Commerce Determines Dalmine Sold Tubing Below Fair Value Estimated reading time: 5–6 minutes Findings of the Review The United States Department of Commerce has released the final results of its administrative review concerning certain cold-drawn mechanical tubing of carbon and alloy steel from Italy. The review focused on the activities of the company Dalmine S.p.A. during the period extending from June 1, 2024, to May 31, 2025. Commerce found that Dalmine sold the tubing in the United States at prices lower than the normal value. This determination was made under the authority of the Tariff Act of 1930. The findings align with the preliminary results released earlier by Commerce on May 14, 2026. Antidumping Duty Determination Dalmine was assigned a weighted-average dumping margin of 68.95 percent. This margin was calculated using adverse facts available, a measure applied due to lack of necessary information provided by the company. Assessment and Cash Deposits Commerce decided that U.S. Customs and Border Protection will assess antidumping duties according to these final results. A specific rate of 68.95 percent will be applied to all entries of Dalmine’s tubing during the review period. For future shipments, a cash deposit rate equal to the weighted-average dumping margin is required for Dalmine’s merchandise. This rate will take effect upon publication and remain until further notice. Other Producers and Exporters In the absence of specific producer or exporter information for other companies during this review, Commerce will continue using rates from previously completed reviews. These include a default “all-others” rate set at 47.87 percent ad valorem. Compliance and Notices Importers must file a certificate concerning the reimbursement of duties prior to the liquidation of entries. Non-compliance could lead to the assumption of duty reimbursement and further assessments. This notice reaffirms the responsibilities of parties holding sensitive information under an Administrative Protective Order, ensuring proper handling and disposition. Commerce remains committed to thorough assessments to enforce fair trade laws, maintaining an equitable trading environment for U.S. industries. 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.

U.S. Department of Commerce Finds No Antidumping in Solar Products from Taiwan Estimated reading time: 5–7 minutes The U.S. Department of Commerce announced its final results concerning the sale of crystalline silicon photovoltaic products, or solar products, from Taiwan. The findings come from an administrative review for the period between February 1, 2024, and January 31, 2025. The review checked if these products were sold in the United States at prices below what they cost normally. During this time, a company called EEPV Corp. was examined closely. The Department of Commerce found that EEPV Corp. did not sell their solar products at unfairly low prices. This means that EEPV did not dump products during the review period. As a result, their dumping margin, which shows unfair pricing, was found to be 0.00 percent. The Department of Commerce will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection not to charge extra duties on these imports from EEPV. This is because their pricing did not break any rules. Instead, these entries will be processed like regular imports. For companies not covered under this review period, usual rules and duties still apply. If products were from a producer or exporter not previously examined, standard rates might be used. The Department of Commerce is quite clear about the next steps. They plan to issue instructions for processing imports. These directions will be given to Customs in around 35 days, provided no legal challenges arise. Cash deposit rules will also change. For EEPV, future shipments will not need extra deposits for now. But if a producer is not covered in the review, the previous rates will still apply. This decision is important for importers. They must be careful to follow rules about filing certificates. These documents say they haven’t been refunded antidumping duties. If they don’t, they could face double duties. In short, the Department of Commerce’s findings show EEPV’s fair pricing during the review year, which affects how their products will be treated when entering the United States. 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.

Court Decision Amends Antidumping Duty on Korean Wind Towers Estimated reading time: 1–7 minutes On September 4, 2026, the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) made a crucial decision about wind towers from Korea. This decision was not in agreement with the previous results from the U.S. Department of Commerce. The decision affects the antidumping duty review for the period from August 1, 2021, to July 31, 2022. The Department of Commerce is now changing the results of that review. Dongkuk S&C Co., Ltd., a company from Korea, had to change how its dumping margin was calculated. The Court of International Trade agreed with the new calculations for Dongkuk’s costs. This means the final dumping margin for Dongkuk is now slightly lowered. From a former rate of 1.95%, the new dumping margin is now 1.90%. Even though the dumping margin has changed, Dongkuk won’t see a change in its current cash deposit rate. This is because there have been newer results since the 2021-2022 review. Currently, the liquidation of Dongkuk’s entries is on hold by order of the court. If this decision is not appealed, or the appeal favors the court’s decision, Commerce will instruct U.S. Customs to assess antidumping duties accordingly. This decision is an important update in the ongoing monitoring and regulation of international trade duties. 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.

New Trade Regulations on L-Lysine from China: Import Duties Announced Estimated reading time: 4-5 minutes Background On July 23, 2026, Commerce announced its final decision that L-lysine from China was being sold in the U.S. at less than fair value. Additionally, it was determined that Chinese producers received unfair subsidies for L-lysine production. The ITC later confirmed that these imports have harmed U.S. industries. Scope of the Orders The orders cover animal feed grade L-lysine. This includes various forms like lysine HCL, lysine sulfate, and liquid lysine. The products may also be mixed with other substances but only the lysine component is covered by the orders. Antidumping Duty Order Commerce will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping duties on relevant L-lysine entries from China. These duties apply to products entered on or after March 6, 2026, when initial determinations were published. A cash deposit reflecting the estimated dumping margins must be made for future imports. Key Details Different producers and exporters are assigned specific dumping margins, with some based on adverse facts available, which means higher penalty rates apply due to lack of cooperation from some organizations. Countervailing Duty Order Similarly, the CVD order results from findings that Chinese producers benefit from unfair subsidies. Duties are now assessed on products entered on or after January 22, 2026. Like the AD order, unliquidated entries before the ITC’s final determinations will escape these duties. Maintaining Compliance Importers should ensure compliance with these new measures to avoid penalties. The orders are part of efforts to level the playing field for U.S. producers by countering unfair trade practices. While these orders aim to help U.S. industries, they highlight ongoing trade tensions between the U.S. and China. Importers should stay informed about such regulations to navigate the complex international trade landscape effectively. For more specific details like estimated weighted-average dumping margins or subsidy rates, refer to the Federal Register notice on these orders. 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.

Chlorinated Isocyanurates from China Under Review for Dumping in U.S. Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes The U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) is checking if some chemicals from China were sold at unfairly low prices in the United States. These chemicals, called chlorinated isocyanurates, are used mainly for cleaning purposes like in swimming pools. The review period is from June 1, 2024, to May 31, 2025. Commerce is looking into the sales of these chemicals by three Chinese companies: Achlor Chemical Ltd., Heze Huayi Chemical Co., Ltd., and Juancheng Kangtai Chemical Co., Ltd. The review is part of an ongoing effort to ensure fair trade practices and protect U.S. markets from low-priced imports that could hurt local businesses. However, Commerce found that Achlor Chemical Ltd. did not have any sales entries of these chemicals during the review period and decided not to include them in the current review. This leaves Heze Huayi and Kangtai as the only companies being reviewed for selling these chemicals at less than normal value. In the past, the China-wide rate for these chemicals was set at 285.63 percent. Since no one requested a fresh review of this overall rate, it remains unchanged in this evaluation. Commerce will be checking if Heze Huayi and Kangtai deserve a different rate based on their current sales activities. Preliminary results show that Heze Huayi has a dumping margin of 90.65 percent, while Kangtai has a margin of 72.63 percent. Businesses and other interested parties can send their comments to the Commerce department. They can also ask for a hearing if needed. All comments must be submitted electronically. Commerce aims to finish the review by the end of the year and expects to make the final results available 120 days after the current review’s publication date. Until then, the cash deposit rates for these companies will stay as decided in the final results of this review. Conclusion This review matters because it helps maintain fair pricing of imported goods and supports local industries. It also ensures that companies pay the correct duties when bringing products into the United States. 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.

Commerce Department Announces Final Results on Sodium Nitrite from India Estimated reading time: 3-5 minutes The U.S. Department of Commerce has published its final results regarding the antidumping duty review of sodium nitrite imports from India. This review covered the period from February 1, 2024, to January 31, 2025. The review was conducted by the International Trade Administration’s Enforcement and Compliance division. Their findings show certain Indian producers and exporters sold sodium nitrite in the United States at prices less than normal value during this time. Key Outcomes: Deepak Nitrite Limited, an Indian producer, has been assigned a dumping margin of 0.00 percent. Kronox Lab Sciences Pvt Ltd and Kutch Chemical Industries Ltd face a dumping margin of 42.76 percent. The review also included a decision to rescind the administrative review for non-examined companies, Buradon Inc., Palvi Industries Limited, and Lotus Global Pvt. Ltd. This decision was based on the absence of suspended entries during the review period. Cash Deposit Requirements: The cash deposit rate for goods from companies reviewed is based on these results. Companies not reviewed will continue under their last known rate. For exports where the producer is covered but the exporter is not, the producer’s rate will apply. The all-others rate remains at 42.76 percent. Upcoming Actions: The Commerce Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess duties on applicable entries. These instructions will be issued no earlier than 35 days after the announcement date. The report also reminds importers about their duty to file certificates regarding the reimbursement of duties. This compliance is important to avoid penalties. The review has been completed without any changes or revisions to the preliminary findings. The Commerce Department follows a set process for reviewing antidumping actions, and this review was conducted in line with those guidelines. The findings are official and published according to the regulations of the Trade Act of 1930. 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.

U.S. Department of Commerce Finds Solar Cells from Indonesia Sold Below Fair Value Estimated reading time: 1–7 minutes The United States Department of Commerce (Commerce) has concluded that crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells (solar cells) from Indonesia are being sold in the United States at less than fair value. The final determination includes the period of investigation from July 1, 2024, to June 30, 2025. Background and Investigation Process The process began earlier this year in April when Commerce invited comments on its preliminary findings. By May, revisions and extensions were made to ensure accurate results. This comprehensive investigation led to a final determination by September 10, 2026. For gathering information, Commerce conducted a thorough verification of the records from PT REC Solar Energy Indonesia. They examined relevant sales and costs. However, PT Blue Sky Solar Indonesia did not provide required information, which resulted in Commerce using adverse facts available against them. Critical Circumstances Commerce has also determined that there are critical circumstances associated with the import of these solar cells from Indonesia. This finding suggests that significant injury was caused or threatened to the domestic industry due to sudden large volumes of imports. Application of Adverse Facts Available Due to the lack of cooperation from companies like Blue Sky, as well as the deficiency in complete information from REC Solar, Commerce determined the use of facts available with adverse inferences (AFA). Both companies have been assigned a high dumping margin as a result. Dumping Margins and All-Others Rate The estimated dumping margins for both PT Blue Sky Solar Indonesia and PT REC Solar Energy Indonesia are 94.36 percent each. This rate is based on adverse facts available. The same rate applies to all other producers and exporters. Implications and Next Steps The U.S. Customs and Border Protection will continue to suspend liquidation of these products at specified rates pending further instructions. This ensures compliance until a final antidumping order is issued, provided the U.S. International Trade Commission confirms the material injury. Scope of Investigation The investigation covers specific solar cells and modules from Indonesia. It includes solar cells of particular thickness and characteristics. Products like thin film photovoltaic cells and small integrated cells in consumer products are excluded. Commerce’s detailed examination of this case aims to protect the domestic industry from unfair trading practices by ensuring solar cells are sold at fair value in the United States. 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.

U.S. Department of Commerce Finds Subsidies in Indonesian Solar Products Estimated reading time: 4–6 minutes The U.S. Department of Commerce has announced a key decision concerning solar products from Indonesia. On September 16, 2026, the department made a final affirmative determination related to countervailable subsidies. This decision is aimed at crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells. These are solar cells made from crystals and might be assembled into modules or panels. The investigation covered products from Indonesia for the period from January 1, 2024, to December 31, 2024. The Commerce Department believes that producers in Indonesia received help from their government to manufacture these solar products. This is called a subsidy. Sometimes, subsidies can lead to unfair pricing when these products are sold in other countries, including the U.S. Scope and Products Covered The product in question includes solar cells and modules, whether assembled or not. They help generate electricity from sunlight. However, it does not cover thin film products made from certain materials like amorphous silicon (a-Si), cadmium telluride (CdTe), or copper indium gallium selenide (CIGS). It also excludes small cells in consumer goods, some small panels, and modules made elsewhere. The Commerce Department assessed various subsidy programs in Indonesia. They looked at evidence from different parties. The department also visited Indonesian companies like PT Blue Sky Solar Indonesia and PT REC Solar Energy Indonesia. This helped verify the information collected. Findings and Rates The investigation led to different subsidy rates for Indonesian companies. PT Blue Sky Solar Indonesia faced a rate of 173.70%, which was based on facts available since complete data was not provided. Meanwhile, PT REC Solar Energy Indonesia was given a lower rate of 73.20%. This latter rate also applies to other Indonesian producers. Commerce also examined if these subsidies began affecting the U.S. sooner. They found “critical circumstances,” meaning imports surged, causing harm to U.S. businesses before the official investigation. This conclusion applies to Blue Sky but not to REC Solar. Next Steps The Commerce Department has asked the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) to see if these subsidized imports harm U.S. industries. If the ITC confirms this, the Department will order duties on these imports. This means extra charges on these solar products when they come into the U.S. This decision can lead to changes in how solar cells are imported and traded. It aims to ensure fair competition for U.S. companies. Keep watching as this investigation wraps up and further decisions are made. 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.

U.S. Department of Commerce Decides on Solar Cells from Laos Estimated reading time: 1–5 minutes The U.S. Department of Commerce has made a decision about solar cells from Laos. They say that these solar cells are being sold in the U.S. at prices that are too low. They also think some imports from Laos might hurt American businesses. The time they looked at for their investigation was from January 1, 2025, to June 30, 2025. This decision was made final on September 16, 2026. Solar cells are devices that turn sunlight into electricity. The ones from Laos were investigated to see if they are priced less than they should be. Investigation Background The investigation began when Commerce published a preliminary decision in April 2026. They asked people to give comments about the decision. By September 10, 2026, they had to make a final decision. The decision includes how much lower the prices of these solar cells are compared to fair value. Commerce also looked at whether there were unusual price drops that needed attention. Companies Involved The main company in Laos that was looked at is Solarspace Technology (Laos). Another company, SolarSpace Technology (Hong Kong), is considered the same as Solarspace for this investigation. There are other companies involved too, like JA Solar and Trina Solar from Vietnam and Thailand. Critical Circumstances The decision also talks about “critical circumstances.” This means that certain imports from Laos could cause quick and severe harm to U.S. industries. For most companies, they found these circumstances to be true, but not for Solarspace. Separate Companies Not all companies are treated the same. Some companies got their own special rates because they showed they are separate from the larger group. Final Decision The U.S. Department of Commerce decided on the following points: The solar cells from Laos are priced too low in the U.S. Some companies have special rates for their exports. Solarspace and SolarSpace (Hong Kong) are treated as one company. The overall weighted average dumping margin is set at 65.43%. Next Steps The U.S. has taken steps to make sure these lower-priced solar cells from Laos don’t hurt U.S. businesses. They have asked the U.S. Customs to keep a close watch on these imports. If the U.S. International Trade Commission also finds that these imports harm U.S. businesses, there will be more taxes on these imports. This is called an “antidumping duty order.” If no harm is found, there will be no extra charges. This investigation is part of making sure trade is fair and does not harm businesses in the United States. 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.

U.S. Department of Commerce Finds Subsidies on Solar Cells from Laos Estimated reading time: 1–5 minutes What is Happening? The U.S. Department of Commerce found that some producers and exporters of these solar cells in Laos are receiving subsidies. A subsidy is when a government provides financial support to businesses, which can help make their products cheaper in other countries. The Investigation This investigation looked at activities from January 1, 2024, to December 31, 2024. Solar cells from Laos were checked to see if they were receiving benefits from their government that were unfair. Final Results The Department found out that companies like Solarspace Technology in Laos benefited from these subsidies. One company, Vietnam Sunergy, was found to be receiving significant help. Because of this, specific extra charges called countervailing duties will be put on these products when they come into the U.S. Critical Circumstances The announcement also mentioned “critical circumstances.” This term refers to situations where imports might have increased a lot quickly. The Department found that, for some companies, these circumstances applied, and extra duties will apply starting from a date 90 days earlier than when the first decision was made public. Verification and Methodology The decision included looking at documents and checking information during the summer of 2026. This is called verification. The process was thorough to make sure all details were correct. Impact The impact of this decision is that certain products from Laos will now cost more when they enter the United States. This pricing change aims to balance out the extra help Lao companies receive from their government. Further Steps The International Trade Commission (ITC) will now decide if the U.S. industry suffers because of these imports. They will complete this decision within 45 days. Conclusion This significant ruling by the Department of Commerce shows its dedication to ensuring fair competition in the markets. As this process continues, there may be further developments based on the ITC verdict. 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.

U.S. Commerce Department Finds Indian Solar Cells Sold Below Fair Value Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes The U.S. Department of Commerce has made a final decision about certain solar cells from India. These are called crystalline silicon photovoltaic (CSPV) cells. The Department says they were sold in the United States at prices less than their fair value. This happened during the period from July 1, 2024, to June 30, 2025. What Was Decided? The decision, published on September 16, 2026, means that these solar cells were not priced fairly when sold in the U.S. This decision follows an earlier report from April 28, 2026, where Commerce said it found similar issues. Important Companies Several Indian companies were involved. These include Mundra Solar PV Limited, Mundra Solar Energy Limited, Kowa Company Ltd, and Premier Energies Photovoltaic Private Limited. They were all part of this decision. Critical Circumstances The Department of Commerce also found something called “critical circumstances.” This means urgent action was needed because of how the solar cells were being sold. This is true for the companies named above. What Happens Next? For these companies, duties will be applied to their products from January 28, 2026. This date is important because it’s before the first report from April 2026. Rates and Duties The companies will have to pay an estimated extra fee of 123.04% on their solar cell exports to the U.S. Other producers and exporters will also have to pay this fee. What About Others? If a company was not investigated but makes these solar cells, it must also pay the extra fee. This ensures that all similar products are treated the same way. Future Steps The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) will check if the U.S. industry is harmed by these imports. If they agree, the decisions and fees will become permanent. Conclusion This move by the Department aims to protect U.S. businesses and ensure fair trade. By adjusting the fees, the Department seeks to level the playing field for American companies involved in solar cell production. The next step involves further review by the ITC to ensure U.S. industries are not adversely affected by these imports. 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.

Federal Register Reports Affirmative Determination on Solar Cells from India Estimated reading time: 3–4 minutes The Department of Commerce has concluded its investigation into subsidies for crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, also known as solar cells, from India. It has determined, with finality, that Indian producers and exporters of these solar cells receive unlawful subsidies that benefit and support their production. This investigation covers the period from April 1, 2024, to March 31, 2025. In line with U.S. trade laws, the Department of Commerce found that some companies in India, such as Mundra Solar Energy Limited and Mundra Solar PV Limited, receive financial benefits from their government that give them an unfair advantage in the marketplace. These benefits are called countervailable subsidies. The Commerce Department’s findings also identify that critical circumstances exist for these companies. Critical circumstances refer to instances where massive imported quantities of subsidized products can potentially harm U.S. industries before trade measures can take effect. Importantly, the report covers solar cells that are not fully assembled into other products, such as modules and laminates, which were temporarily assembled or partially made. However, the report specifies which goods are not covered. For instance, certain small solar panels permanently integrated into consumer goods which are not primarily for power generation, and some panels used for special applications, are not included. The Commerce Department has ruled that the producers in India will face countervailing duties, which are financial charges on their imported goods. These duties aim to level the playing field by offsetting the unfair financial advantage provided through subsidies. While the investigation notes instances where particular Indian producers and exporters did not cooperate, the department based its findings on facts otherwise available, using adverse presumptions. This means if a company didn’t participate, the Commerce Department assumed the worst-case scenario regarding their subsidy benefits. For other Indian producers not reviewed individually, a general rate of 126.09 percent has been applied, which is calculated following regulatory guidelines. The International Trade Commission (ITC) must now make a decision within 45 days on whether these subsidized imports have harmed or could harm American industries. Should the ITC agree with the affirmative findings, a countervailing duty order will be issued by the Commerce Department. This ensures all imports of the subsidized product will face the same duties, helping protect U.S. jobs and industries. In conclusion, the U.S. Department of Commerce finds itself aligned with regulations to foster fair trade, ensuring a level playing field for American companies against unfair foreign advantages. 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.

U.S. Department of Commerce Determines Subsidies for Aluminum Foil from Oman Estimated reading time: 2–3 minutes Date: 2026-09-15 The U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) has made a decision regarding aluminum foil imported from the Sultanate of Oman. The decision concerns countervailable subsidies provided to producers and exporters in Oman, specifically the Oman Aluminium Rolling Company SPC (OARC). The review period is from January 1, 2023, to December 31, 2023. During this time, Commerce found that countervailable subsidies were given to OARC. These subsidies are money or help from the government that gives an advantage to a company. Because of this, it was concluded that a countervailable subsidy rate of 11.38% should be applied to aluminum foil from OARC. Commerce plans to tell U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to collect these duties on aluminum foil from OARC. The collection will start from the publication date, September 15, 2026. If a legal challenge is made, CBP will be directed not to collect the duties immediately. This will allow all parties time to seek further legal action. The cash deposit rates for other companies that were not reviewed will remain the same as before this decision. This ensures that past rates continue for those companies. Commerce has reassured the parties involved that they must handle all private information with care. Guidelines on how to return or destroy private information have been provided to ensure compliance. The decision was finalized and published by Christopher Abbott, who is acting as the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. This decision is part of Commerce’s ongoing efforts to enforce trade laws fairly and to ensure a level playing field. The complete details and methodology behind these final results can be accessed online through the Federal Register or Commerce’s website for public records. 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.

Commerce Department Finds Indian Glycine Sold Below Normal Value Estimated reading time: 2–5 minutes The United States Department of Commerce has finalized its review regarding the import of glycine from India. The review determined that Indian producers and exporters have been selling glycine in the U.S. at prices below its normal value. This review examined the period from June 1, 2024, to May 31, 2025. Key Findings The final results confirm the preliminary findings issued earlier this year. The preliminary results had found that some Indian companies were selling glycine at unfairly low prices. The companies Medilane Healthcare Private Limited and Mulji Mehta Enterprises were found to have dumping margins of 57.17%. Implications The Department of Commerce will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to assess antidumping duties on these imports. The cash deposit rate for Medilane Healthcare Private Limited and Mulji Mehta Enterprises will be set at 57.17%. Additional Details Cash deposit rates for other companies will depend on whether they were part of this review or a previous one. If a company was not reviewed, rates from the most recent segment will apply. If neither the exporter nor the producer has previously been reviewed, a standard rate of 7.23% will apply. Responsibilities for Importers Importers must file a certificate concerning the reimbursement of any antidumping or countervailing duties before their entries are liquidated. If they fail to do so, they could face double duties or increased duties. Privacy and Compliance Parties involved should respect agreements regarding proprietary information as laid out by the Department of Commerce. These results have been issued according to U.S. law and will be enforced to ensure fair trade practices. 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.

Commerce Department Releases Results of Korean Oil Tubular Goods Review Estimated reading time: 1–7 minutes Date: 2026-09-15 On September 15, 2026, the U.S. Department of Commerce announced the final results of an administrative review concerning oil country tubular goods from South Korea. The period under review was from January 1, 2023, to December 31, 2023. The review focused on whether companies received unfair financial help, called subsidies, from the government that would hurt U.S. competitors. Key Findings: The review looked at SeAH Steel Corporation, a company from Korea that makes and sells oil tubular goods. The Department of Commerce found that SeAH Steel did not receive unfair government subsidies during the review period. A subsidy would mean that the government provided financial help that favored the company over others in the market. The findings concluded that the subsidy rate for SeAH Steel was de minimis. This means the rate was so small that it was practically zero. As a result, no extra duties will be charged on their good. Review Rescission: The review also mentioned Hyundai Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. This company was originally included in the review. However, because there were no import entries that the review could assess, the Department decided not to include them in the final review. Process and Methodology: The Department conducted this review following certain rules. They checked for any financial help from the government to the company that would affect trade. They also ensured transparency by making the details of the review public online. The final results and the technical information are kept in a special online system, ensuring that the process remains open to officials and interested parties. Next Steps: The Commerce Department will tell U.S. Customs not to impose extra duties on SeAH’s goods. This instruction will take effect soon. Other companies that were not a part of this review will still be subject to the original duty rates as updated last year. The rates will continue until new instructions or reviews occur. This review serves as an example of ongoing monitoring of international trade practices. It ensures fair competition in the U.S. market by evaluating imports’ financial backing from foreign governments. 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.

Commerce Department Reviews Oil Country Tubular Goods from Türkiye Estimated reading time: 2–4 minutes Commerce Department Reviews Oil Country Tubular Goods from Türkiye The U.S. Department of Commerce has released preliminary findings in its review of countervailing duties on certain Oil Country Tubular Goods (OCTG) from Türkiye. These goods are a type of steel pipes used in the oil and gas industry. The review is for the period of January 1, 2024, through December 31, 2024. Key Details: The department has found that Borusan Birleşik Boru Fabrikaları Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş. (Borusan), a major producer and exporter, received subsidies. A subsidy is a financial help given by the government. For the specified period, Borusan has been given a subsidy rate of 0.63 percent. The review started after requests made in 2025, and it includes extensions due to government shutdowns. Important Dates: The notice was published on September 15, 2026. Case briefs, where interested parties can comment, are due 21 days from this date. Rebuttal briefs, which respond to case briefs, are due five days after case briefs. Public Participation: Interested parties can submit comments and request a hearing to discuss the issues. Such requests must include the requester’s details and list of discussion points. Next Steps: Commerce plans to release the final results within 120 days of this notice, unless the timeline is extended. Cash deposit instructions related to the findings will guide future duty collections. This review process helps ensure fair trade practices by evaluating and acting on subsidies that might affect the U.S. market. Interested parties are encouraged to participate actively for transparency and informed outcomes. 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.

Continuation of Trade Orders on Silicon Metal Estimated reading time: 2–5 minutes The U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) and the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) have decided to continue certain trade orders. These orders are about silicon metal from four countries: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Iceland, Malaysia, and the Republic of Kazakhstan. Commerce and the ITC believe that ending these orders would allow unfair trade practices to continue. This could hurt businesses in the United States. So, they are keeping the orders in place. The orders are of two types. One type is called antidumping duty (AD) orders, and the other is countervailing duty (CVD) orders. AD orders are for Bosnia and Herzegovina, Iceland, and Malaysia. The CVD order is for Kazakhstan. These orders cover all forms and sizes of silicon metal. However, silicon that is very pure, called semiconductor grade silicon, does not fall under these orders. The ITC first looked at this matter on March 2, 2026. The ITC and Commerce checked if ending the orders would be bad for U.S. industries. They decided that it would. So, on September 3, 2026, they published their decision to keep the orders. Commerce will keep collecting fees on silicon metal imports. These fees help ensure that unfair trade practices do not happen. These reviews happen every five years. Commerce plans to check these orders again before five years are up. For now, the orders will stay. The goal is to protect U.S. businesses from unfair trade practices. This decision will help keep competition fair in the silicon metal market. 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.

US Commerce Department Finalizes Antidumping Duties on Chinese Steel Racks Estimated reading time: 1–7 minutes The United States Department of Commerce has made a significant decision regarding the import of certain steel racks and their parts from China. The decision reveals that some companies from China sold steel racks in the US at prices lower than the normal value. This review covers the period from September 1, 2023, to August 31, 2024. Findings from the Review The review shows that certain Chinese exporters, including Jiangsu Nova Intelligent Logistics Equipment Co., Ltd., were involved in dumping. Dumping means selling goods in another country at a lower price than in the home market. As a result, a weighted-average dumping margin of 10.34 percent is applied to these companies. Jiangsu JISE Intelligent Storage Equipment Co., Ltd. also falls under this category. Steps Taken by the Department of Commerce Review Process: The Commerce Department applied rules from the Tariff Act of 1930. It used this legal framework to conduct a detailed review of the imports. Rescission of Review: The Commerce Department decided to rescind, or cancel, the review for Nanjing Kingmore Logistics Equipment Manufacturing Co., Ltd., due to a lack of evidence for any suspended entries of their products during the period. Separate Rates and China-Wide Rate: Companies that cooperated and proved their case received a separate rate of 10.34 percent. Companies that did not cooperate are part of the China-wide entity and face a rate of 144.50 percent. This includes firms like Guangdong Xinmiao Storage Equipment Co., Ltd., among others. Implications for Importers Cash Deposits: Importers must now provide cash deposits based on the new rates when bringing these products into the US. For Jiangsu Nova and Jiangsu JISE, the rate is 10.34 percent. If the company is part of the China-wide entity, the rate is 144.50 percent. Reimbursement Certificate: Importers are reminded of their duty to file a certificate about whether antidumping duties were reimbursed. This step is crucial to avoid penalties. Next Steps Assessment Instructions: Within 35 days of this announcement, Commerce will send instructions to the US Customs and Border Protection regarding the collection of duties. Confidential Information: Companies must adhere to rules about returning or destroying confidential information shared during the review process. In conclusion, this decision by the US Department of Commerce aims to ensure fair pricing and maintain competitive markets by addressing the issue of dumping from Chinese steel rack exporters. Importers in the US need to follow the new guidelines to comply with the law. 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.

Commerce Preliminary Determination: Tin Mill Products from China Face Countervailing Duties Estimated reading time: 2–3 minutes Investigation Details The period of the investigation covers the entire year of 2025. This is part of an ongoing examination under the Tariff Act of 1930. Commerce began the investigation in May 2026 and has been working towards gathering the necessary information to assess the situation. Scope of Investigation Tin mill products are flat-rolled steel items, either coated with tin or chromium. These products, known as tinplate and tin-free steel, are used in various industries. The scope of this investigation covers all tin mill products from China, regardless of their specific characteristics. Findings According to the preliminary findings, companies like Shougang Holding Trade (Hong Kong) Ltd. and Shougang Jingtang United Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. have been identified as receiving countervailable subsidies. Commerce has applied an adverse inference due to a lack of cooperation from these companies in providing requested information. Critical Circumstances Commerce also finds critical circumstances existing, which impacts how duties are applied. This designation means that duties may be imposed on retroactive imports, dating back 90 days before the initial suspension decision. Next Steps Those interested are invited to comment on this preliminary decision. The decision on final duties will be aligned with the final determination in a companion antidumping duty investigation. This is expected to be finalized by November 30, 2026. Public Participation Commerce has opened the floor for case briefs and comments from interested parties. Deadlines have been set for submissions, and a hearing may be scheduled if requested. It is crucial for stakeholders to participate actively to ensure their perspectives are considered. Notification to ITC The International Trade Commission (ITC) has been notified of these findings. It is up to the ITC to determine whether the imports in question are injuring or threatening U.S. industries. The Department of Commerce remains committed to ensuring fair trade practices and protecting domestic industries from unfair foreign subsidies. The outcomes of these determinations have significant implications for trade relations and industry stakeholders. 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.

U.S. Department of Commerce Finds Korean Brass Rod Sold Below Normal Value Estimated reading time: 5–7 minutes Published: 2026-09-14 The U.S. Department of Commerce has announced preliminary findings in its review of brass rod imports from the Republic of Korea. The review covers the period from December 1, 2023, to May 31, 2025. Key Findings The review focused on two Korean companies: Booyoung Industry (BYI) and Daechang Co., Ltd. (Daechang). The preliminary results show that both companies sold brass rods in the United States at prices lower than the normal value. This means they sold their products for less than it costs to produce them. About the Review Process The review began in July 2025, following requests to look into the antidumping duty order on brass rods from Korea. An antidumping duty is a protectionist tariff imposed on foreign imports believed to be priced below fair market value. The U.S. Department of Commerce selected BYI and Daechang as the main companies for this review. The review experienced delays due to a government shutdown, leading to extensions of the deadlines. Methodology The Department of Commerce used an extensive process to come to these preliminary conclusions. This involved checking the companies’ sales data and comparing it to the normal value. They calculated export prices and constructed export prices based on U.S. laws. Preliminary Results For the period covered, BYI has a dumping margin of 9.28%, while Daechang Co., Ltd., along with the associated companies Seowon Co. Ltd. and IMI Co. Ltd., has a margin of 5.22%. These percentages reflect how much lower their sales prices were compared to the normal value. Next Steps Interested parties, such as importers and industry stakeholders, have an opportunity to comment on these preliminary results. They must submit their comments in writing, including summaries of their main points, within 21 days from the notice. A final decision will be made after reviewing these comments. The decisions will affect how much duty importers must pay on brass rods from Korea in the future. Impact on Importers Importers of Korean brass rods will need to pay duties based on the preliminary dumping margins. If the final results confirm or change these margins, the duties will be adjusted accordingly. This can affect the final price of the brass rods for U.S. buyers. Conclusion The U.S. Department of Commerce is taking steps to address the issue of brass rods being sold for less than their production cost. Through the antidumping review, they aim to ensure fair competition and support U.S. manufacturers. 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.

U.S. Department of Commerce: No Shipments from C.S. Aluminium Corporation Estimated reading time: 1–3 minutes September 14, 2026 The U.S. Department of Commerce has announced its final decision about C.S. Aluminium Corporation (CSAC). They have found that CSAC did not ship any common alloy aluminum sheet to the United States during the review period. This period was from April 1, 2024, to March 31, 2025. The announcement was made in the Federal Register on September 14, 2026. It was confirmed by Sarah Keith from the Department of Commerce. The Department of Commerce first published their preliminary findings on May 14, 2026. They invited people to give comments on these findings. However, no one gave any comments. Because of this, the preliminary findings were used in the final announcement. According to the Department, since there were no shipments, there is no need for detailed calculations of dumping margins. They did not have to disclose any calculations, as there were none to make. For those who might be affected by antidumping duties, the Department of Commerce has set rules. They have determined that for products by CSAC, there will be no duties to pay because there were no shipments. Any products that might have mistakenly come to the U.S. will be taxed at a general rate of 17.50 percent. The Department has procedures in place if someone wants to seek an injunction through the U.S. Court of International Trade. This means certain steps will be taken to delay any immediate actions. The cash deposit rates will not change for CSAC because there were no shipments. If other companies have participated in past reviews, those rates will remain in effect. For new companies without any reviews, the deposit rate will be the same as the general rate, which is 17.50 percent. Lastly, this notice reminds importers that they need to file important certificates about antidumping duties. If they don’t, the Department might assume they are avoiding duties. This means they may have to pay double duties. This acts as a final notice to parties involved and ensures compliance with the laws concerning aluminum imports from Taiwan. 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.

U.S. Commerce Department Reviews Belgian Citric Acid Sales for Antidumping Compliance Estimated reading time: 2–5 minutes The U.S. Department of Commerce has released preliminary findings from its review of citric acid and citrate salts imported from Belgium. The review, conducted by the International Trade Administration, focused on the period from July 1, 2024, to June 30, 2025. The main subject of the review was the Belgian company Citribel N.V. The investigation aimed to determine if Citribel was selling these products in the United States at unfairly low prices that could harm U.S. businesses. Preliminary Findings The preliminary results show that Citribel did not sell the products at prices below the normal value, meaning their practices were in compliance with U.S. law. This marks a significant outcome for Citribel, as no unfair pricing was detected during the review period. Background and Procedures The investigation into Belgian citric acid began after an antidumping duty order was published in July 2018. The Department of Commerce started this specific review in August 2025. Due to federal delays, the department had to extend deadlines. Finally, they issued the preliminary results on September 8, 2026. Throughout the review, the Department closely studied Citribel’s pricing and sales data. They also verified the company’s information to ensure accuracy in the preliminary findings. Next Steps for Public Comments The Department of Commerce is open to public comments on these findings. Interested parties have 21 days from the notice’s publication to submit their comments. Rebuttal comments are also welcome, provided they comply with the Department’s regulatory requirements. Comments must include tables of contents and authorities, and submissions must be made electronically. The Department emphasizes the importance of clear and concise comments, limited to 450 words per issue. Final Results and Future Implications The final results of this review are expected within 120 days. They will determine future duties and cash deposit requirements for Citribel’s products. The Commerce Department will use these results to guide future regulations concerning imports of citric acid from Belgium. Conclusion This review is part of ongoing efforts by the Department of Commerce to ensure fair trade practices and protect U.S. industries. It provides reassurance to consumers and businesses about the integrity of international trade relations. The final results will clarify any further actions required for compliance and fair market practices. 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.

U.S. Department of Commerce Amends Results of Shrimp Duty Review Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes Date: 2026-09-14 The U.S. Department of Commerce has made amendments to the results of a recent trade review. This review focused on the countervailing duty on frozen warmwater shrimp from Ecuador. The review period was from January 1, 2022, to December 31, 2022. The changes were made to fix errors that occurred earlier. The Department of Commerce oversees international trade and ensures fair practices. They had to amend the final results of their review to fix what are termed “ministerial errors.” These errors included mistakes in calculations or clerical errors. The initial final results came out on August 6, 2026. However, on August 12, companies were informed that they could comment on any errors. By August 17, the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee pointed out these mistakes. Another party, Empacadora del Pacifico S.A. (known as Edpacif), responded with comments on August 24, 2026. A “ministerial error” arises from simple calculation mistakes or copying errors. It does not result from any major change in policy or procedure. The Department of Commerce’s regulations ensure that such errors can be identified and corrected. In this case, two companies were affected by these errors: Edpacif and Nirsa/Proposorja. For Edpacif, an incorrect figure was used in the final calculations. As a result, their subsidy rate changed slightly from 15.17 percent to 15.18 percent. For Nirsa/Proposorja, the department failed to apply a necessary revision, increasing their subsidy rate from 2.21 percent to 2.23 percent. The revised results will affect how duties are collected in the future. The Department uses these results to instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection on the rates they should apply to imports. This also impacts the cash deposits companies must make when importing these goods into the U.S. The detailed memorandum that discusses these errors and the department’s rationale is available online for registered users. This information is logged in a centralized electronic system where interested parties can access it. This amendment ensures fair trade practices are upheld and serves as a reminder of the importance of accuracy in international trade assessments by government agencies. The department has announced that these changes will be published in the Federal Register and are now effective. This means any shipments of impacted goods brought into the U.S. will follow these revised rates. This announcement serves as a reminder to companies about the importance of following trade regulations closely and the obligations related to any agreements or protections in place. Compliance with these requirements is crucial for fair international trade operations. 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.

U.S. Department of Commerce Preliminary Findings on Glycine from Japan Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes On September 14, 2026, the U.S. Department of Commerce made an announcement regarding the import of glycine from Japan. This announcement is about the preliminary results of a review on antidumping duties. Antidumping duties are taxes added to goods to make foreign products more expensive when they are sold for less than they are worth. The Department of Commerce reported that some companies in Japan have been selling glycine to the United States at prices that are less than normal. These sales happened between June 1, 2024, and May 31, 2025. The Department is asking people who are interested to comment on these findings. The main report from the Department of Commerce includes some history. It notes that an order was first made on June 21, 2019, to control these sales. The Department started a review process on June 3, 2025, inviting requests for a more detailed check. The requests for this review officially began on July 25, 2025. The process of reviewing was delayed because of a government shutdown. Because of this, the deadlines were extended. The Department has now extended the deadline for review results to September 8, 2026. The Department also plans to explain their methods in doing this review. They calculate different types of prices like “export price” and “normal value.” These check how much products should cost on their way to the U.S. from Japan. The Department decided to stop the review for four companies that did not meet certain requirements. These companies include Ajinomoto Co., Inc., Ajinomoto Healthcare, Inc., Sojitz Corporation, and Sojitz Logistics Corporation. There will not be any checks on them anymore. The Department found that some companies have been selling their glycine products to the U.S. at dumping margins. Dumping margins show how much less they are selling their products for in the U.S. Yuki Gosei Kogyo Co., Ltd./Nagase & Co., Ltd. had a margin of 3.25 percent. However, Resonac Corporation had a dumping margin of 0.00 percent. The Department is planning to disclose more information soon and is inviting comments from the public. People can submit written comments within 21 days after this notice, followed by rebuttal comments to be submitted five days later. The Department also encourages those wanting a hearing to submit their requests. The next steps include calculating duties that are due based on the findings. If there are no penalties or low margins found, some companies might not have to pay extra duties. For now, the cash deposit rates will continue for certain companies while others will keep their deposit rates the same as before. The final results and decision will be shared within 120 days from the notice date. This is to ensure that importers know how much antidumping duty they might need to pay. Importers are reminded to file important certificates about paying antidumping duties on time. This is crucial to avoid double payments. The Department of Commerce is committed to updating all interested parties and maintaining fair trade practices. 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.

U.S. Department of Commerce Finds Methionine from Spain Sold Below Normal Value Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes Background: The U.S. Department of Commerce has released its final results for an administrative review of antidumping duties on methionine imported from Spain. This review covered the period of September 1, 2023, to August 31, 2024. The findings revealed that methionine from Spain was sold in the United States at less than its normal value. This review focused only on Adisseo España S.A., a producer and exporter of methionine from Spain. The Department of Commerce first published preliminary findings on this matter in March 2026. The deadline for these final results was extended twice, with the final publication date set for September 8, 2026. Results: The review concluded that Adisseo España S.A. sold methionine at an average dumping margin of 8.20 percent. This means that the prices at which they sold methionine in the U.S. were significantly lower than those in the Spanish market. Scope of the Order: The order pertains specifically to methionine produced in Spain. Methionine is an important additive in animal feed, used to ensure proper nutrition for livestock. Assessment Rates: The Department of Commerce will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection on how to assess antidumping duties on relevant entries of methionine produced by Adisseo. For entries during the review period, duties will be applied based on the 8.20 percent dumping margin. For entries from other exporters or producers, the standard rate from previous investigations, which is 37.53 percent, will apply. This rate will also apply if Adisseo exported methionine without knowledge that it was destined for the United States. Cash Deposit Requirements: New cash deposit rates will apply for all shipments of methionine from Spain entering the U.S. from the publication date of these final results. The specific rate for Adisseo will be 8.20 percent. Other producers and exporters will either use their established rates or the standard rate of 37.53 percent. Reimbursement of Duties: Importers are reminded to file a certificate if they aren’t reimbursing antidumping duties. This action must be taken before liquidating entries during the review period. Failure to file may result in doubled duties being assessed. Conclusion: These results ensure that U.S. Customs and Commerce regulations are upheld, maintaining fair trade practices. Importers and exporters should remain aware of their responsibilities under these antidumping duties to prevent repercussions. For more details or questions, interested parties can contact the Department of Commerce. The full report is available electronically through the department’s website. 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.

Commerce Department Reviews Quartz Surface Product Imports from India Estimated reading time: 1–7 minutes The U.S. Department of Commerce has released preliminary findings regarding the import of certain quartz surface products from India for the review period of June 1, 2024, to May 31, 2025. The Department has found that some Indian exporters sold quartz surfaces in the U.S. market at prices below the normal value, which is known as “dumping.” The companies Cuarzo and Beyyond Rocks Private Limited (collectively known as Cuarzo/Beyyond) have been identified for such sales. On the contrary, it has been determined that Pokarna Engineered Stone Limited (PESL) did not engage in dumping during the review period. The Department of Commerce is now proposing a new dumping margin of 4.91% for Cuarzo/Beyyond. PESL, however, could maintain a margin of 0.00%, indicating no dumping of its products. The Department has also decided to rescind the review for 53 companies and plans to rescind it for four more companies, having found either no dumped entries or no entries subject to review during the period. The companies whose cases were rescinded include firms like Global Stones Pvt Ltd. and Pacific Quartz Surfaces LLP. In accordance with the legal procedures, interested parties are invited to comment on the preliminary results. They have until September 15, 2026, to provide comments, while rebuttal comments are due by September 22, 2026. The merchandise under review is quartz surface products originating from India. The review started following requests in July 2025, with a selection of Cuarzo and PESL as mandatory respondents in March 2026. A series of extensions due to government shutdown and backlog pushed the preliminary results announcement to September 8, 2026. The calculated dumping margin will impact future import rates and duties, adjusting based on a calculated sample rate for companies not individually reviewed. The final results and implications for cash deposits on future imports will be known after the full review, anticipated to conclude within 120 days after this preliminary announcement. The Commerce Department’s efforts aim to ensure fair trade practices and level competition for U.S. industries affected by unfair pricing strategies from international companies. 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.

Commerce Department Finds Argentine Honey Dumped at Low Prices Estimated reading time: 6–8 minutes Preliminary Results Announced The U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) has released preliminary findings in the administrative review of antidumping duties on raw honey imported from Argentina. The review looked at the period from June 1, 2024, to May 31, 2025. Commerce found that two Argentine companies, NEXCO S.A. (NEXCO) and Villamora S.A. (Villamora), sold raw honey in the United States at prices below the normal value. These are preliminary results, and interested parties are invited to comment on these findings. Commerce selected NEXCO and Villamora as the main companies to review, along with other non-examined companies. Review Background and Procedures The Commerce Department started the review on July 25, 2025, after receiving requests for it. The review was delayed due to a government shutdown. However, it resumed once routine operations were restored. The preliminary findings were extended multiple times, with the final preliminary results being announced just before the new deadline on September 8, 2026. Merchandise and Methodology The merchandise in focus is raw honey from Argentina. Commerce conducted the review according to U.S. trade laws, specifically sections 751 and 772 of the Tariff Act of 1930. The export price was calculated accordingly, and the normal value was determined to identify any price differences. Findings for Non-Examined Companies For companies that were part of the review but were not individually examined, Commerce calculated a rate using the weighted average of the rates given to NEXCO and Villamora. This rate came out to 3.48 percent. This is in line with the procedure for determining rates for non-selected companies when it is not possible to investigate every company individually. Preliminary Dumping Margins The preliminary results show the estimated dumping margins. NEXCO was found to have a dumping margin of 1.93 percent, and Villamora had a margin of 6.80 percent. Opportunities to Comment Commerce will disclose its calculation results to parties. Interested parties can submit written comments and case briefs up to 21 days after this announcement. They can also submit rebuttal briefs limited to issues raised in others’ briefs five days later. Parties can request a hearing if needed. They must submit such requests electronically with specific details about participants and issues to be discussed. Market Impact and Next Steps The review assesses the impact of dumped goods on the U.S. market and determines additional duties to level the playing field. Following the completion of this review, adjusted cash deposit rates for future shipments of honey from Argentina will be set based on these preliminary results. The ongoing assessments will also affect importers. Commerce ensures no double duties are collected by verifying if duties are reimbursed before liquidating entries. Publication and Enforcement These preliminary findings are published as a formal notice in the Federal Register, ensuring transparency and allowing for fair market practices in international trade. This announcement forms a part of Commerce’s efforts to regulate fair trade and maintain competitive markets in the U.S. The final results of this review can potentially affect future imports and trade practices concerning honey from Argentina. 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.

U.S. Department of Commerce Reviews Raw Honey Imports from Vietnam Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes What Did the Review Find? The United States Department of Commerce has made a preliminary decision on raw honey imports from Vietnam. The decision is part of an antidumping duty administrative review. The review covers the period from June 1, 2024, through May 31, 2025. The Department of Commerce found that some companies in Vietnam sold raw honey in the U.S. at prices less than the normal value. This means they sold honey at a lower price than it usually costs in their own country. Companies Reviewed The review looked closely at two companies: Ban Me Thuot Honeybee Joint Stock Company (BMT) and Daklak Honeybee Joint Stock Company (DakHoney). These companies are the main focus because they are large exporters of honey to the U.S. Preliminary Results BMT was found to have a dumping margin of 30.21 percent. DakHoney was found to have a dumping margin of 39.61 percent. The dumping margin is the amount by which the normal value exceeds the export price. Eight other companies were also reviewed. They were not individually examined, but they met certain qualifications. These companies received a dumping margin of 34.91 percent. Companies Not Reviewed Some companies from Vietnam were not part of the reviewed group. For these companies, the wider Vietnam entity rate of 60.03 percent still applies. This is a standard rate used for companies not individually reviewed or that do not qualify for separate rates. Upcoming Steps The Department of Commerce has shared these preliminary results. Parties involved have the opportunity to submit comments. These comments can be filed in case briefs within 21 days of the date of publication of this notice. After the comments are reviewed, a final decision will be made. In summary, the preliminary results of this review could lead to changes in how raw honey from Vietnam is imported into the U.S. Future cash deposit rates may be adjusted based on these results. This review aims to ensure fair trade practices between the U.S. and Vietnam. 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.

U.S. Department of Commerce Releases Preliminary Results on Brazilian Honey Estimated reading time: 5 minutes The U.S. Department of Commerce has released preliminary findings on the antidumping duty review of raw honey from Brazil. This review covered the period from June 1, 2024, to May 31, 2025. The department has found that certain companies in Brazil sold honey in the U.S. at less than its normal value. Main Companies Reviewed: The review targeted two main companies: Melbras Importadora E Exportadora Agroindústria Ltda. Minamel Agroindústria Ltda. Both companies were found to have sold honey at prices lower than normal value. Review Details: The review began on July 25, 2025. The U.S. Department of Commerce selected Melbras and Minamel as the primary subjects of this review. The review considered data from a period when several federal delays altered timelines. Rescissions: The department decided to rescind the review of 11 other companies, including Apis Nativa Agroindustrial Exportadora Ltda, as they did not have entries of subject merchandise during the review period. Methodology: The department considered both the export price and the constructed export price. They also evaluated the normal value of Brazilian honey. For companies not individually reviewed, an average margin was applied. Preliminary Results: Melbras received a preliminary dumping margin of 1.67 percent. Minamel received a margin of 2.64 percent. Additional Information: Interested parties can comment on these findings, and responses must include a public executive summary. All documents should be filed via the department’s electronic service system. Next Steps: The Department of Commerce expects to finalize these preliminary findings in the coming months. Cash deposit rates apply to shipments of honey from Brazil based on these preliminary results. U.S. importers must continue to ensure compliance with antidumping duties. These findings are part of ongoing efforts by the U.S. to maintain fair trade practices and evaluate imports for dumping activities. The department plans to continue its thorough review process to ensure that American producers are not harmed by unfair pricing practices from foreign entities. 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.

U.S. Department of Commerce Finds Subsidies in Glycine Imports from India Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes Date: 2026-09-14 Introduction The U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) has made a preliminary decision about glycine products imported from India. They think that some companies in India received unfair money help from their government, which makes selling their products cheaper in the U.S. This is part of an ongoing investigation to make sure trade rules are fair. Background Glycine is a product that the U.S. monitors closely. In 2019, a rule was set to make sure India was not giving unfair help to their companies for glycine. Commerce has done a review for the year 2024 to check if these rules were followed. They started this talk in July 2025 and chose two main companies, Kumar Industries and Mulji Mehta Enterprises, to look at closely. Decision to Rescind for Some Companies Commerce has decided to stop looking at 27 companies because nobody wanted a review for them anymore. This means those companies will not be part of this decision about unfair subsidies. Reason for the Review A review is done to make sure there are no unfair practices. The U.S. laws state there should be no unfair help from governments to companies that could harm fair trade. Commerce found that some companies may have received help, which means they sold glycine at lower prices unfairly. Results and Method For this review, Commerce found that Kumar Industries and Mulji Mehta Enterprises took part in these programs. They gave Kumar a subsidy rate of 39.75% and Mulji Mehta Enterprises a rate of 104.92%. Mulji Mehta Pharma, linked to Mulji Mehta Enterprises, also got Kumar’s rate of 39.75% because it wasn’t separately checked. What Happens Next? Commerce will allow people to talk about this decision before making it final. Anyone interested in giving thoughts must do so within 21 days from today’s announcement. The final decision will be made after listening to these comments. Conclusion This step ensures fair trade practices between the U.S. and India concerning glycine. Commerce’s actions aim to protect U.S. businesses from unfair competition while ensuring they follow international trade rules. Families and industries relying on fair pricing will be kept informed as the review continues. For more detailed information, parties are invited to access the full preliminary review memorandum online. 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.