« AnteriorContinuar »
separate finding for each country as anything other than a procedural or administrative convenience or expediency.
Tariff Commission practice.--On four occasions since 1954 the Tariff Commission has received from the Treasury Department simultaneous, but separate, determinations covering the same product from different countries. Each of these investigations resulted in unanimous negative determinations by the Commission. The statements of reasons indicated that the products had all been sold at prices equal to or higher than the comparable domestic product. For this reason, it was not necessary to resolve the issue of collective treatment of the dumped imports.
The issue has come up, however, in ways which illustrate the procedural difficulties introduced when Treasury staggers its determinations with respect to LTFV imports of the same products from more than one country. This type of problem is illustrated in the wire rod determinations, where Treasury made four separate determinations at different times with respect to such wire rods from Belgium, Luxembourg, Western Germany and France. In these investigations argument was made that each country's exports of LTFV wire rods had to be separately
Hardboard from Canada and the Union of South Africa, tissue paper from Finland and Norway; rayon staple fiber from Belgium and France; and rayon staple fiber from Cuba and West Germany.
considered in terms of their impact on a domestic industry. The Commission, in four separate unanimous negative determinations, included statements recognizing the issue.
In each of the negative wire rod determinations the Commission stated that it had taken into account a number of factors, the first two of which seem to imply a consideration of the combined injurious effect of LTFV imports from the four countries. However, the Commission determinations seem to have straddled the precise issue now before us, for in each of the determinations, the Commission seems to be implying that no matter whether you consider the LTFV imports separately or collectively the results are still the same.
The investigation which most directly involves the issue now before the Commission is the one with respect to cement from 1/ As a result of this investigation the Commission was divided; a majority in making the affirmative determination took into account that LTFV cement from Sweden had previously depressed the prices in the market areas in which the Portuguese cement was being sold. It noted that the latter cement was continuing such depressed prices and made an affirmative determination. The minority took the position that it was improper to consider the impact of any LTFV imports on an industry except those from
Investigation No. AA 1921-22, Portland Grey Cement from Portugal, October 20, 1961.
The Portuguese cement case is the first case which has afforded an opportunity for judicial review of the present issue.
The U.S. Customs Court in a recent ruling 1/ on an appeal to re
appraisement involving the assessment of dumping duties on cement from Portugal upheld the majority determination of the Commission. The court stated one of the importer's contentions in the case as being "that the Commission exceeded its statutory authority by predicating its finding of 'injury' almost entirely upon importations of cement from countries other than Portugal". In concluding that the Commission majority had acted properly in that case, the
court said that under the extensive powers of the Commission-
a consideration by them of the effect of prior
The LTFV imports of cold pig iron from East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Romania, and the U.S.S.R. were imported and sold in the
1 City Lumber Co. v. United States, R.D. 11557, decided July 9, 1968, and now on appeal.
markets of the United States during the same period of time. The collective imports began in 1964, reached their peak in 1966, and ceased shortly after the beginning of 1967 when appraisements of such imports were withheld by customs officers. I must conclude, on the basis of the foregoing considerations, that the purposes and language of the statute require that the Commission's determination take into account the combined impact of LTFV imports of cold pig iron from all of the countries in question.
Description and Uses
Virtually all the pig iron from the four Eastern Europe countries on which the Treasury Department found sales at LTFV consisted of the basic and foundry grades. Almost all basic pig iron is used in the United States for the purpose of making steel. The great bulk of pig iron produced in the United States is of the basic grade and is transferred from the blast furnace to the steel making furnace in the molten state. Nonintegrated steelmaking concerns (i.e., those having no blast furnaces) whether they make steel ingots or steel for casting, must purchase their requirements of basic pig iron. The volume of their pig iron requirements varies, of course, depending on the process used for steelmaking. Virtually all of their pig iron is purchased in the form of cold pig that requires remelting in the steel furnace.
steel producers sometimes have occasion to buy basic cold pig iron, either domestic or imported, when needed to supplement their captive supply of hot metal; this need usually reflects the idling of one or more of their own blast furnaces for rebuilding, relining, or less extensive repairs.
Foundry pig iron is available in a wide variety of compositions and is used in the iron foundry industry for making iron castings such as pipe, automobile engine blocks and other automotive castings, and machinery parts. It normally has a higher silicon content (up to 3.5 percent or higher compared with a maximum of 1.5 percent in basic pig iron) and often contains less manganese. The foundry grades are usually shipped in the form of cold pig. Basic pig iron can be used for making iron castings but when so used the user incurs the further expense of additional ingredients (such as ferrosilicon) necessary to introduce elements not contained in the quantities required in basic pig iron.
Producers of cast-iron articles generally use a mixture of steel scrap, cast-iron scrap, and pig iron in their iron-making furnaces. The extent to which pig iron is used in the mix is dependent in part on the relative prices of pig iron and castiron scrap. By far the largest volume of cast-iron articles is made from a mixture containing pig iron which is usually 25 percent or more of the mix. However, there are situations in which