LinkedInFacebookInstagramXYouTube
305-456-3830|info@diaztradelaw.com

U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC)

Call 305-456-3830 or email info@diaztradelaw.com.

New AD/CVD Case Filed Against Glyphosate from China 

A new antidumping and countervailing duty action has been filed against Glyphosate from China. The allegation is that imports from China are being dumped and unfairly subsidized.  

Full list of importers here.
Full list of exporters here. 

Background on AD/CVD Investigations 

Antidumping duty (“AD”) and countervailing duty (“CVD”) investigations are brought jointly by the U.S. International Trade Commission (“USITC”) and the U.S. Department of Commerce (“Commerce”). AD investigations are triggered when a domestic industry alleges that it has been injured by competing imports of particular goods from specific countries being sold at less than a fair value. Meanwhile, CVD investigations are triggered when a domestic industry alleges that it has been injured by competing imports that are being unfairly subsidized by their governments. The domestic industry initiating the investigation is known as the petitioner, while the foreign industry participating in the investigation is known as the respondent. 

Scope of the Investigation 

The merchandise covered by these investigations is glyphosate (N(phosphonomethyl) glycine) in all forms, concentrations, and formulations.  

The products subject to the investigation are currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under the following subheadings: 2931.49.0020, 3808.93.5020, and 2931.49.0080.  

Full scope here.

Next Steps 

The Commerce Department will determine whether to initiate the investigations within 20 days. The […]

By |2026-07-02T07:40:26-04:00July 2, 2026|AD/CVD, China, Import|0 Comments
Read More

EAPA Update: CBP Finds Evasion Despite Full Cooperation 

A recent EAPA evasion finding against a solar importer reveals how a single country-of-origin misclassification can trigger steep consequences, even when the importer fully cooperates with CBP.

KEY TAKEAWAYS 

  • CBP issued a Notice of Determination as to Evasion in an EAPA case, finding that a major solar-module importer evaded antidumping AD/CVD orders on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells. 
  • Report the cell, not the module.  For solar modules assembled in a third country, the AD/CVD-relevant country of origin is where the cell was made, not where the module was assembled. Declaring the assembly country can be a material, false statement under EAPA. 
  • Cooperation does not erase the duty.  The company fully cooperated, but CBP found evasion anyway. 
  • The exposure is severe.  Cash-deposit rates reached up to 271.28% (Vietnam AD) and 238.95% (China-wide AD).
  • If you assemble abroad and import into the U.S., audit your country-of-origin declarations now — before an allegation does it for you. 

The Evasion Case 

On June 23, 2026, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a Notice of Determination as to Evasion in EAPA Consolidated Case No. 8163, finding substantial evidence that a major solar-module importer evaded antidumping (AD) and countervailing (CVD) duty orders on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells. The finding reached the Vietnam Circumvention Determination and the Malaysia and Vietnam AD/CVD Orders. 

The […]

By |2026-07-02T07:24:30-04:00July 2, 2026|AD/CVD, Enforcement, Import, Investigation, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)|0 Comments
Read More

New AD/CVD Case Filed Against Choline Salts from China 

A new antidumping and countervailing duty action has been filed against Choline Salts from China. The allegation is that imports from China are being dumped and unfairly subsidized.  

Full list of importers here.
Full list of exporters here. 

Background on AD/CVD Investigations 

Antidumping duty (“AD”) and countervailing duty (“CVD”) investigations are brought jointly by the U.S. International Trade Commission (“USITC”) and the U.S. Department of Commerce (“Commerce”). AD investigations are triggered when a domestic industry alleges that it has been injured by competing imports of particular goods from specific countries being sold at less than a fair value. Meanwhile, CVD investigations are initiated when a domestic industry alleges that it has been injured by competing imports unfairly subsidized by their governments. The domestic industry initiating the investigation is known as the petitioner, while the foreign industry participating in the investigation is known as the respondent. 

Scope of the Investigation 

The merchandise covered by these investigations is choline salts, in all forms and purities.  

The products subject to the investigation are currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under the following subheadings: 2923.10.0000, 2106.90.9998, 2309.90.1005, 2309.90.1015, 2309.90.1020, 2309.90.1030, 2309.90.1032, 2309.90.1035, 2309.90.1045, 2309.90.1050, 2309.90.9500, and 3824.99.9397.  

Full scope here.

Next Steps 

The Commerce Department will determine whether to initiate the […]

By |2026-06-26T12:37:20-04:00June 26, 2026|China, Import, U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC), U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC)|0 Comments
Read More

New Section 232 Action: What the June 2026 Aluminum, Steel & Copper Proclamation Means for Your Imports

Topline summary: On June 1, 2026, President Trump amended the Section 232 tariff framework for aluminum, steel, and copper. Importers of agricultural, industrial, and mobile equipment may qualify for temporarily reduced rates of 10–15%, while certain furniture parts, lithographic plates, and steel racks are newly dutiable for the first time. With a December 31, 2027, sunset on all temporary reductions, importers should audit their HTS classifications now to avoid overpaying or underpaying.

On June 1, 2026, the President issued Proclamation 11032, “Further Adjusting the Tariff Regimes for Imports of Aluminum, Steel, and Copper Into the United States,” amending the April 2026 Section 232 framework (Proclamation 11021). U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) followed on June 5 with implementation guidance in CSMS #68855869. The changes take effect for goods entered for consumption, or withdrawn from a warehouse for consumption, on or after 12:01 a.m. ET on June 8, 2026. 

This is not a uniform tariff cut. The proclamation does two opposite things at once. It reduces Section 232 rates on a large block of machinery and equipment, while simultaneously adding new products to the duty regime for the first time. If you import equipment, the change may help you. If you import certain furniture parts, lithographic plates, or steel racks, you may have just become newly dutiable.  

What Changed on June 8 

  1. New products […]

By |2026-06-08T17:20:18-04:00June 8, 2026|Import, International Trade, tariffs, Trade Policy, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC), U.S. Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR)|0 Comments
Read More

A Court Just Blocked an EAPA Evasion Action Over a 519% Duty Rate

Quick Summary: On April 24, 2026, the U.S. Court of International Trade did something importers rarely see – it stepped in mid-investigation and blocked U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) from enforcing interim measures in an Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA) evasion case. The measures had saddled the importer, ICON EV LLC, with a combined antidumping and countervailing duty (AD/CVD) cash-deposit rate of 519.23% and a “live entry” requirement that, on the company’s evidence, would have pushed it into bankruptcy within a month. The decision, ICON EV LLC v. United States, Slip Op. 26-42, is a meaningful crack in what has felt like an impenetrable EAPA enforcement wall, and it offers a roadmap for importers caught in the same trap. 

What is an EAPA evasion investigation? 

The Enforce and Protect Act gives CBP a fast, powerful tool to police the evasion of AD/CVD orders. When a competitor or a domestic industry coalition files a “reasonable allegation” that an importer is dodging duties through transshipment, misclassification, undervaluation, or other schemes, CBP must open an investigation within 15 business days and issue a final determination within 300 days. 

What many importers do not realize is that within 90 days of opening the investigation, CBP must impose “interim measures” if it forms a “reasonable suspicion” of evasion. Those measures can include suspending or extending liquidation of entries, requiring “live entry” (full documentation and duty payment before goods are released), and imposing AD/CVD cash-deposit rates. And critically, the statute does not require CBP to give the importer notice or a chance to respond before those interim measures […]

By |2026-06-08T19:35:02-04:00June 5, 2026|AD/CVD, Enforcement, U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC)|0 Comments
Read More
This website uses cookies and third party services. By continuing to use our website, you agree to the Privacy Policy. OK
Skip to content
Go to Top