For your information, the U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) has announced that it is reinstating the antidumping duty orders on ball bearings from Japan and the United Kingdom (UK). These orders had been in effect since 1989. The revocation of these antidumping duty orders, and the recent DOC announcement that the orders with respect to Japan and the UK are reinstated, followed several years of litigation regarding the “sunset review” injury determination in 2006 by the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC).
As a result of the reinstatement of the antidumping duty orders, the DOC will instruct CBP to resume collection of cash deposits on ball bearings from Japan and the UK. The DOC will also resume its administrative reviews of these antidumping duty orders for the following time periods: (1) May 1, 2009 through April 30, 2010; and (2) May 1, 2010 through April 30, 2011. The DOC will also provide an opportunity for U.S. producers, Japanese/British producers, and/or U.S. importers to request administrative reviews of entries entered during the following periods: (1) May 1, 2011 through April 30, 2012; and (2) May 1, 2012 through April 30, 2013. It is unclear, however, whether DOC will instruct CBP to collect cash deposits on Japanese and British bearings entered since July 16, 2011, which was the date that CBP had discontinued cash deposit requirements while the revocation was in effect.
What does this all mean to importers? It means that your liability from May 1, 2009 going forward is not set. Instead, if administrative reviews are requested, your liability will be based on the final margins calculated by DOC in the administrative reviews.
Finally, please note that the DOC and ITC also are expected to initiate new five-year sunset reviews on January 2, 2014. In particular, the ITC will have to examine anew import trends and the economic health of the U.S. industry over the past five years to determine again, based on the updated data, whether revocation of the antidumping duty orders on ball bearings from Japan and the UK would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to the U.S. industry.