On May 3, 2005, the US sued, the American Diamond Saw Blade Manufacturers Union filed an indictment with the US Department of Commerce, alleging that diamond saw blades from China and South Korea were dumped in the United States and required anti-dumping investigations.
On May 11, 2005, the Domestic Coping and Responsibility Coordination Meeting was held. The China Chamber of Commerce for Import and Export of Mechanical and Electrical Products held a meeting of responding to complaints in Shanghai, and relevant export enterprises and lawyers to the United States attended the meeting.
On June 21, 2005, the US Department of Commerce officially filed a case, and in this case investigation, for the first time, the new non-market economy countries' exports and manufacturers applied for separate tax rates to adopt new and more stringent procedures. On the same day, the US Department of Commerce asked the 23 Chinese manufacturers or exporters identified by the prosecution to submit the quantity and amount of exports. The US Department of Commerce also sent a letter to the Fair Trade Bureau of the Ministry of Commerce of the People's Republic of China, requesting information on the quantity and amount, and requesting that the letter be forwarded to the company involved.
From July 5 to July 15, 2005, the US Department of Commerce received information on the quantity and amount of exports to the US from 25 Chinese companies involved in the case. The final responding company was identified as 29 companies.
On July 18, 2005, the US International Trade Commission made a preliminary ruling that the diamond saw blades imported from China threatened to cause substantial damage or substantial damage to the US-related industries.
On July 19, 2005, the US determined the compulsory sample survey enterprise, and selected Beijing Antai Steel Research Superhard Materials Co., Ltd. (Beigang Research), Shijiazhuang Boshen Tools Group Co., Ltd. (Boshen), Hebei Yukai Group ( Qi Kai), Saint-Gobain Abrasives (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. (Saint-Gobain) and other four companies for the case of mandatory sampling survey enterprises.
On July 21, 2005, the US Department of Commerce identified countries such as India, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, the Philippines, and Egypt as countries that are comparable to China's economic development.
On September 22 and 23, 2005, the US Department of Commerce notified 17 Chinese companies that met the respective tax rate (weighted average tax rate) applications, and gave them separate tax rates in this case. However, by the time the preliminary results were released, this number increased to 21.
On July 28, 2005, the US Department of Commerce issued A, C, and D questionnaires to Beigang Research Institute, Boshen, Qikai, and Saint-Gobain.
In August 2005, the US Department of Commerce identified India as a replacement for this case.
On September 1, 2005, Saint-Gobain quit the responding, and the US Department of Commerce subsequently imposed a national uniform tax rate on it.
From September to December 2005, the US Department of Commerce issued supplementary questionnaires to companies such as Beigang Research Institute, Boshen, and Qikai, and received their responses.
On December 29, 2005, the US Department of Commerce issued preliminary results, ruling that the dumping margin of Chinese companies was 0.11% to 164.09%.
From February 20 to 24, 2006, the US Department of Commerce sent personnel to conduct on-site verification, and sent inspection teams to conduct on-the-spot verification of three companies including Beigang Research Institute, Boshen, and Qikai.
On May 16, 2006, the US Department of Commerce issued the final ruling and ruled that the dumping margin of Chinese companies was 2.50% to 164.09%. As the US Department of Commerce raised the “financial indicators†of the alternative country India, the final tax rate of Beigang Research Institute was 2.50%, which is still the lowest tax rate for Chinese enterprises; Boshen 34.19%; Qi Kai 48.50%; 26 companies such as Danyang Lectra The weighted average tax rate of 20.72%; the unreported company is still 164.09%.
(Note: The number of companies with a weighted average tax rate in the US Department of Commerce's preliminary ruling was 21, and the final ruling increased to 26). 45 days after the US Department of Commerce issued the final ruling, the US International Trade Commission will finalize the case.
On May 11, 2005, the Domestic Coping and Responsibility Coordination Meeting was held. The China Chamber of Commerce for Import and Export of Mechanical and Electrical Products held a meeting of responding to complaints in Shanghai, and relevant export enterprises and lawyers to the United States attended the meeting.
On June 21, 2005, the US Department of Commerce officially filed a case, and in this case investigation, for the first time, the new non-market economy countries' exports and manufacturers applied for separate tax rates to adopt new and more stringent procedures. On the same day, the US Department of Commerce asked the 23 Chinese manufacturers or exporters identified by the prosecution to submit the quantity and amount of exports. The US Department of Commerce also sent a letter to the Fair Trade Bureau of the Ministry of Commerce of the People's Republic of China, requesting information on the quantity and amount, and requesting that the letter be forwarded to the company involved.
From July 5 to July 15, 2005, the US Department of Commerce received information on the quantity and amount of exports to the US from 25 Chinese companies involved in the case. The final responding company was identified as 29 companies.
On July 18, 2005, the US International Trade Commission made a preliminary ruling that the diamond saw blades imported from China threatened to cause substantial damage or substantial damage to the US-related industries.
On July 19, 2005, the US determined the compulsory sample survey enterprise, and selected Beijing Antai Steel Research Superhard Materials Co., Ltd. (Beigang Research), Shijiazhuang Boshen Tools Group Co., Ltd. (Boshen), Hebei Yukai Group ( Qi Kai), Saint-Gobain Abrasives (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. (Saint-Gobain) and other four companies for the case of mandatory sampling survey enterprises.
On July 21, 2005, the US Department of Commerce identified countries such as India, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, the Philippines, and Egypt as countries that are comparable to China's economic development.
On September 22 and 23, 2005, the US Department of Commerce notified 17 Chinese companies that met the respective tax rate (weighted average tax rate) applications, and gave them separate tax rates in this case. However, by the time the preliminary results were released, this number increased to 21.
On July 28, 2005, the US Department of Commerce issued A, C, and D questionnaires to Beigang Research Institute, Boshen, Qikai, and Saint-Gobain.
In August 2005, the US Department of Commerce identified India as a replacement for this case.
On September 1, 2005, Saint-Gobain quit the responding, and the US Department of Commerce subsequently imposed a national uniform tax rate on it.
From September to December 2005, the US Department of Commerce issued supplementary questionnaires to companies such as Beigang Research Institute, Boshen, and Qikai, and received their responses.
On December 29, 2005, the US Department of Commerce issued preliminary results, ruling that the dumping margin of Chinese companies was 0.11% to 164.09%.
From February 20 to 24, 2006, the US Department of Commerce sent personnel to conduct on-site verification, and sent inspection teams to conduct on-the-spot verification of three companies including Beigang Research Institute, Boshen, and Qikai.
On May 16, 2006, the US Department of Commerce issued the final ruling and ruled that the dumping margin of Chinese companies was 2.50% to 164.09%. As the US Department of Commerce raised the “financial indicators†of the alternative country India, the final tax rate of Beigang Research Institute was 2.50%, which is still the lowest tax rate for Chinese enterprises; Boshen 34.19%; Qi Kai 48.50%; 26 companies such as Danyang Lectra The weighted average tax rate of 20.72%; the unreported company is still 164.09%.
(Note: The number of companies with a weighted average tax rate in the US Department of Commerce's preliminary ruling was 21, and the final ruling increased to 26). 45 days after the US Department of Commerce issued the final ruling, the US International Trade Commission will finalize the case.
Upvc Pipe,Bs Water Supply Upvc Pipe,Din Drainage Upvc Pipe Grey,Upvc Pipe Expansion Socket
Zhejiang Huangyan Minghua Plastic Pipe Fitting CO.,LTD , https://www.pipefitting-mh.com