International Trade Law News /title <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> <meta name="verify-v1" content="6kFGcaEvnPNJ6heBYemQKQasNtyHRZrl1qGh38P0b6M=" /> <head> <title>International Trade Law News

« Home | U.S. and Mexico Sign Cement Agreement » | U.S. - Dominican Republic - Central America Free T... » | BIS Imposes $221,250 Penalty on Microwave Company ... » | BIS Imposes Penalties and Revokes Export Privilege... » | BIS Denies Export Privileges of Person for Exporti... » | Japan to Strengthen Export Controls » | Commerce Department Seeking Comments on Eliminatio... » | Crawfish Processor Sues to Receive Slice of Byrd A... » | CBP Issues Administrative Message to Brokers Regar... » | 2006 ICPA Conference - Viva Compliance! » 

March 12, 2006 

Antidumping Petition on Activated Carbon From China Refiled

On March 8, 2006, Norit Americas Inc., of Marshall, TX, and Calgon Carbon Corp., of Pittsburgh, PA, refiled their antidumping petition on activated carbon from the People's Republic of China.

Norit and Calgon filed a similar antidumping petition in January 2006, but withdrew the petition the following month. The new petition limits the subject merchandise to "steam activated carbon" only.

As we previously reported, less than a week before the original petition was filed Calgon Carbon, one of the two petitioners, announced that it opened a "state-of-the art" activated carbon processing and packaging facility in Tianjin, China that will be operated by Calgon Carbon Company Tianjin Limited (CCT), a wholly owned subsidiary of Calgon Carbon Corporation.

Labels:

I find it very interesting that Calgon is willing to file this anti-dumping petition right as it is opening its own facility in China. The Chinese companies against which Calgon brought the anti-dumping petition presumably are either owned by the Chinese state or have close ties to it, hence the anti-dumping charge. It is always possible Calgon's Chinese facility will be working with very different governmental entities than those that work with the Chinese companies that allegedly engaged in dumping. However, if this is not the case, I cannot help but wonder whether Calgon might be creating some problems for itself in China with this filing.

From one who is in the thick of it.
This petition is not really against the Chinese, it is against the select American importers (most of whom are small businesses)of chinese coal carbon. These small businesses (importers) are the ones who will initially pay anti-dumping duties. But, make no mistake, you and I are the ones who will really be paying for this in the end. The one and only reason that this anti-dumping petition is being filed is because of reduced profit margins for the big boys (big companies playing with big profits). There is far more to this than meets the eye. If this gets by the first round of the ITC/DOC investigation, in essence, a monopoly will again be in place. Prices for all carbons, no matter what source, will increase dramitically by as much as 200%-700%(based on supply and demand). And, businesses who import this carbon from China will STOP, because the majority of these small businesses (who import onlyhalf of the total amount) do not have the physical "cash" to overcome the tremendous increase in the outlay of cash, which would be required, even if the dutiers are put into place only temporarily during a prolonged investigation.
People will go out of business, water bills will increase by at least the same amount because the municipalities will not be able to get the carbon at the original prices they were quoted and they will pass these costs on to you the consumer. Other municipalities will have to shut off their water supply, because they too can not get the enormous amount of immediatey required cash to pay for the immediate increase in carbon prices (even if only temporary). And, because there are strict requirements on effluent contaminant levels from these same municipalities, they may also have to shut down, because there is physically not be enough carbon available from Calgon and Norit (the domestic suppliers filing the petition) to meet the ever increasing filtration requirements throughout the entire USA.
The trickle down effect will increase prices across the board for almost every single industry and product in the USA.
And, in the end, the big boys, with their deep pockets, will be able to overcome the anti-dumping "cash requirement duties" (even temporarily), increase prices immediately for the shorter supply of material and increased duties and STICK IT TO ALL OF US (the public in general), like they did befoe there was a level playing field (real, honest competition).
Calgon is one of the largest exporters of carbon from China and the largest importer of carbon from China into the USA. They are playing economic gamnes with the anti-dumping laws to simply eliminate competition.

It would seem to me that all carbon prices would increase because of the decrease in supply of any carbon product. Who knows about this petition? I had not even known about this anti-dumping petition until I was looking for some technical information on the web. If this is so critical, why aren't the people who are defending this telling us (the customers) how to help?
Is this happening so fast that no one can react fast enough?
Do we call our representatives or congressmen to get support against the petition?

This is very interesting site...
» » »

Post a Comment

Editor

Subscribe

Subscribe to our confidential mailing list

Mobile Version

Search Trade Law News

International Trade and Compliance Jobs

Jobs from Indeed

Archives

Categories

Disclaimer

  • This Site is presented for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is formed when you use this Site. Do not consider the Site to be a substitute for obtaining legal advice from a qualified attorney. The information on this Site may be changed without notice and is not guaranteed to be complete, correct or up-to-date. While we try to revise this Site on a regular basis, it may not reflect the most current legal developments. The opinions expressed on this Site are the opinions of the individual author.
  • The content on this Site may be reproduced and/or distributed in whole or in part, provided that its source is indicated as "International Trade Law News, www.tradelawnews.com".
  • ©2003-2015. All rights reserved.

Translate This Site


Powered by Blogger