While anti-dumping and subsidy investigations are not uncommon, they do not always result in duties being imposed. As a case in point, the Canada Border Services Agency (the “CBSA”) recently closed its investigation into “Drill Pipes” originating in or exported from China because the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (the “CITT”) did not find injury or a threat of injury.

Background

On March 25, 2022, CBSA issued a Notice of Initiation of Investigation under the Special Import Measures Act (“SIMA”) of alleged dumping and subsidizing of “Drill Pipes” originating in or exported from the People’s Republic of China (the “Subject Goods”).

(See our previous blog for more information on the precise definition of the Subject Goods, including exclusions.)

While the CBSA Investigation was ongoing, the CITT conducted a separate Preliminary Injury Inquiry, as required under subsection 34(2) of SIMA.

CITT Preliminary Determination of Injury

On May 24, 2022, the CITT made a Preliminary Determination that “the evidence does not disclose a reasonable indication that the dumping and subsidizing of the subject goods have caused injury or retardation or are threatening to cause injury.”

As a result of the CITT’s Preliminary Determination, the CBSA terminated its investigation into the dumping and subsidizing of Drill Pipe from China effective May 25, 2022, as required by paragraph 35(2)(a) of SIMA.

Implications for Future Anti-Dumping Investigations?

The CITT's Preliminary Determination - along with similar recent Final Determinations in OCTG 3 (Mexico) and OCTG 4 (Austria), serves as a reminder that just because CBSA commences an anti-dumping investigation does not mean that the CITT will find injury, or that anti-dumping duties will be imposed. 

It also serves as a reminder of the importance of making submissions as part of the CITT inquiry, and not focusing solely on the CBSA investigation – as the old saying goes, “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure”, and success at the CITT can stop a CBSA investigation in its tracks.

Takeaways

Given the short timelines for participating in a CITT inquiry, businesses which might be impacted by an investigation under SIMA should immediately contact their lawyers if they think they might want or need to participate – regardless of whether or not they have received an RFI/Questionnaire!

Among other alternatives, there businesses can also request that the CITT consider excluding your products from the “Subject Goods” definition to which the inquiry – and its decisions – applies.  Again, contacting your lawyer immediately to discuss possible next steps and receive a recommendation is invaluable!

Do you require assistance in this area?  If so, please click here.

Want a PDF copy of this blog?