Barcode : 4326250-02 A-533-889 REV - Admin Review 12 / 13 / 19 - 5 / 31 / 21
�
� submissions even though there is no dispute that such data was complete , timely filed , verifiable and provided to the best of the respondent ’ s ability . As such , this information should have been used for the purposes of calculating a margin for Antique Group , as established by section 782 ( e ) of the Act . The petition rate used by Commerce has no basis in reality , with record information indicating that the rate is unreasonable . In addition , Commerce has not placed the basis for the petition rate that was used on the record , depriving parties of an opportunity to directly comment on that information . As the CAFC detailed in De Cecco , an AFA rate is punitive where it is unjustifiably high and uncorroborated by the administrative record . 173 In this case , the preliminary AFA rate is not reflective of Antique Group ’ s behavior , with the rate many times higher than the original investigation rate .
� Evidence indicates that market conditions have not changed since the investigation . Specifically , non-selected companies would not have requested reviews , had they anticipated higher margins , and PESL preliminarily received a lower rate than it obtained in the investigation .
�
�
�
Commerce is obligated under section 776 ( c ) of the Act to corroborate any selected AFA rates from reasonably available independent sources . Additionally , Gallant Ocean established that Commerce must corroborate the petition rate to ensure that it is not selected when it is unreasonable . 174 Commerce erred in relying on PESL ’ s transaction-specific margins to corroborate the AFA rate because , as PESL had a preliminary rate of zero , any margins high enough to corroborate 323.12 percent are necessarily aberrational . If they were representative of PESL ’ s operations , PESL would not have a zero margin . Antidumping measures are intended to ensure fair competition , not provide a domestic industry with a competitive advantage . While dumping enforcement should be rigorously enforced , it must be based on economic reality rather than reliance on inflated duties that harm foreign producers and U . S . importers and consumers .
GlobalFair ’ s Case Brief 175
� Section 776 ( c )( 2 ) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.308 ( d ) require that Commerce corroborate secondary information used in determining an AFA rate and , as part of this , Commerce will examine whether the secondary information has probative value . This is to ensure that Commerce does not rely on an unreasonably high AFA rate that is not representative of dumping rates . 176
� In this instance , the petition rate used as the AFA rate is based on different products and processes from those used by manufacturers in India , thus resulting in an analysis lacking probative value .
� Reliance on the petition rate , which is significantly higher than the dumping margins calculated in the original investigation , results in inflated margins that translate into significant duties for importers .
173
Id . at 18 ( citing De Cecco , 216 F . 3d at 1032 ).
174
Id . at 20 ( citing Gallant Ocean ).
175
See GlobalFair ’ s Case Brief at 2-7 .
176
Id . at 8 ( citing Gallant Ocean ).
38 Filed By : David Lindgren , Filed Date : 1 / 3 / 23 1:27 PM , Submission Status : Approved