Antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings from start to finish: petitions and initiations, preliminary and final determinations, ITC injury determinations, administrative and sunset reviews, cash deposit rate changes, scope rulings and circumvention findings.
The Canadian International Trade Tribunal found in inquiry NQ-2026-001 that dumping of certain oil and gas well casing originating in or exported from Austria has not caused injury and is not threatening to cause injury to the domestic industry, so anti-dumping duties will not be collected by the Canada Border Services Agency. The complainants were Algoma Tubes Inc., Tenaris Global Services (Canada) Inc. and Hydril Canadian Company LP, collectively Tenaris Canada. The Tribunal will issue its reasons on September 16, 2026.
Why it matters: Entries of certain oil and gas well casing from Austria will not be subject to anti-dumping duties following the CITT's no-injury finding in NQ-2026-001.
The Canadian International Trade Tribunal initiated a preliminary injury inquiry (PI-2026-005) into a complaint by the Canadian Retread Manufacturers Association and Michelin North America (Canada) Inc. that certain truck and bus tires from China are being dumped and subsidized, following the Canada Border Services Agency's initiation of dumping and subsidizing investigations under SIMA. The Tribunal will determine on October 30, 2026 whether there is a reasonable indication that the alleged dumping and subsidizing have caused injury, retardation or a threat of injury. If so, the CBSA will continue its investigations and make preliminary determinations by November 30, 2026.
Why it matters: Importers of certain truck and bus tires from China face a preliminary injury inquiry (PI-2026-005) with a Tribunal injury determination due October 30, 2026 and possible CBSA preliminary determinations by November 30, 2026.
The Canadian International Trade Tribunal continued its December 10, 2020 order on the dumping and subsidizing of oil country tubular goods from China, following expiry review RR-2025-005, finding that expiry of the order was likely to result in injury. The Canada Border Services Agency will therefore continue to impose anti-dumping and countervailing duties on these goods. The order was originally made in expiry review RR-2019-005.
MOFCOM Announcement No. 35 of 2026 states that, from August 14, 2026, antidumping duties continue for five years on single-mode optical fiber from India under tariff line 90011000, at the same rates set in Announcements No. 56 of 2014 and No. 29 of 2020: 7.4% for Sterlite Technologies Limited, 11.4% for Birla Furukawa Fibre Optics Limited, 24.5% for Corning Technologies India Private Limited, 30.6% for Aksh Optifibre Limited and Finolex Cables Limited, and 24.5% for other Indian companies. The expiry review found that dumping and injury to China's single-mode optical fiber industry would likely continue or recur if the measure were terminated.
Why it matters: Importers of Indian-origin single-mode optical fiber under tariff line 90011000 must pay the listed company rate on entries from August 14, 2026, with the product scope unchanged from the 2014 and 2020 announcements.
The U.S. Court of International Trade, in Slip Op. 26-90, Consol. Court No. 24-00190, granted motions for judgment on the agency record filed by Hyundai Steel Company, Dongkuk Steel Mill Co., Ltd. and the Government of the Republic of Korea and remanded Commerce's final results in the 2022 countervailing duty administrative review of certain cut-to-length carbon-quality steel plate from the Republic of Korea for further explanation or reconsideration.
Why it matters: The remand returns Commerce's 2022 review determination on certain cut-to-length carbon-quality steel plate from the Republic of Korea, in which Hyundai Steel received a 1.47 percent ad valorem rate and Dongkuk Steel Mill 1.61 percent, to the agency for further explanation or reconsideration.
The U.S. Court of International Trade sustained Commerce's second remand redetermination in the final scope ruling on certain carbon steel butt-weld pipe fittings from China, holding that rough fittings produced in China that underwent sizing/reforming or heat- or cold-treating and finishing in Vietnam fall within the antidumping duty order. The ruling covers the two Vietnam production scenarios in the covered merchandise referral, EAPA Consolidated Case Number 7335 (Remand Number 7717), involving Norca Industrial Company, LLC and International Piping & Procurement Group, LP. The court's decision is Slip Op. 26-83 in Consol. Court No. 23-00231, dated July 29, 2026.
Why it matters: Entries of Chinese-origin rough carbon steel butt-weld pipe fittings that underwent sizing/reforming or heat- or cold-treating and finishing in Vietnam are within the scope of the antidumping duty order on carbon steel butt-weld pipe fittings from China.
The U.S. Court of International Trade sustained Commerce's remand redetermination in the 2021 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain softwood lumber products from Canada, Slip Op. 26-82, Consol. Court No. 23-00187. The remand followed the CAFC's decision in Marmen III, 134 F.4th 1334 (Fed. Cir. 2025), which vacated Commerce's use of the Cohen's d test; Commerce replaced it with a price difference test as the first step of its differential pricing analysis.
Why it matters: The revised rates apply to the 2021 review of certain softwood lumber products from Canada, with Canfor at 5.25%, West Fraser at 7.06% and non-selected companies at 6.26%.
The U.S. Court of International Trade remanded Commerce's final affirmative antidumping duty determination on certain corrosion-resistant steel products from Mexico, covering the July 1, 2023 to June 30, 2024 period of investigation, in Galvasid S.A. de C.V. v. United States, Slip Op. 26-80, Court Nos. 25-00235 and 26-00825. The court held that Galvasid's challenge, filed October 28, 2025, was timely under 19 U.S.C. § 1516a(g)(3)(A)(i) because no binational panel review was requested, and dismissed the later complaint in Court No. 26-00825. Commerce had assigned Galvasid a 24.05% weighted-average dumping margin using partial facts available with an adverse inference, amended to 24.09% after a ministerial error correction.
The Canadian International Trade Tribunal found in inquiry NQ-2025-008 that the dumping and subsidizing of thermoformed molded fibre tableware originating in or exported from China have caused injury to the domestic industry, and anti-dumping and countervailing duties will therefore be collected by the Canada Border Services Agency. The complainant was CKF Inc. of Hantsport, Nova Scotia. The Tribunal will issue the reasons for its findings on July 13, 2026.
Why it matters: Importers of thermoformed molded fibre tableware from China face collection of anti-dumping and countervailing duties by the Canada Border Services Agency following the CITT's injury finding in NQ-2025-008.
The Canadian International Trade Tribunal determined on June 18, 2026, in preliminary injury inquiry PI-2026-002, that there is a reasonable indication that the dumping and subsidizing of certain steel racks from China have caused injury to the domestic industry. The inquiry followed the Canada Border Services Agency's initiation of dumping and subsidizing investigations under the Special Import Measures Act. CBSA will continue its investigations and issue preliminary determinations by July 17, 2026.
Why it matters: Importers of certain steel racks from China face continued CBSA dumping and subsidizing investigations, with preliminary determinations due by July 17, 2026.
The U.S. Court of International Trade remanded Commerce's final determination and antidumping duty order in the 2024 investigation of paper plates from China, in Fuzhou Hengli Paper Co. v. United States, Slip Op. 26-59, Court No. 25-00064, dated June 11, 2026. The court held that Commerce's application of total adverse facts available, which produced a 515.40% dumping margin for Fuzhou, was not supported by substantial evidence or otherwise in accordance with law. The case concerns the Final Determination published at 90 Fed. Reg. 8,271 (Jan. 28, 2025), covering certain paper plates from China, Thailand and Vietnam.
The Canadian International Trade Tribunal determined in preliminary injury inquiry PI-2026-001 that there is a reasonable indication that the dumping and subsidizing of decorative and other non-structural plywood from China have caused injury or are threatening to cause injury to the domestic industry. The inquiry followed the Canada Border Services Agency's initiation of dumping and subsidizing investigations under the Special Import Measures Act. CBSA will continue its investigations and issue preliminary determinations by July 9, 2026.
The Canadian International Trade Tribunal initiated a final injury inquiry, NQ-2026-002, into whether the dumping and subsidizing of forged grinding media originating in or exported from China have caused injury or retardation or threaten to cause injury. The inquiry follows a notice from the Canada Border Services Agency stating that preliminary determinations were made on the dumping and subsidizing of the goods. The Tribunal will determine on September 22, 2026 whether the dumping and subsidizing have caused injury or retardation or threaten to cause injury to the domestic industry. Interested persons, associations or governments may participate by filing Form I—Notice of Participation.
The U.S. Court of International Trade, in Slip Op. 26-56, denied Deacero S.A.P.I. de C.V. and Deacero USA, Inc.'s motion for judgment on the agency record and sustained in full Commerce's final affirmative anticircumvention determination on prestressed concrete steel wire strand from Mexico, Court No. 24-00212. The inquiry, initiated July 31, 2023, covered high carbon steel wire from Mexico assembled or completed into PC strand in the United States during January 1, 2021 through June 30, 2023. The court rejected Deacero's challenges to Commerce's production comparison methodology, its minor-or-insignificant processing analysis under section 781(a)(2), and its treatment of patterns of trade.
The Canadian International Trade Tribunal determined on May 15, 2026, in preliminary injury inquiry PI-2025-010, that there is a reasonable indication that the dumping and subsidizing of certain unarmoured building cables from China have caused injury to the domestic industry. The inquiry followed the Canada Border Services Agency's initiation of dumping and subsidizing investigations under the Special Import Measures Act. CBSA will continue its investigations and issue preliminary determinations by June 12, 2026.
Why it matters: Importers of certain unarmoured building cables from China will see CBSA's preliminary dumping and subsidizing determinations by June 12, 2026, which will set any provisional duties.
The CBSA initiated investigations on April 20, 2026 into whether steel racks from producers operating in or exporting from China are being dumped, subsidized, or both, following a complaint by Arpac Storage Systems, Etalex Inc., Industries Cresswell Inc., the Econo-Rack (2015) Group Inc. and North American Steel Equipment Inc. The CITT will issue its preliminary injury decision by June 19, 2026, and the CBSA will make preliminary decisions by July 20, 2026. A statement of reasons will be available on the CBSA's website within 15 days of the launch.
Why it matters: Importers of steel racks from China face SIMA investigations that could lead to preliminary determinations by July 20, 2026, with the CITT's injury decision due by June 19, 2026.
In Slip Op. 26-39, Court No. 24-00155, the U.S. Court of International Trade sustained Commerce's final scope determination for the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on wooden cabinets and vanities and components thereof from the People's Republic of China as applied to further processing in Malaysia, denying ACProducts, Inc. and related plaintiffs' motion for judgment on the agency record. Commerce found that Scenario 1, 2 and 3 cabinets produced in China and combined in Malaysia with Malaysian-made cabinet parts are Chinese in origin and covered by the orders, while Scenario 4 cabinets containing a Chinese toe kick and otherwise Malaysian parts are third-country in origin and not covered.
Why it matters: Importers of wooden cabinets and vanities from Malaysia must treat Scenario 1, 2 and 3 cabinets made with Chinese components as Chinese-origin goods subject to the AD/CVD orders, while Scenario 4 cabinets are outside the scope.