C.F.R. » Title 19 » CHAPTER III—INTERNATIONAL TRADE ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE › PART 351—ANTIDUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING DUTIES › Subpart B—Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Procedures

19 C.F.R. § 351.210

Final determination

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Introduction. A “final determination” in an antidumping or countervailing duty investigation constitutes a final decision by the Secretary as to whether dumping or countervailable subsidization is occurring. If the Secretary's final determination is affirmative, in most instances the Commission will issue a final injury determination (except in certain countervailing duty investigations). Also, if the Secretary's preliminary determination was negative but the final determination is affirmative, the Secretary will impose provisional measures. If the Secretary's final determination is negative, the proceeding, including the injury investigation conducted by the Commission, terminates. This section contains rules regarding deadlines for, and postponement of, final determinations, contents of final determinations, and the effects of final determinations.

(b) Deadline for final determination. The deadline for a final determination under section 705(a)(1) or section 735(a)(1) of the Act will be:

(1) Normally, not later than 75 days after the date of the Secretary's preliminary determination (see section 705(a)(1) or section 735(a)(1) of the Act);

(2) In an antidumping investigation, not later than 135 days after the date of publication of the preliminary determination if the Secretary postpones the final determination at the request of:

(i) The petitioner, if the preliminary determination was negative (see section 735(a)(2)(B) of the Act); or

(ii) Exporters or producers who account for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise, if the preliminary determination was affirmative (see section 735(a)(2)(A) of the Act);

(3) In a countervailing duty investigation, not later than 165 days after the preliminary determination, if, after the preliminary determination, the Secretary decides to investigate an upstream subsidy allegation and concludes that additional time is needed to investigate the allegation (see section 703(g)(2) of the Act); or

(4) In a countervailing duty investigation, the same date as the date of the final antidumping determination, if:

(i) In a situation where the Secretary simultaneously initiated antidumping and countervailing duty investigations on the subject merchandise (from the same or other countries), the petitioner requests that the final countervailing duty determination be postponed to the date of the final antidumping determination; and

(ii) If the final countervailing duty determination is not due on a later date because of postponement due to an allegation of upstream subsidies under section 703(g) of the Act (see section 705(a)(1) of the Act).

(c) Contents of final determination and publication of notice. The final determination will include, if appropriate, a final finding on critical circumstances under section 705(a)(2) or section 735(a)(3) of the Act (whichever is applicable). The Secretary will publish in the Federal Register notice of “Affirmative (Negative) Final Antidumping (Countervailing Duty) Determination,” including the rates, if any.

(d) Effect of affirmative final determination. If the final determination is affirmative, the Secretary will take the actions described in section 705(c)(1) or section 735(c)(1) of the Act (whichever is applicable). In addition, in the case of a countervailing duty investigation involving subject merchandise from a country that is not a Subsidies Agreement country, the Secretary will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to require a cash deposit, as provided in section 706(a)(3) of the Act, for each entry of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the order under section 706(a) of the Act.

(e) Request for postponement of final antidumping determination—(1) In general. A request to postpone a final antidumping determination under section 735(a)(2) of the Act (see paragraph (b)(2) of this section) must be submitted in writing within the scheduled date of the final determination. The Secretary may grant the request, unless the Secretary finds compelling reasons to deny the request.

(2) Requests by exporters. In the case of a request submitted under paragraph (e)(1) of this section by exporters who account for a significant proportion of exports of subject merchandise (see section 735(a)(2)(A) of the Act), the Secretary will not grant the request unless those exporters also submit a request described in the last sentence of section 733(d) of the Act (extension of provisional measures from a 4-month period to not more than 6 months).

(f) Deferral of decision concerning upstream subsidization to review. Notwithstanding paragraph (b)(3) of this section, if the petitioner so requests in writing and the preliminary countervailing duty determination was affirmative, the Secretary, instead of postponing the final determination, may defer a decision concerning upstream subsidization until the conclusion of the first administrative review of a countervailing duty order, if any (see section 703(g)(2)(B)(i) of the Act).

(g) Notification of postponement. If the Secretary postpones a final determination under paragraph (b)(2), (b)(3), or (b)(4) of this section, the Secretary will notify promptly all parties to the proceeding of the postponement, and will publish in the Federal Register notice of “Postponement of Final Antidumping (Countervailing Duty) Determination,” stating the reasons for the postponement.

(h) Termination of suspension of liquidation in a countervailing duty investigation. If the Secretary postpones a final countervailing duty determination, the Secretary will end any suspension of liquidation ordered in the preliminary determination not later than 120 days after the date of publication of the preliminary determination, and will not resume it unless and until the Secretary publishes a countervailing duty order.

(i) Postponement of final countervailing duty determination for simultaneous investigations. A request by the petitioner to postpone a final countervailing duty determination to the date of the final antidumping determination must be submitted in writing within five days of the date of publication of the preliminary countervailing duty determination (see section 705(a)(1) and paragraph (b)(4) of this section).

(j) Commission access to information. If the final determination is affirmative, the Secretary will make available to the Commission and to employees of the Commission directly involved in the proceeding the information upon which the Secretary based the final determination and that the Commission may consider relevant to its injury determination (see section 705(c)(1)(A) or section 735(c)(1)(A) of the Act).

(k) Effect of negative final determination. An investigation terminates upon publication in the Federal Register of the Secretary's or the Commission's negative final determination, and the Secretary will take the relevant actions described in section 705(c)(2) or section 735(c)(2) of the Act (whichever is applicable).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1997–2025 · leading case: Corus Staal BV v. United States Dep't of Com., 259 F. Supp. 2d 1253 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Corus Staal BV v. United States Dep't of Com., 259 F. Supp. 2d 1253 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2003). · cites it 2× “On May 22, 2001, Corus requested a postponement of the final determination pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 351.210 (b)(2)(h), as permitted by 19 U.”
Corus Staal BV v. United States Dep't of Com., 279 F. Supp. 2d 1363 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2003). · cites it 4× “As explained in Corus I, the agreement for provisional measures was "required by regulation, 19 C.F.R. § 351.210 (e)(2), and reflects the limitation on provisional measures set forth in 19 U.”
Goodluck India Ltd. v. United States, 2023 CIT 164 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2023). · cites it 2× “§§ 1673d, 1673e(a); 19 C.F.R. § 351.210 (d); Diamond Sawblades Mfrs.”
Dupont Teijin Films USA, LP v. United States, 2003 CIT 167 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2003). · cites it 2× “§ 1671b(c)(l), and only petitioners have the power to request an alignment of the antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings, see 19 C.F.R. § 351.210 (b)(4)(I). Thus, upon remand, the Department must fully address Polyplex’s concern that petitioners could unfairly control…”
Dupont Teijin Films Usa, Lp v. United States, 407 F.3d 1211 (Fed. Cir. 2005). · cites it 2× “The court also instructed Commerce to determine if alignment of AD and CV duty proceedings at the request of petitioners under 19 C.F.R. § 351.210 (b)(4)(I) would affect the application of ' section 1677a(c)(l)(C), and if petitioners would be able to unfairly control the fate of…”
Bethlehem Steel Corp. v. United States, 159 F. Supp. 2d 730 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001). “; 19 C.F.R. § 351.210 (b)(2). See also Postponement of [F]inal Determination of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations of Hot-Rolled Flat-Rolled Carbon Quality Steel From Brazil, 64 Fed.”
Maclean-Fogg Co. v. United States, 2012 CIT 81 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2012). “§ 1671d(c)(l)(B) 4 ; 19 C.F.R. § 351.210 (d); Final Determination, 76 Fed.”
Royal Thai Gov't v. United States, 502 F. Supp. 2d 1334 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2007). “§§ 1671d & 1677(1); 19 C.F.R. §§ 351.210 & 351.503(d) (2006).”
Zhejiang Native Produce & Animal By-Prods. Imp. & Exp. Grp. Corp. v. United States, 400 F. Supp. 2d 1374 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2005). · cites it 4× “§ 1516a(a)(2)(A); 19 C.F.R. § 351.210 (2004). 5 Thus, for DefendanL-Intervenors the Final Results contain a final determi *1378 nation within the meaning of 19 U.”
Bldg. Sys. de Mexico, S.A. de C v. v. United States, 2020 CIT 104 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2020). “§ 1673d(c)(1); 19 C.F.R. § 351.210 (d). Prompt review of the pending challenge to the Final Results would allow the court to begin the sometimes-lengthy process of clarifying and remanding any unlawful agency determinations for further explanation or reconsideration.”
SolarWorld Americas, Inc. v. United States, 2015 CIT 137 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2015). “, which involves imports of the same class or kind of merchandise from the same or other countries, [Commerce], if requested by the petitioner, shall extend the date of the final [CVD] determination .”
F.lli De Cecco di Filippo Fara San Martino S.p.A. v. United States, 21 Ct. Int'l Trade 1130 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1997). · cites it 2× “, adding 19 C.F.R. § 351.210 (e)(2): Requests by exporters.”
Show all 13 citing cases →
— 19 C.F.R. § 351.210(b) — 1 case
Corus Staal BV v. United States Dep't of Com., 279 F. Supp. 2d 1363 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2003). “As explained in Corus I, the agreement for provisional measures was "required by regulation, 19 C.F.R. § 351.210 (e)(2), and reflects the limitation on provisional measures set forth in 19 U.”
— 19 C.F.R. § 351.210(h) — 1 case
Corus Staal BV v. United States Dep't of Com., 279 F. Supp. 2d 1363 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2003). “As explained in Corus I, the agreement for provisional measures was "required by regulation, 19 C.F.R. § 351.210 (e)(2), and reflects the limitation on provisional measures set forth in 19 U.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.