International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers v. United States

Court of International Trade

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers v. United States

19 Ct. Int'l Trade 12

CourtUnited States Court of International Trade

DecidedJanuary 6, 1995

DocketCourt No. 92-03-00137

StatusPublished

This text of 19 Ct. Int'l Trade 12 (International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Court of International Trade primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers v. United States, 19 Ct. Int'l Trade 12 (cit 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

RESTANI, Judge:

This action contests the final results of the sixth administrative review of an antidumping duty order. The challenged determination is Color Television Receivers. Except for Monitors, from Taiwan, 57 Fed. Reg. 3740 (Dep’t Comm. 1992). The issue before the court is whether the United States Department of Commerce is now using a proper methodology under 19U.S.C. § 1677a(d)(l)(C) (1988) for computing an adjustment to United States Price (“USP”) for a value added tax forgiven upon export of the televisions.

Commerce’s new methodology applies the home market tax rate to the exported merchandise at the same point in the U.S. chain of commerce as the foreign tax is applied in the home market. The VAT USP adjustment is also calculated in a manner that accounts for the difference between the home market tax base and U.S. tax base caused by import duties and their drawback or non-collection. This methodology has been approved in several cases. See, e.g., Independent Radionic Workers of America v. United States, 862 F. Supp. 422, 426 (Ct. Int’l Trade 1994); Avesta Sheffield, Inc. v. United States, Slip Op. 94-53 (Mar. 31, 1994). The remand requested by defendant shall be conducted in accordance with these decisions.

The results of the remand are due within 45 days hereof. Any objections and responses to such objections shall be filed within 11 and 5 days thereafter, respectively.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Opinion

RESTANI, Judge:

This action contests the final results of the sixth administrative review of an antidumping duty order. The challenged determination is Color Television Receivers. Except for Monitors, from Taiwan, 57 Fed. Reg. 3740 (Dep’t Comm. 1992). The issue before the court is whether the United States Department of Commerce is now using a proper methodology under 19U.S.C. § 1677a(d)(l)(C) (1988) for computing an adjustment to United States Price (“USP”) for a value added tax forgiven upon export of the televisions.

Commerce’s new methodology applies the home market tax rate to the exported merchandise at the same point in the U.S. chain of commerce as the foreign tax is applied in the home market. The VAT USP adjustment is also calculated in a manner that accounts for the difference between the home market tax base and U.S. tax base caused by import duties and their drawback or non-collection. This methodology has been approved in several cases. See, e.g., Independent Radionic Workers of America v. United States, 862 F. Supp. 422, 426 (Ct. Int’l Trade 1994); Avesta Sheffield, Inc. v. United States, Slip Op. 94-53 (Mar. 31, 1994). The remand requested by defendant shall be conducted in accordance with these decisions.

The results of the remand are due within 45 days hereof. Any objections and responses to such objections shall be filed within 11 and 5 days thereafter, respectively.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

19 Ct. Int'l Trade 12, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/international-brotherhood-of-electrical-workers-v-united-states-cit-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack