MMM’s Brady Mills and Nicholas Duffey successfully represented Korean steel producers POSCO and Hyundai Steel Company in two recent decisions before the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT). Both cases challenged subsidy determinations by the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce), resulting in remands for Commerce to reconsider its determinations in countervailing duty administrative reviews of certain cut-to-length steel plate from the Republic of Korea.
In POSCO v. United States, the CIT found that Commerce’s de facto specificity determination for the electricity for less-than-adequate remuneration (LTAR) program, as well as its financial contribution and specificity determinations for the Korea Emissions Trading Scheme (KETS), were unlawful.
In Hyundai Steel Company v. United States, the CIT found that Commerce misapplied the statutory standard for disproportionality and failed to provide a rational basis for grouping industries based solely on electricity consumption. Accordingly, the CIT held that Commerce’s determination that the Republic of Korea provides electricity at LTAR was unsupported by substantial evidence and contrary to law.
Read the POSCO v. United States and the Hyundai Steel Company v. United States decisions here.
