Government Regulation

June 12, 2019

Anti-Dumping Update

American Mattress Manufacturers Welcome the US Department of Commerce Preliminary Determination of Dumping by Chinese Mattress Producers


News provided by

The Mattress Petitioners

May 29, 2019, 15:23 ET


WASHINGTON, May 29, 2019 /PRNewswire/ — Corsicana Mattress Company, Elite Comfort Solutions, Future Foam Inc., FXI, Inc., Innocor, Inc., Kolcraft Enterprises Inc., Leggett & Platt, Incorporated, Serta Simmons Bedding, LLC, and Tempur Sealy International, Inc. (collectively, the “Mattress Petitioners”) applaud today’s US Department of Commerce (“Commerce”) announcement finding dumping by the largest Chinese mattress producers.  Commerce announced dumping margins of 38.56 to 84.64 percent for the two mandatory respondents (Healthcare Co., Ltd. and Zinus (Xiamen) Inc.) and applied dumping margins of 74.65 percent to the 33 separate rate companies that demonstrated independence from the Chinese government and 1,731.75 percent to all other Chinese producers, which are referred to collectively as the China-Wide entity.  The dumping margin is the difference between the Chinese producers’ US prices and a normal value calculated under US trade law.

“We are thrilled that Commerce has confirmed that Chinese producers are relying on significant dumping margins to unfairly compete in the US market with margins as high as 1,731.75 percent,” said Yohai Baisburd, lead counsel to the Mattress Petitioners.  The preliminary determination will be published in the Federal Register within a week or so at which time US Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) will commence collecting cash deposits of dumping duties based on these margins.  These dumping duties are in addition to the 25 percent “Section 301” duties the United States has imposed on a variety of Chinese goods, including mattresses.

“Today’s announcement and the collection of dumping duties are necessary steps to allow us and the whole US mattress industry to compete on a level playing field with Chinese producers,” said Christos Chrisafides, President of Elite Comfort Solutions.

Commerce also found “critical circumstances” with respect to the separate rate companies and the China-wide entity because of a surge in imports after this case was filed on September 18, 2018.  CBP will be instructed to collect the cash deposits of dumping duties retroactively for 90 days from importers of mattresses covered by the critical circumstances finding.

The Mattress Petitioners believe this action is essential to ensure that the US mattress industry can compete on a level playing field and to allow for future reinvestment and growth for the entire US industry.  For additional information please contact the Mattress Petitioners lead counsel, Yohai Baisburd of Cassidy Levy Kent (USA) LLP, at 202-567-2319.

SOURCE The Mattress Petitioners

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/american-mattress-manufacturers-welcome-the-us-department-of-commerce-preliminary-determination-of-dumping-by-chinese-mattress-producers-300858563.html

June 12, 2019

Anti-Dumping Update

American Mattress Manufacturers Welcome the US Department of Commerce Preliminary Determination of Dumping by Chinese Mattress Producers


News provided by

The Mattress Petitioners

May 29, 2019, 15:23 ET


WASHINGTON, May 29, 2019 /PRNewswire/ — Corsicana Mattress Company, Elite Comfort Solutions, Future Foam Inc., FXI, Inc., Innocor, Inc., Kolcraft Enterprises Inc., Leggett & Platt, Incorporated, Serta Simmons Bedding, LLC, and Tempur Sealy International, Inc. (collectively, the “Mattress Petitioners”) applaud today’s US Department of Commerce (“Commerce”) announcement finding dumping by the largest Chinese mattress producers.  Commerce announced dumping margins of 38.56 to 84.64 percent for the two mandatory respondents (Healthcare Co., Ltd. and Zinus (Xiamen) Inc.) and applied dumping margins of 74.65 percent to the 33 separate rate companies that demonstrated independence from the Chinese government and 1,731.75 percent to all other Chinese producers, which are referred to collectively as the China-Wide entity.  The dumping margin is the difference between the Chinese producers’ US prices and a normal value calculated under US trade law.

“We are thrilled that Commerce has confirmed that Chinese producers are relying on significant dumping margins to unfairly compete in the US market with margins as high as 1,731.75 percent,” said Yohai Baisburd, lead counsel to the Mattress Petitioners.  The preliminary determination will be published in the Federal Register within a week or so at which time US Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) will commence collecting cash deposits of dumping duties based on these margins.  These dumping duties are in addition to the 25 percent “Section 301” duties the United States has imposed on a variety of Chinese goods, including mattresses.

“Today’s announcement and the collection of dumping duties are necessary steps to allow us and the whole US mattress industry to compete on a level playing field with Chinese producers,” said Christos Chrisafides, President of Elite Comfort Solutions.

Commerce also found “critical circumstances” with respect to the separate rate companies and the China-wide entity because of a surge in imports after this case was filed on September 18, 2018.  CBP will be instructed to collect the cash deposits of dumping duties retroactively for 90 days from importers of mattresses covered by the critical circumstances finding.

The Mattress Petitioners believe this action is essential to ensure that the US mattress industry can compete on a level playing field and to allow for future reinvestment and growth for the entire US industry.  For additional information please contact the Mattress Petitioners lead counsel, Yohai Baisburd of Cassidy Levy Kent (USA) LLP, at 202-567-2319.

SOURCE The Mattress Petitioners

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/american-mattress-manufacturers-welcome-the-us-department-of-commerce-preliminary-determination-of-dumping-by-chinese-mattress-producers-300858563.html

June 5, 2019

There are Some States to Avoid

I lived in IL multiple times, but I’m not going back . . . like the rain tax in NJ

EV Owners In Illinois Must Pay $248 A Year To Make Up For Lost Gas Tax Revenue

As if people in Illinois weren’t being taxed enough as a result of the state’s ongoing pension crisis, now electric vehicle owners in the lowest rated state are going to have to pay $248 in annual registration fees next year – $100 more than what owners of gas burning cars pay – according to the Chicago Tribune.

The higher fee is part of the state’s road improvement legislation. The fee is a massive hike from the $17.50 a year that EV owners currently pay, but significantly lower than $1000 fee that lawmakers proposed last month in a bid to compensate for the loss of state gas tax revenue.

Tom Coleman, 69, of Naperville said: “They’ve cut it back from an outrageous number to a more reasonable number. Most EV owners are going to feel a lot better than $1,000, but still upset.”

Of course, just because it’s been postponed does not mean it will not happen, and with the state chronically on the very of insolvency, Illinois will keep on trying to extra a pound, or several hundred gallons, of virtual gasoline from environmentally conscious electric car owners.

As a reminder, over the weekend, the Illinois General Assembly approved the governor’s $45 billion package of transportation infrastructure improvements which boosted things like vehicle registration fees to fund it. The gas tax in Illinois, which is already one of the highest in the United States, will be doubled to $.38 per gallon and the annual registration fee will jump to $148, from $50, for most gas burning vehicles.

And since EVs don’t use gas, EV owners don’t pay any gas tax. This has prompted the state to assess an additional hundred dollars per year to EV owners in lieu of motor fuel taxes. In other words, congratulations EV owners, you’re still paying for gas, even if indirectly.

Hybrids, which still use gas as a supplement to electric power, are not included in the registration surcharge. Legislation introduced last month by Democratic Senator Martin Sandoval of Chicago would have raised the annual EV registration to $1,000. That proposal was met with pushback from EV manufacturers and owners, who called it “unfair” and a “disincentive”.

Companies like Rivian are calling the $248 fee reasonable compared to the initial fee proposed.

Rivian spokesman Michael McHale said: “We appreciate the stance taken by the Illinois legislature on this issue as we continue our build out and investment in the Normal, IL factory that will help increase the numbers of electric vehicles on the roads of Illinois.”

EV sales have been gaining traction over recent years, fueled in part by state and federal incentives. But charging owners more to drive an electric vehicle in Illinois might slow down the momentum for EVs in the state. Illinois ranked seventh in EV sales last year at 6,400 vehicles, and with a total of about 15,000 electric vehicles registered in the state. Coleman received a $7,500 federal tax credit on his $40,000 Chevy Bolt last year. He didn’t get any incentives from Illinois and commented that the $248 fee was fair for the state’s much-needed road repairs.

He stated: “A lot of EV people aren’t going to be happy, although I think we need to do our fair share. These roads really suck around here.”

And we know this idea is completely foreign, but instead of incentivizing and decentivizing over and over, perhaps the state might at some point consider actually allowing the free market to determine what vehicles should wind up on the road. We understand that this plays into legislators’ nightmarish fears of not being able to find things to tax, but we’re sure they’d find something… 

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-06-04/ev-owners-illinois-must-pay-248-year-make-lost-gas-tax-revenue

June 5, 2019

There are Some States to Avoid

I lived in IL multiple times, but I’m not going back . . . like the rain tax in NJ

EV Owners In Illinois Must Pay $248 A Year To Make Up For Lost Gas Tax Revenue

As if people in Illinois weren’t being taxed enough as a result of the state’s ongoing pension crisis, now electric vehicle owners in the lowest rated state are going to have to pay $248 in annual registration fees next year – $100 more than what owners of gas burning cars pay – according to the Chicago Tribune.

The higher fee is part of the state’s road improvement legislation. The fee is a massive hike from the $17.50 a year that EV owners currently pay, but significantly lower than $1000 fee that lawmakers proposed last month in a bid to compensate for the loss of state gas tax revenue.

Tom Coleman, 69, of Naperville said: “They’ve cut it back from an outrageous number to a more reasonable number. Most EV owners are going to feel a lot better than $1,000, but still upset.”

Of course, just because it’s been postponed does not mean it will not happen, and with the state chronically on the very of insolvency, Illinois will keep on trying to extra a pound, or several hundred gallons, of virtual gasoline from environmentally conscious electric car owners.

As a reminder, over the weekend, the Illinois General Assembly approved the governor’s $45 billion package of transportation infrastructure improvements which boosted things like vehicle registration fees to fund it. The gas tax in Illinois, which is already one of the highest in the United States, will be doubled to $.38 per gallon and the annual registration fee will jump to $148, from $50, for most gas burning vehicles.

And since EVs don’t use gas, EV owners don’t pay any gas tax. This has prompted the state to assess an additional hundred dollars per year to EV owners in lieu of motor fuel taxes. In other words, congratulations EV owners, you’re still paying for gas, even if indirectly.

Hybrids, which still use gas as a supplement to electric power, are not included in the registration surcharge. Legislation introduced last month by Democratic Senator Martin Sandoval of Chicago would have raised the annual EV registration to $1,000. That proposal was met with pushback from EV manufacturers and owners, who called it “unfair” and a “disincentive”.

Companies like Rivian are calling the $248 fee reasonable compared to the initial fee proposed.

Rivian spokesman Michael McHale said: “We appreciate the stance taken by the Illinois legislature on this issue as we continue our build out and investment in the Normal, IL factory that will help increase the numbers of electric vehicles on the roads of Illinois.”

EV sales have been gaining traction over recent years, fueled in part by state and federal incentives. But charging owners more to drive an electric vehicle in Illinois might slow down the momentum for EVs in the state. Illinois ranked seventh in EV sales last year at 6,400 vehicles, and with a total of about 15,000 electric vehicles registered in the state. Coleman received a $7,500 federal tax credit on his $40,000 Chevy Bolt last year. He didn’t get any incentives from Illinois and commented that the $248 fee was fair for the state’s much-needed road repairs.

He stated: “A lot of EV people aren’t going to be happy, although I think we need to do our fair share. These roads really suck around here.”

And we know this idea is completely foreign, but instead of incentivizing and decentivizing over and over, perhaps the state might at some point consider actually allowing the free market to determine what vehicles should wind up on the road. We understand that this plays into legislators’ nightmarish fears of not being able to find things to tax, but we’re sure they’d find something… 

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-06-04/ev-owners-illinois-must-pay-248-year-make-lost-gas-tax-revenue

May 31, 2019

Chinese Phenol Update

Corrected: China imposes preliminary ADDs on phenol imports from five origins

Source: ICIS News

2019/05/27

Correction: In the ICIS news story headlined “China imposes preliminary ADDs on phenol imports from five origins” dated 27 May please read in the first paragraph, “…antidumping duties (ADDs) of 11.9%…” instead of “…antidumping duties (ADDs) of 28.9%…”, and in the second paragraph “…which started on 26 March…” instead of “…which started on 28 March…”. A corrected version follows.

SINGAPORE (ICIS)–China has imposed preliminary antidumping duties (ADDs) of 11.9% to 129.6% on phenol imports from the US, EU, South Korea, Japan and Thailand with immediate effect.

Container ships docked at the Yangshan port in Shanghai, China. (Source: AP/REX/Shutterstock)The Chinese Ministry of Commerce announced on Monday the preliminary results of its ADD probe, which started on 26 March 2018.

Country/Region Company ADD
US INEOS Americas LLC 129.6%
US Blue Cube Operations LLC 125.4%
US Other US companies 129.6%
Europe INEOS Phenol GmbH 82%
Europe INEOS Phenol Belgium NV 82%
Europe Other European companies 82%
South Korea Kumho P&B Chemicals, Inc 13.9%
South Korea LG Chemicals 13.3%
South Korea Other South Korean companies 23.7%
Japan Mitsui Chemicals 81.2%
Japan Other Japanese companies 81.2%
Thailand PTT Phenol Company Limited 11.9%
Thailand Other Thai companies 28.6%

Source: China Ministry of Commerce

The release of the probe’s preliminary results had been delayed by the 90-day US-China trade war truce from early December 2018.

Market players expect China’s ADDs on phenol imports to be finalized in November.

China conducted the probe on the petition of domestic producers, including PetroChina Jilin Petrochemical, Changshu Changchun, CEPSA Shanghai, Sinopec Mitsui Chemicals, Bluestar Harbin Petrochemical, Yangzhou Shiyou and Huizhou Zhongxin.

The investigation covered the period 1 January 2014 to 30 September 2017.

US phenol imports (by country)

For US-origin phenol, the ADD is on top of the 10% import duty imposed in August 2018, a month since the US-China trade war began.

Since the fourth quarter of last year, there had been no US-origin phenol exported to China.

(Adds paragraphs 3-8, pie charts)

https://www.icis.com/explore/resources/news/2019/05/27/10369909/corrected-china-imposes-preliminary-adds-on-phenol-imports-from-five-origins?cmpid=SOC%7CRSS%7Ctwitter%7CFreeChemNewsFeed