96-15683. Color Television Receivers, Except for Video Monitors, From Taiwan; Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review  

  • [Federal Register Volume 61, Number 120 (Thursday, June 20, 1996)]
    [Notices]
    [Pages 31507-31508]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 96-15683]
    
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
    [A-583-009]
    
    
    Color Television Receivers, Except for Video Monitors, From 
    Taiwan; Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
    
    AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
    Department of Commerce.
    
    ACTION: Notice of amendment to final results of antidumping duty 
    administrative review.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: On October 21, 1994, in the case of Zenith Electronics 
    Corporation v. United States, 865 F. Supp. 890 (Zenith), the United 
    States Court of International Trade (the Court) affirmed the Department 
    of Commerce's (the Department's) third results of redetermination on 
    remand and prior remand determinations of the final results of the 
    first administrative review of the antidumping duty order on color 
    television receivers, except for video monitors (CTVs), from Taiwan, to 
    the extent that they were not subsequently modified by the Court. The 
    Court also vacated its July 29, 1991, order to the extent that the 
    order held that ``no assessment rate cap may be applied in liquidating 
    the subject entries unless the importer paid a cash duty for an 
    estimated dumping duty.'' As a result, the Court ordered the Department 
    to apply the assessment rate cap to all subject imports entered between 
    the publication dates of the Department's preliminary affirmative 
    determination of sales at less than fair value (LTFV) and the 
    International Trade Commission's (ITC's) final affirmative injury 
    determination.
        Consistent with the decision of the United States Court of Appeals 
    for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) in Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 
    337 (CAFC 1990) (Timken), on January 17, 1995, the Department published 
    a notice in the Federal Register which suspended liquidation of the 
    subject merchandise entered or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption 
    until there was a ``final and conclusive'' decision in this case (60 FR 
    3391). On February 12, 1996, the CAFC upheld the Department's 
    methodology for determining direct and indirect expenses for purposes 
    of making a circumstance-of-sale (COS) adjustment in calculating AOC 
    International, Inc.'s (AOC) final margin and remanded the case back to 
    the Court for recalculation of dumping margins in a manner consistent 
    with the CAFC's decision. Although the case is not yet ``final and 
    conclusive'' for AOC, the other respondents in this proceeding are not 
    affected by this outstanding issue. We have, therefore, prepared these 
    amended final results for those respondents.
    
    EFFECTIVE DATE: June 20, 1996.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maureen McPhillips or John Kugelman, 
    Office of Antidumping Compliance, Import Administration, International 
    Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
    Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202) 482-
    5253.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    Background
    
        On December 29, 1986, the Department published in the Federal 
    Register the final results of the first administrative review of the 
    antidumping duty order on CTVs from Taiwan (51 FR 46895). In those 
    results, the Department set forth its finding of weighted-average 
    margins for nine companies, AOC, Capetronic (BSR) Ltd. (Capetronic), 
    Fulet Electronic Industrial Co., Ltd. (Fulet), Nettek Corp., Ltd. 
    (Nettek), RCA Taiwan (RCA), Shinlee Corp. (Shinlee), Shin-Shirasuna 
    Electric Co. (Shin-Shirasuna), and Tatung Co. (Tatung), for the period 
    of review (POR) October 19, 1983 through March 31, 1985, and Sampo 
    Corp. (Sampo) for the POR April 1, 1984 through March 31, 1985, and 
    announced its intent to instruct the U.S. Customs Service to assess 
    antidumping duties on all appropriate entries.
        Subsequent to the Department's final results, four of the reviewed 
    companies and a domestic producer, Zenith, filed lawsuits with the 
    Court challenging these results. Thereafter, on September 11, 1989, the 
    Court issued an order and opinion remanding the Department's 
    determination so that the Department could make reasonable allowances 
    for ``bona fide differences in warranty expenses between the United 
    States and the home market'', and to reconsider an adjustment for 
    Sampo's bad debt losses based on its bad debt experience during the 
    period or another appropriate period. See AOC International, Inc. et. 
    al. v. United States, 721 F. Supp. 314 (CIT 1989). The Department 
    requested a voluntary remand for the following reasons: to recalculate 
    constructed value CV) for Tatung; to recalculate AOC's inland freight 
    and explain the calculation methodology; to adjust Tatung's foreign 
    market value (FMV) for discounts and rebates which Tatung paid to 
    distributors for trade-ins of used CTVs by the dealers in the home 
    market; to allocate advertising and sales promotion expenses on a 
    product-line, rather than a model-specific basis; and to add to the 
    U.S. price (USP) the amount of commodity taxes forgiven upon 
    exportation of CTVs. On January 31, 1991, the Department filed its 
    first remand results with the Court.
        On July 29, 1991, the Court ordered a second remand for the 
    Department to do the following: Determine the amount of commodity tax 
    passed through to home market purchasers and add that amount to the 
    U.S. price (USP); cease applying an assessment rate cap in liquidating 
    entries of the subject merchandise unless the importer paid a cash 
    deposit for an estimated antidumping duty; eliminate the use of sales 
    adjustments in this case to the extent that they reduce CV general 
    expenses to less than the statutory minimum amount; remove all home 
    market export-related expenses from exporter's sale's price (ESP); 
    request additional information from
    
    [[Page 31508]]
    
    AOC in order to remove from USP the import duties paid with respect to 
    home market models, and instead add the import duties forgiven with 
    respect to the exported models; investigate whether Shin-Shirasuna's 
    sales to Canada were fictitious so as to manipulate the foreign market 
    value for comparison with imports to the United States and thereby 
    minimize the antidumping duty liability; recalculate Capetronic's 
    dumping margins using production data related to a specific sale 
    instead of using the weighted-average costs of production, remove from 
    USP the value of certain proprietary selling expenses for Shirasuna; 
    and correct certain programming errors. See Zenith Electronics 
    Corporation v. United States, 770 F. Supp. 648 (CIT 1991). In addition, 
    the Department requested a remand to explain the reasons underlying its 
    de minimis determination. On January 31, 1992, the Department filed its 
    second remand results with the Court.
        On January 28, 1993, the Court ordered a third remand so that the 
    Department could reconsider the tax pass-through in a manner consistent 
    with the constant costs and imperfect competition characteristic of the 
    Taiwanese color television market. In addition, the Court ordered the 
    Department to ``cap'' the upward adjustment to USP for foreign tax at 
    the amount of tax found to be passed through to home market purchasers, 
    to make an adjustment for the difference in circumstances of sale 
    included in the U.S. and home market taxable values, to insure that the 
    general expenses component of CV was not reduced at any time to less 
    than the statutory minimum amount by reason of adjustments for selling 
    expenses associated with disregarded home market sales, and to correct 
    two clerical errors. See Zenith Electronic Corp. v. United States, 812 
    F. Supp. 228 (CIT 1993). On May 5, 1993, the Department filed its third 
    remand results with the Court.
        On October 21, 1994, the Court, in Zenith, affirmed the 
    Department's third remand results, and affirmed the prior remand 
    determinations in this case to the extent that they were not 
    subsequently modified by the Court. The Court also vacated its July 29, 
    1991 order to the extent that the order held that ``no assessment rate 
    cap may be applied in liquidating the subject entries unless the 
    importer paid a cash duty for an estimated dumping duty.'' As a result, 
    the Court ordered the Department to apply the assessment rate cap to 
    all subject imports entered between the publication dates of the 
    Department's preliminary affirmative determination of sales at LTFV and 
    the ITC's final affirmative injury determination, and it dismissed the 
    case.
        Because the Court's October 21, 1994 order affirmed the 
    Department's recalculation of Capetronic's rate at 1.36 percent, the 
    Department published amended final results of review for Capetronic in 
    this administrative review. See 60 FR 11955 (March 3, 1995). As a 
    result of this new rate, the Court issued an order in the third 
    administrative review of CTVs from Taiwan to rescind its previous 
    revocation of Capetronic from the antidumping duty order on CTVs from 
    Taiwan because, as a result of the Department's redetermination of its 
    rate in the first administrative review, Capetronic did not have three 
    consecutive years of sales at not less than fair value. See Tatung 
    Company v. United States, Court No. 90-12-00645 (March 8, 1995); see 
    also 60 FR 29822 (June 6, 1995).
        On January 17, 1995, the Department, consistent with the decision 
    of the CAFC in Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 
    1990) (Timken), published a notice in the Federal Register stating that 
    it would not order the liquidation of the subject merchandise entered 
    or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption prior to a ``final and 
    conclusive'' decision in this case. Although further action is required 
    by the Court with regard to the Department's calculation of COS 
    adjustments for AOC, this issue does not affect the other respondents 
    in this review and, therefore, the Court's October 21, 1994 decision is 
    ``final and conclusive'' for those respondents.
        As a result of the Department's redeterminations on remand, we have 
    determined the weighted-average dumping margins for CTVs from Taiwan 
    for the following periods to be:
    
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Margin 
          Manufacturer/ exporter               Time period           percent
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Fulet Elect. Industrial, Co......  10/19/83-03/31/85                0.08
    Sampo Corp.......................  04/01/84-03/31/85                6.29
    Tatung Co........................  10/19/83-03/31/85                2.56
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        The Department will determine, and the Customs Service will assess, 
    antidumping duties on the appropriate entries for the above companies.
        Once the Court remands Zenith back to the Department and the case 
    is ``final and conclusive'' with respect to AOC, we will recalculate 
    AOC's dumping margin in accordance with the Court's opinion, publish an 
    amended Federal Register notice, and issue liquidation instructions for 
    AOC for the first administrative review of CTVs from Taiwan.
        This amendment of final results of review and notice are in 
    accordance with section 751(f) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 
    (19 U.S.C. 1675(f)) and 19 CFR 353.28(c).
    
        Dated: June 4, 1996.
    Paul L. Joffe,
    Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
    [FR Doc. 96-15683 Filed 6-19-96; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 3510-DS-M
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
6/20/1996
Published:
06/20/1996
Department:
Commerce Department
Entry Type:
Notice
Action:
Notice of amendment to final results of antidumping duty administrative review.
Document Number:
96-15683
Dates:
June 20, 1996.
Pages:
31507-31508 (2 pages)
Docket Numbers:
A-583-009
PDF File:
96-15683.pdf