, making it the mostly commonly used harmful trade policy measure.1

...

Read More

Trade Law

2023-01-26

At the end of last year, World Trade Organization (WTO) members agreed that the 13th Ministerial Conference (MC13) of the WTO will take place in Abu Dhabi, the capital of the United Arab Emirates (UAE), in February 2024. There is no doubt that the WTO is facing headwinds and is in need of a vigorous push forward. The UAE’s success in transforming itself into a global trade and digital hub and a leader in services trade could serve to drive a successful outcome at MC13.

...

Read More

Trade Law

2023-01-17

On December 21, 2022, the appeal arbitrators in the Colombia – Frozen Fries (DS591) World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute circulated their award (the “Award”). This was the second appeal conducted under Article 25 of the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) and the first appeal under the Multi-Party Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement (MPIA), a framework created by a group of WTO members to overcome the challenges posed by the non-operational Appellate Body.

...

Read More

Trade Law

2022-02-10

The United Kingdom just issued a new statutory instrument, effective immediately, which extends the authority to designate persons and entities under the U.K. sanctions against Russia.

...

Read More

Trade Law

2022-01-24

Washington, D.C. partner Kevin Wolf, London partner Jasper Helder and Emily Kilcrease with the Center for New American Security submitted a detailed comment to U.S. and EU export control authorities to help guide and inform efforts to rationalize U.S. and EU export controls.  It can also be a useful resource for anyone interested in the topic and wanting to understand the history and context to current export control policy issues. They note that the US-EU Joint Statement on the role and purpose of export controls “is far more significant than generally recognized because it is the first time the EU (represented by the EC) or any other US ally has stated so explicitly and publicly since the end of the Cold War an agreement with the US that export controls should be used to achieve country-specific and other policy objectives not directly related to weapons of mass destruction or conventional military items.”

...

Read More

Trade Law

2020-06-10

We are pleased to share a recording of Akin Gump’s webinar, “Protecting the Crown Jewels - New U.K. National Security Rules for Foreign Investment in a Post-COVID-19, Post-Brexit World.

...

Read More

© 2024 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.