On November 8, 2019, the Canada Border Services Agency initiated an antidumping and subsidy case against certain corrosion resistant (galvanized) steel from Turkey, the united Arab Emirates and Vietnam.  This is the second corrosion resistant steel case in 18 months.  The last corrosion resistant steel case was against China, Taiwan, South Korean and India.  In the 2018 case, the Canadian International Trade Tribunal did not find past injury but found that there was a threat of injury over the next 12-18 months.

It is also important to note that the CBSA previously determined that the United Arab Emirates’ level of subsidization of the carbon steel welded pipe industry was de minimis and terminated the subsidy case.  The CBSA also recently determined that the Government of Vietnam did not influence the prices of carbon steel welded pipe.

Covered Goods/ Excluded Goods

The subject goods in the current case are defined by the CBSA as:

“corrosion-resistant flat‑rolled steel sheet products of carbon steel including products alloyed with the following elements:

  • Boron (B) not more than 0.01%,
  • Niobium (Nb) not more than 0.100%,
  • Titanium (Ti) not more than 0.08%, or
  • Vanadium (V) not more than 0.300%

in coils or cut lengths, in thicknesses up to 0.168 in. (4.267 mm) and widths up to 72 inch (1,828.8 mm) with all dimensions being plus or minus allowable tolerances contained in the applicable standards, with or without passivation and/or anti-fingerprint treatments, originating in or exported from the Republic of Turkey, the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, and the United Arab Emirates, and excluding:

  • corrosion-resistant steel sheet products for use in the manufacture of passenger automobiles, buses, trucks, ambulances or hearses or chassis therefor, or parts thereof, or accessories or parts thereof;
  • steel products for use in the manufacture of aeronautic products;
  • steel sheet that is coated or plated with tin, lead, nickel, copper, chromium, chromium oxides, both tin and lead (“terne plate”), or both chromium and chromium oxides (“tin free steel”);
  • stainless flat-rolled steel products;
  • corrosion-resistant steel sheet products that have been pre-painted, including with lacquers or varnishes, or permanently coated in plastic;
  • galvanized armouring tape, which is narrow flat steel tape of 3 in. or less, that has been coated by a final operation with zinc by either the hot-dip galvanizing or the electrogalvanizing process so that all surfaces, including the edges, are coated;
  • perforated steel,
  • and tool steel.”

H.S. Classifications

The subject goods are usually imported under the following tariff classification numbers:

  • 7210.30.00.00
  • 7210.49.00.10
  • 7210.49.00.20
  • 7210.49.00.30
  • 7210.61.00.00
  • 7210.69.00.10
  • 7210.69.00.20
  • 7212.20.00.00
  • 7212.30.00.00
  • 7212.50.00.00
  • 7225.91.00.00
  • 7225.92.00.00


There are four separate proceedings in a typical Canadian antidumping or countervailing duty proceeding:

1) The CBSA conducts an antidumping investigation.  Within the first 90 days, the CBSA sends Exporter Requests for Information that must be filed on or before the specified deadline.  The CBSA may send supplemental requests for information.  The Requests for Information permit the CBSA to calculate preliminary dumping margins.  It is preferable to obtain a company-specific dumping margin – especially if an exporter has not dumped goods into Canada;

2) The CITT conducts a Preliminary Injury Inquiry within the first 60 days.  See our post on What is a Preliminary Interest Inquiry? In the Preliminary Injury Inquiry, the CITT looks at whether the complaint discloses a reasonable indication of injury.  Normally, the CITT will consider issues on (1) scope, (2) classes of goods and (3) evidentiary issues.  Since this is a regional case, arguments about test for regional cases and whether this is an appropriate regional case will likely be very relevant.  Companies should participate early and raise relevant issues with the CITT. The CBSA conducts a Preliminary Dumping Investigation within the first 90 days (the period overlaps with the CITT Preliminary Injury Inquiry);

3) The CBSA conducts Final Dumping and Subsidy Investigations: After 90 or 135 days have elapsed, the CBSA starts final investigations. During this period, on-site verifications take place. This process takes 90 days; and

4) After the CBSA issued Preliminary Determinations, the CITT conducts a Final Injury Inquiry.  The process takes 90 days.  On or about the 90th day, the CITT starts a hearing.

At this time, we will focus on the CBSA preliminary determinations phase. It is very important to start completing the questionnaires as quickly as possible.   Importers complete the Importers RFI. Exporters must complete (1) the Exporter Dumping RFI and (2) the Exporter Subsidy RFI. The CBSA is also distributing Industry Profit Surveys to obtain information of what amount is a reasonable profit.


The CBSA’s timeline of important dates is as follows:

  • December 2, 2019: CBSA: Importer RFIs are due;
  • December 16, 2019: CBSA: Exporter RFIs are due and Government responses are due;
  • February 6, 2019: CBSA: CBS make its preliminary determination of dumping/subsidization;
  • March 17, 2020 at noon: CBSA Closing of the record date;
  • March 24, 2020 at noon: CBSA: Case Briefs are due;
  • March 31, 2020 at noon: CBSA: Reply submissions are due; and
  • May 6, 2020: CBSA will issue final determination.

It is important for exporters to participate in the CBSA investigations. We recently posted an article entitled “Exporters Who Receive De Minimis Dumping Margins in Canadian AD Cases Now Being Excluded From Final Orders” in which we highlight the benefits of participating in a Canadian antidumping case.  If an exporter can achieve a de minimis dumping margin (less than 2%), the dumping investigation will be terminated against that exporter.  This would allow that exporter to continue to sell to importers in Canada.

We achieved a 0% dumping margin for Conares in the Carbon Steel Welded Pipe 2 case and they have been excluded from the Tribunal’s injury Order.  We also achieved a 0% dumping margin for Cintasa in the Fabricated Industrial Steel Components case and they too have been excluded from the Tribunal’s injury Order.

The CITT’s timeline for the preliminary injury inquiry is as follows:

  • November 21, 2019: CITT Notices of Participation are due;
  • December 6, 2019: CITT: Submissions by parties against the complaint (e.g., importers, foreign producers) are due;
  • December 13, 2019: CITT: Reply submissions of domestic industry are due; and
  • January 7, 2020: CITT will issue the preliminary injury decision.

The CITT has indicated that the submissions of parties opposing the complaint “should include evidence, e.g. documents and sources that support the factual statements in the submissions and argument concerning the questions of:

  • whether there are goods produced in Canada, other than those identified in the CBSA’s statement of reasons for initiating the investigations, that are like goods to the subject goods;
  • whether the subject goods comprise more than one class of goods;
  • which domestic producers of like goods comprise the domestic industry; and
  • whether the information before the Tribunal discloses a reasonable indication that the alleged dumping and subsidizing of the subject goods have caused injury or retardation, or are threatening to cause injury.”

It is important to note that the CITT has indicated that it will not consider product exclusion requests during the preliminary injury proceedings.

If you require any assistance, please contact Cyndee Todgham Cherniak at 416-307-4168 or cyndee@lexsage.com.  For more articles about Canada’s AD/CVD regime or proceedings, go to the LexSage website.