New AD/CVD Case Filed Against Van-Type Trailers and Subassemblies Thereof From Canada, Mexico, and China 

A new antidumping and countervailing duty action has been filed against Van-Type Trailers and Subassemblies Thereof From Canada, Mexico, and the People’s Republic of China (China). The allegation is that imports from Canada, Mexico, and China are unfairly subsidized and being dumped.  

Full list of exporters here. 

Full list of importers here 

Background on AD/CVD Investigations 

Antidumping duty (“AD”) and countervailing duty (“CVD”) investigations are brought jointly by the U.S. International Trade Commission (“USITC”) and the U.S. Department of Commerce (“Commerce”). AD investigations are triggered when a domestic industry alleges that it has been injured by competing imports of particular goods from specific countries being sold at less than a fair value. Meanwhile, CVD investigations are triggered when a domestic industry alleges that it has been injured by competing imports that are being unfairly subsidized by their governments. The domestic industry initiating the investigation is known as the petitioner while the foreign industry participating in the investigation is known as the respondent. 

Scope of the Investigation 

The merchandise covered by these investigations is van-type trailers and subassemblies thereof, whether finished or unfinished.  

The products subject to the investigation are currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under the following subheadings: 8716.39.0040, 8716.90.5060, 7308.30.5050, 7308.90.9590, 7326.90.8688, 8708.29.1500, 9708.99.8180, and 8716.90.5010.  

Full scope here.

Next Steps 

The Commerce Department will determine whether to initiate the investigations […]

By |2025-11-24T09:29:38-05:00November 24, 2025|AD/CVD, U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC)|0 Comments

New AD/CVD Case Filed on Chromium Trioxide from India and Turkey 

A new antidumping and countervailing duty action has been filed on Chromium Trioxide from India and Turkey. The allegation is that imports from India and Turkey are unfairly subsidized and are being dumped.   

Full list of exporters here. 

Full list of importers here 

Full list of census data here.  

Background on AD/CVD Investigations 

Antidumping duty (“AD”) and countervailing duty (“CVD”) investigations are brought jointly by the U.S. International Trade Commission (“USITC”) and the U.S. Department of Commerce (“Commerce”). AD investigations are triggered when a domestic industry alleges that it has been injured by competing imports of particular goods from specific countries being sold at less than a fair value. Meanwhile, CVD investigations are triggered when a domestic industry alleges that it has been injured by competing imports that are being unfairly subsidized by their governments. The domestic industry initiating the investigation is known as the petitioner while the foreign industry participating in the investigation is known as the respondent. 

Scope of the Investigation 

The merchandise covered by these investigations is chromium trioxide (Chemical Abstracts Services (“CAS”) registry number 133-82-0), regardless of form (dry or solution).  

The products subject to the investigations are currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under subheading 2819.10.0000.  

Full scope here.   

Next Steps 

The Commerce Department will determine whether to initiate […]

By |2025-09-30T12:45:15-04:00September 30, 2025|AD/CVD, U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC)|0 Comments

New AD/CVD Case Filed on Fresh Mushrooms from Canada 

A new antidumping and countervailing duty action has been filed on fresh mushrooms from Canada. The allegation is that imports from Canada are unfairly subsidized and are being dumped.   

Full list of exporters here. 

Full list of importers here 

Background on AD/CVD Investigations 

 Antidumping duty (“AD”) and countervailing duty (“CVD”) investigations are brought jointly by the U.S. International Trade Commission (“USITC”) and the U.S. Department of Commerce (“Commerce”). AD investigations are triggered when a domestic industry alleges that it has been injured by competing imports of particular goods from specific countries being sold at less than a fair value. Meanwhile, CVD investigations are triggered when a domestic industry alleges that it has been injured by competing imports that are being unfairly subsidized by their governments. The domestic industry initiating the investigation is known as the petitioner while the foreign industry participating in the investigation is known as the respondent. 

Scope of the Investigation 

The merchandise covered by these investigations is fresh mushrooms of the genus Agaricus 

The products subject to the investigations are currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under subheading 0709.51.0100. 

Full scope here.   

Next Steps 

The Commerce Department will determine whether to initiate the investigations within 20 days. The USITC will reach a preliminary determination of material injury or threat of material injury within 45 […]

By |2025-09-17T16:02:12-04:00September 17, 2025|AD/CVD, U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC)|0 Comments

New AD/CVD Case Filed: High Purity Dissolving Pulp from Brazil and Norway

A new antidumping and countervailing duty action has been filed on high purity dissolving pulp from Brazil and Norway. The allegation is that imports from Brazil and Norway are unfairly subsidized and are being dumped.  

Full list of exporters here. 

Full list of importers here  

Background on AD/CVD Investigations  

Antidumping duty (“AD”) and countervailing duty (“CVD”) investigations are brought jointly by the U.S. International Trade Commission (“USITC”) and the U.S. Department of Commerce (“Commerce”). AD investigations are triggered when a domestic industry alleges that it has been injured by competing imports of particular goods from specific countries being sold at less than a fair value. Meanwhile, CVD investigations are triggered when a domestic industry alleges that it has been injured by competing imports that are being unfairly subsidized by their governments. The domestic industry initiating the investigation is known as the petitioner while the foreign industry participating in the investigation is known as the respondent. 

Scope of the Investigation 

The merchandise covered by these investigations is high purity dissolving pulp.  

The products subject to the investigations are currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under subheadings 4702.00.0020 and 4702.00.0040.  

Full scope here.

Next Steps 

The Commerce Department will determine whether to initiate the investigations within 20 days. The USITC will reach a preliminary determination of material injury or threat of material […]

ICYMI: Patio Furniture Company Agrees to Pay $4.9 Million to Resolve Duty Evasion Allegations

On July 24, 2025, the Department of Justice (DoJ) announced that Grosfillex, Inc., a Pennsylvania furniture company, agreed to pay $4.9 million to resolve allegations it evaded antidumping and countervailing duties (AD/CVD).

Grosfillex submitted false forms to Customs and Border Protection (CBP) claiming that furniture parts made of extruded aluminum from China were not subject to AD/CVD. The company attempted to hide the aluminum extrusions by falsely packing them as sham “furniture kits.” Additionally, for a different subset of extrusions, the company failed to correct customs forms it had submitted previously, even after learning that the forms contained false information.

The investigation arose from a whistleblower lawsuit filed under the False Claims Act by a former employee of Grosfillex. Under the False Claims Act, private citizens can sue on behalf of the government and share in any recovery. In this case, the whistleblower will receive $962,662.74.

Duty Evasion is on the Rise

This case is just one example of the growing incentive to cheat that comes with higher tariffs. Whether it’s through misclassifying goods, undervaluing imports, or using deceptive transshipment routes, some companies think they are being creative, but, instead, are participating in outright illegal strategies to reduce their tariff liability.

Higher tariffs have even contributed to the emergence of a cottage industry of “tariff reduction” companies that suggest ways to cut import costs. However, many of these so-called strategies amount to evasion, […]

Go to Top