US steelmakers rummaging in the trade case toolbox for imports relief

It took four years, but we might now know what former Nucor CEO Dan DiMicco meant in 2012 when he said Nucor was “exploring some very new and unique ways” of combating unfairly traded steel imports. “There are opportunities for us to deal with this today with tools that are in the toolbox and tools that will be added to the toolbox,” DiMicco said during an earnings call in October 2012. Since then, US steelmakers have petitioned for antidumping and countervailing duty (AD and CVD) investigations on oil country tubular goods, rebar, wire rod, welded line pipe, corrosion-resistant sheet, structural tubing, cold-rolled coil, hot-rolled coil, cut-to-length plate and other steel products. After the wave of AD and CVD duty investigations in the last few years, we’re now hearing US metals companies touting new tools — such as last year’s provision lowering the injury standard — and calling out so many sections of US trade law that it’s starting to sound like trade case bingo. 201. 232. 337. 332. They conjure a sort of trade case numerology that requires a deep understanding of the myriad ways domestic industries can confront unfair trade, although there has been no recent mention of 301, which has been unsuccessful for steel at least thrice, or the mystical Super 301. “It’s time now that we do something substantial. It’s time now to send the message that we’re not going to have to keep coming back case after case and year after year for 15 more years,” Leo Gerard, president of the United Steelworkers union, said at an International Trade Commission hearing. “It is time that the administration leads a 201. It is time that the administration put forward an investigation on a 232.” Steel Dynamics Inc. CEO Mark Millett testified that launching a Section 201 proceeding was “likely the only viable solution to restore financial health to steel manufacturers and pipe and tube producers.” So, what do all these numbers mean? Section 201, Trade Act of 1974 – A Section 201 action is probably the most commonly known trade action for steelmakers besides AD and CVD cases and it has helped the industry before. Unlike AD and CVD cases that have to be filed on products and name countries individually, Section 201 actions — also called safeguards — impact all imports of specific products no matter the origin. They’re also are enacted more quickly. In 2001, the ITC recommended a four-year Section 201 program with tariffs for multiple ...