2 more Chinese OTR tire mfrs. file suit

WASHINGTON (May 6, 2016) — Two more Chinese OTR tire makers — Trelleborg Wheel Systems (Xingtai) Co. Ltd. and Xuzhou Xugong Tyres Co. Ltd. — have filed complaints with the U.S. Court of International Trade, taking issue with the U.S. Department of Commerce's antidumping rate calculations after a routine administrative review.

The new complaints are in addition to actions filed earlier this week by Qingdao Qihang Tyre Co. Ltd. and Qingdao Free Trade Zone Full-World International Trading Co. Ltd.

In all, there are six Chinese OTR tire makers that were subject to the review. The other two, Tianjin Leviathan and Weihai Zhongwei, have as yet not filed complaints but have 30 days from April 20 to do so.

Trelleborg Wheel Systems (Xingtai) filed its complaint with the trade court May 2, while Xuzhou Xugong Tyres Co. followed on May 5.

All four complaints concern the results of Commerce's review of antidumping duties for Chinese OTR tires between Sept. 1, 2013 and Aug. 31, 2014. Published in the April 20 Federal Register, this was a routine five-year review as mandated by the Trade Act of 1930.

In that review, Trelleborg was assigned an antidumping duty rate of 70.55 percent, as were three other companies — Full-World, Tianjin Leviathan International Trade Co. Ltd. and Weihai Zhongwei Rubber Co. Ltd.

Qingdao Qihang was assessed a rate of 79.86 percent, and Xuzhou Xugong a rate of 65.33 percent.

Xuzhou Xugong sells under the Armour brand name. Trelleborg Wheel Systems (Xingtai) is a subsidiary of Trelleborg Wheel Systems S.p.A., a unit of Sweden's Trelleborg A.B.

All four complaints challenge the agency's methods of calculating the antidumping duties against the importers, albeit on different points. All four importers ask the trade court to remand the duties to Commerce for recalculation, as well as for whatever other relief the court deems appropriate.

According to Xugong, Commerce ignored the company's case brief requesting that Peru be selected as the primary surrogate country used for constructing normal value. Commerce chose Thailand instead.

Xugong also said Commerce miscalculated the distance from Bangkok to the nearest seaport, as well as the value of Thai reclaimed rubber, both important figures in calculating antidumping duties.

Trelleborg claimed that Commerce refused the company's request to be both a mandatory and a voluntary respondent to the agency's queries in the antidumping review. The agency also erred in using the data from the two mandatory respondents — Qingdao Qihang and Xuzhou Xugong — to calculate Trelleborg's duties, the company said.

As of May 6, all the complainants except Xuzhou Xugong had won a preliminary injunction against Commerce from the trade court.