On December 31, 2014, the Court of International Trade issued an opinion dismissing an action filed by Plaintiff Standard Furniture Manufacturing Co., Inc. (Standard) which sought distributions under the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000 (CDSOA). The CDSOA allowed affected domestic producers (ADP) who supported an antidumping investigation to receive a portion of antidumping duties collected. The CDSOA, also known as the Byrd Amendment, was repealed in 2005. However, affected domestic producers may still receive distributions from duties on goods imported from 2000 to October 1, 2007. Due to delays in the liquidation and distribution process, distributions are still being made to affected domestic producers.
In the complaint, Standard contested a decision by the International Trade Commission (ITC) to deny Standard of ADP status and Customs and Border Protection’s (Customs) decisions to deny Standard CDSOA distribution payments in fiscal years 2011 and 2012. The Court dismissed Standard’s complaint because in response to an ITC questionnaire Standard stated that it opposed the petition which ultimately resulted in an antidumping order on wooden bedroom furniture imported from China.
Standard unsuccessfully argued it should be granted ADP status and thus receive distributions despite indicating a lack of support in the questionnaire because Standard “support[ed] the petition through their conduct.” The Court dismissed Standard’s claims by relying on the language of the CDSOA. The pertinent provision directs the ITC, in providing its list of ADPs to Customs, to include “a list of persons that indicate support of the petition by letter or through questionnaire response.” Thus, the Court held Standard was disqualified from ADP status and CDSOA distributions because Standard opposed the petition in its questionnaire response.