Archer Daniels Midland Co. v. United States
35 I.T.R.D. (BNA) 1543
Ct. Intl. Trade2013Background
- Citric acid countervailing duty order from PRC for period ending 2009 reviewed by Commerce.
- Three subsidies at issue: steam coal LTAR, sulfuric acid LTAR, and government loans to RZBC entities.
- Commerce issued Preliminary Results finding countervailability due to data gaps and treated producers as authorities via AFA.
- Final Results changed sulfuric acid benchmark approach and de facto/ de jure specificity; steam coal specificity deferred for future review.
- RZBC challenged AFA application, benchmark choice, and creditworthiness determinations; court remands for clearer explanation and grade-specific sulfuric acid benchmark analysis.
- Commerce remanded to address steam coal countervailability and grade variations in sulfuric acid benchmark; remand due by July 29, 2013; parties may file comments.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Steam coal countervailability deferral legality | Petitioners argue deferral under 19 CFR 351.311(a)(2) inappropriate here. | Commerce deferred per its interpretation to future review and final determination. | Remand to clarify Commerce’s steam coal conclusion. |
| AFA application to RZBC sulfuric acid authorities | RZBC contends AFA wrongly applied to identify authorities based on GOC failure to cooperate. | AFA warranted due to GOC information gaps; authorities identified. | upheld AFA but remand to ensure proper ownership analysis. |
| Tier-one vs tier-two benchmark for LTAR sulfuric acid | RZBC argues tier-one prices should be used; world market prices should reflect comparability. | Tier-two used where tier-one unreliable due to market distortion; data supported by CVD Preamble. | sustain tier-two use; remand to address comparability of grades. |
| Creditworthiness determinations for 2006–2009 loans | RZBC challenges inclusion of government loans and late audit data; data not available at loan time. | Commerce properly weighed post-loan financial data and contemporaneous indicators. | sustain creditworthiness findings; remand on specific evidence handling. |
| Treatment of RZBC Juxian as a new company and use of affiliate data | RZBC contends new-company treatment was improper; data from affiliates should be given weight. | Commerce may consider affiliate data; flexibility to weigh factors. | Commerce acted within discretion; sustained. |
Key Cases Cited
- U.S. Steel Corp. v. United States, 621 F.3d 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (substantial evidence standard in administrative reviews)
- Universal Camera Corp. v. NLRB, 340 U.S. 474 (U.S. 1951) (clear or substantial evidence standards in review)
- Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 612 F.3d 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Chevron framework and substantial evidence review context)
- Essar Steel Ltd. v. United States, 678 F.3d 1268 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (agency determinations and benchmark comparability in countervailing duty)
- Royal Thai Gov’t v. United States, 441 F. Supp. 2d 1350 (CIT 2006) (use of tier-two benchmarks when tier-one data unreliable)