X hits on this document

PDF document

Coated Free Sheet Paper From China, Indonesia, and Korea - page 19 / 198

730 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

19 / 198

3.

Simultaneous Presence

Imports from each of the subject countries have been present in the U.S. market in each year of the POI and during the interim 2006 period.88

4.

Channels of Distribution

The domestic like product and subject imports are sold through common channels of distribution, that is, through distributors (known as “merchants”) and to end users. Both the domestic like product and subject imports are sold predominantly through merchants. Approximately *** percent of sales of the domestic like product, and an estimated *** percent of subject imports, are made through this channel.89

5. Conclusion

Based on our consideration of the four criteria discussed above, we find that there is a reasonable overlap of competition among the subject imports and the domestic like product, and we cumulate subject imports from China, Indonesia, and Korea for purposes of our present material injury analysis.

VI.

REASONABLE INDICATION OF MATERIAL INJURY BY REASON OF ALLEGEDLY SUBSIDIZED AND LESS THAN FAIR VALUE IMPORTS FROM CHINA, INDONESIA, AND KOREA

In the preliminary phase of antidumping or countervailing duty investigations, the Commission

determines whether there is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of the imports under investigation.90 In making this determination, the Commission must consider the volume of subject imports, their effect on prices for the domestic like product, and their impact on domestic producers of the domestic like product, but only in the context of U.S. production operations.91 The statute defines “material injury” as “harm which is not inconsequential, immaterial, or unimportant.”92 In assessing whether there is a reasonable indication that the domestic industry is materially injured by reason of subject imports, we consider all relevant economic factors that bear on the state of the industry in the United States.93 No single factor is dispositive, and all relevant factors are considered “within the context of the business cycle and conditions of competition that are distinctive to the affected industry.”94

For the reasons stated below, we determine that there is a reasonable indication that the domestic industry producing CFSP is materially injured by reason of subject imports from China, Indonesia, and Korea.

88

CR/PR at Table IV-2.

89

CR at II-1, PR at II-1.

90

19 U.S.C. §§ 1671b(a) and 1673b(a).

91 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(B)(i). The Commission “may consider such other economic factors as are relevant to the determination” but shall “identify each [such] factor . . . [a]nd explain in full its relevance to the determination.” 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(B); see also, e.g., Angus Chem. Co. v. United States, 140 F.3d 1478 (Fed. Cir. 1998).

92

19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(A).

93

19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(C)(iii).

94

19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(C)(iii).

13

Document info
Document views730
Page views730
Page last viewedWed Dec 07 08:41:32 UTC 2016
Pages198
Paragraphs7125
Words78899

Comments