Commerce Department Finalizes Antidumping Duty Review of R-134a from China
Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes
The United States Department of Commerce (Commerce) has finalized its review for the antidumping duty administrative review of 1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane (R-134a) imported from the People’s Republic of China. This is based on the sales between April 1, 2023, and March 31, 2024.
R-134a, a coolant used in air conditioning, was sold in the U.S. at less than normal value. This decision was announced on April 2, 2026.
Commerce conducted this review under Section 751(a)(1)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930. They used detailed information to determine if R-134a was dumped, meaning sold below market value.
For the final review results, Commerce identified several Chinese companies involved with the product. These companies include Zhejiang Sanmei Chemical Industry Co. Ltd., Jiangsu Sanmei Chemical Industry Co., Ltd., and Fujian Qingliu Dongying Chemical Industry Co. Ltd. These firms were treated as a single entity, referred to as Sanmei.
This review concluded that the dumping margin for these companies is 173.90 percent. This margin indicates how much cheaper the imported product was sold than its regular market value.
Changes were made from preliminary results, impacting margin calculations for Sanmei. Commerce analyzed case comments to ensure accuracy and make necessary adjustments.
For companies not reviewed in this period, the rate remains 167.02 percent, unchanged from previous reviews. This rate covers companies not explicitly named but included under the China-wide entity.
Importers of R-134a must follow specific procedures. If their sales lead to zero or de minimis (too small for legal concern) margins, they will not face antidumping duties. Commerce will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) about these rates, ensuring correct duty applications.
The cash deposit requirements are effective immediately for all R-134a shipments. These requirements help enforce the dumping margin rates.
Commerce urges importers to submit a certificate regarding any duty reimbursements. Failure to comply could mean paying double antidumping duties.
This case continues to serve as a cautionary tale for international trade, emphasizing the importance of compliance with U.S. trade laws.
Legal Disclaimer
This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
