Shandong Rongxin Import & Export Co. v. United States
2011 Ct. Intl. Trade LEXIS 44
Ct. Intl. Trade2011Background
- This case follows Commerce’s Remand Results addressing the wage rate value used to determine normal value in the PRC pencils antidumping proceeding.
- Shandong challenges only the Remand Results’ wage-rate determination, not other factors of production.
- Dorbest Ltd. invalidated Commerce’s previous regression-based labor valuation, prompting remand to adjust the wage rate under 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(4).
- Commerce determined labor data should be drawn from multiple market-economy countries rather than a single surrogate, citing labor’s unique variability.
- Commerce initially identified 10 candidate countries, narrowed to seven after excluding nonmarket economies, yielding a final simple-average wage rate of $1.07/hour.
- Shandong argues ISIC revision consistency and the broad basket approach, as well as the definition of “significant producer,” are misapplied; the court remands for adjustments consistent with this opinion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| May labor be valued from multiple countries instead of a single surrogate? | Shandong argues for a single-country (India) value per policy. | United States asserts statutory, regulatory, and CAFC support for multi-country labor valuation. | Yes; multiple-country labor valuation is supported and sustained. |
| Was excluding Indian ISIC-Rev.2 data from the basket justified? | Shandong contends Indian data are reliable and should be included. | Defendant argues ISIC revision consistency justifies excluding ISIC-Rev.2 data. | Omitted ISIC-Rev.2 data requires explanation; remand for justification of ISIC consistency over broad basket. |
| Is Commerce's interpretation of ‘significant producer’ proper? | Shandong challenges including any exporter as a significant producer. | Defendant relies on ambiguity and Chevron deference to justify broad interpretation. | Court finds the broad interpretation impermissible; remand to refine a reasonable standard. |
| Should the Remand Results be sustained, remanded, or revised regarding wage data? | Shandong seeks reversal of the wage-rate methodology. | Defendant supports the wage-rate methodology and remand adjustments. | Remanded to Commerce for detailed reconsideration per this Opinion. |
Key Cases Cited
- Dorbest Ltd. v. United States, 604 F.3d 1363 (Fed.Cir. 2010) (invalidated regression-based labor valuation under § 1677b(c)(4))
- Nation Ford Chem. Co. v. United States, 166 F.3d 1373 (Fed.Cir. 1999) (explains surrogate valuation framework for NME cases)
- Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. NRDC, 467 U.S. 837 (U.S. 1984) (establishes deference framework for agency interpretations)