Notice2025-17777
Multilayered Wood Flooring From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; Notice of Amended Final Results
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
September 15, 2025
Issuing agencies
Commerce DepartmentInternational Trade Administration
Abstract
On August 29, 2025, the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) issued its final judgment in Evolutions Flooring, Inc. et al. v. United States, Consol. Court No. 21-00591, sustaining the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce)'s remand results pertaining to the administrative review of the countervailing duty (CVD) order on multilayered wood flooring from the People's Republic of China (China) covering the period January 1, 2018, through December 31, 2018. Commerce is notifying the public that the CIT's final judgment is not in harmony with Commerce's final results of the administrative review, and that Commerce is amending the final results with respect to the countervailable subsidy rate assigned to Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo Wood Industry Co., Ltd. (Jiangsu Senmao), Riverside Plywood Corporation (Riverside Plywood) and its cross-owned affiliate Baroque Timber Industries (Zhongshan) Co., Ltd. (Baroque Timber), and the non-selected companies under review.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 176 (Monday, September 15, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 176 (Monday, September 15, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44370-44371]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2025-17777]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-570-971]
Multilayered Wood Flooring From the People's Republic of China:
Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Results of
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; Notice of Amended Final
Results
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On August 29, 2025, the U.S. Court of International Trade
(CIT) issued its final judgment in Evolutions Flooring, Inc. et al. v.
United States, Consol. Court No. 21-00591, sustaining the U.S.
Department of Commerce (Commerce)'s remand results pertaining to the
administrative review of the countervailing duty (CVD) order on
multilayered wood flooring from the People's Republic of China (China)
covering the period January 1, 2018, through December 31, 2018.
Commerce is notifying the public that the CIT's final judgment is not
in harmony with Commerce's final results of the administrative review,
and that Commerce is amending the final results with respect to the
countervailable subsidy rate assigned to Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo Wood
Industry Co., Ltd. (Jiangsu Senmao), Riverside Plywood Corporation
(Riverside Plywood) and its cross-owned affiliate Baroque Timber
Industries (Zhongshan) Co., Ltd. (Baroque Timber), and the non-selected
companies under review.
DATES: Applicable September 8, 2025.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jonathan Schueler or Laurel Smalley,
AD/CVD Operations, Office VIII, Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-9175
or (202) 482-3456, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On October 27, 2021, Commerce published its Final Results in the
2018 CVD administrative review of multilayered wood flooring from
China. Commerce applied facts available with an adverse inference
(AFA), pursuant to section 776(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended
(the Act), to the Government of China (GOC) with respect to the Export
Buyer's Credit Program (EBCP), to find that both mandatory respondents
under review (i.e., Jiangsu Senmao and Riverside Plywood) used and
benefited from the program during the POR.\1\ Additionally, with
respect to the Provision of Fiberboard and Veneers (including face and
backboard veneer) for Less Than Adequate Remuneration (LTAR) programs,
Commerce evaluated the adequacy of remuneration of Baroque Timber's
purchases of fiberboard and veneer on a batch basis to calculate the
average unit value (AUV) for the respondent's fiberboard and face
veneer purchases.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of
China: Final Results and Partial Rescission of Countervailing Duty
Administrative Review; 2018, 86 FR 59362 (October 27, 2021) (Final
Results), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum (IDM) at
Comment 1.
\2\ Id. at Comment 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After analyzing alleged ministerial errors in the Final Results, on
December 1, 2021, Commerce published the Amended Final Results to
correct certain ministerial errors in Commerce's benchmark calculations
under the Provision of Plywood and Fiberboard for LTAR programs, in
addition to correcting a spelling error in the corresponding U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) instructions to the Final
Results.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of
China: Notice of Amended Final Results of Countervailing Duty
Administrative Review, 86 FR 68219 (December 1, 2021) (Amended Final
Results) and accompanying Memorandum, ``Allegations of Ministerial
Errors in the Final Results,'' dated November 23, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evolutions Flooring, Inc. and Struxtur, Inc. et al. appealed
Commerce's Final Results. On March 27, 2025, the CIT remanded the Final
Results to Commerce, granting Commerce's request for a voluntary remand
to further evaluate its use of AFA to find that Jiangsu Senmao used the
EBCP and to correct an error in the benefit calculation of the
Provision of Veneers for LTAR program.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Evolutions Flooring, Inc. et al. v. United States,
Consol. Court No. 21-00591, Slip Op. 25-33 (March 27, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its final remand redetermination, issued on July 9, 2025,
Commerce found that Jiangsu Senmao did not use the EBCP during the POR
and corrected Commerce's error in the benefit calculation for Baroque
Timber under the Provision of Veneers for LTAR program.\5\ The CIT
sustained Commerce's final remand redetermination.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Final Results of Remand Redetermination Pursuant to
Court Remand, Evolutions Flooring, Inc. et al. v. United States,
Consol. Court No. 21-00591, Slip Op. 25-33 (CIT 2025), dated July 9,
2025 (final remand redetermination), available at <a href="https://access.trade.gov/public/FinalRemandRedetermination">https://access.trade.gov/public/FinalRemandRedetermination</a>.
\6\ See Evolutions Flooring, Inc. et al. v. United States,
Consol. Court No. 21-00591, Slip Op. 25-33 (August 29, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,\7\ as clarified by Diamond Sawblades,\8\
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that, pursuant
to sections 516A(c) and (e) of the Act, Commerce must publish a notice
of court decision that is not ``in harmony'' with a Commerce
determination and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a
``conclusive'' court decision. The CIT's August 29, 2025, judgment
constitutes a final decision of the CIT that is not in harmony with
Commerce's Final Results. Thus, this notice is published in fulfillment
of the publication requirements of Timken.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir.
1990) (Timken).
\8\ See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers Coalition v. United
States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amended Final Results
Because there is now a final court judgment, Commerce is amending
its Final Results and Amended Final Results with respect to Jiangsu
Senmao and Riverside Plywood as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subsidy rate
Producer/exporter (percent ad valorem)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Riverside Plywood Corporation and Its Cross-Owned 9.02
Affiliates \9\...................................
Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo Wood Industry Co., Ltd...... 5.29
[[Page 44371]]
Non-selected companies under review \10\.......... 7.91
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cash Deposit Requirements
Commerce will issue revised cash deposit instructions to CBP.
Because the companies listed in Appendix I of this notice have a
superseding cash deposit rate (i.e., there have been final results
published in a subsequent administrative review), we will not issue
revised cash deposit instructions to CBP. This notice will not affect
the current cash deposit rate for those exporters/producers. For Dailan
Shengyu Science and Technology Development Co., Ltd., which does not
have a superseding cash deposit rate, Commerce will issue revised cash
deposit instructions to CBP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Cross-owned affiliate are Baroque Timber Industries
(Zhongshan) Co., Ltd. and Suzhou Times Flooring Co., Ltd.
\10\ The non-selected companies to which this rate applies are
listed in Appendix II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Liquidation of Suspended Entries
At this time, Commerce remains enjoined by the CIT order from
liquidating entries that: were produced and/or exported by Riverside
Plywood Corporation, including its cross-owned affiliates; Jiangsu
Senmao Bamboo Wood Industry Co., Ltd.; and the companies listed in
Appendix II of this notice, and were entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption during the period January 1, 2018, through
December 31, 2018. These entries will remain enjoined pursuant to the
terms of the injunction during the pendency of any appeals process.
In the event the CIT's ruling is not appealed or, if appealed,
upheld by a final and conclusive court decision, Commerce intends to
instruct CBP to assess countervailing duties on unliquidated entries of
subject merchandise produced and/or exported by the companies listed in
Appendix II of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b). We
will instruct CBP to assess countervailing duties on all appropriate
entries covered by this review when the ad valorem rate is not zero or
de minimis. Where an ad valorem subsidy rate is zero or de minimis,\11\
we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without
regard to countervailing duties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections
516A(c) and (e) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: September 10, 2025.
Christopher Abbott,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Negotiations, performing the
non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for
Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix I
List of Companies With Superseding Cash Deposit Requirements
1. Baroque Timber Industries (Zhongshan) Co., Ltd. and/or Riverside
Plywood Corp.
2. Dalian Shumaike Floor Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
3. Dongtai Fuan Universal Dynamics, LLC
4. Dunhua City Jisen Wood Industry Co., Ltd.
5. Fine Furniture (Shanghai) Limited
6. Huzhou Chenghang Wood Co., Ltd.
7. Huzhou Sunergy World Trade Co., Ltd.
8. Jiangsu Guyu International Trading Co., Ltd.
9. Jiashan Huijiale Decoration Material Co., Ltd.
10. Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo and Wood Industry Co., Ltd.
11. Jiangsu Simba Flooring Co., Ltd.
12. Kemian Wood Industry (Kunshan) Co., Ltd.
13. Kingman Floors Co., Ltd.
14. Linyi Anying Wood Co., Ltd.
15. Scholar Home (Shanghai) New Material Co., Ltd.
16. Sino-Maple (Jiangsu) Co., Ltd.
17. Tongxiang Jisheng Import and Export Co., Ltd.
18. Yihua Lifestyle Technology Co., Ltd.
19. Zhejiang Dadongwu Green Home Wood Co., Ltd.
20. Zhejiang Fuerjia Wooden Co., Ltd.
21. Zhejiang Jiechen Wood Industry Co., Ltd.
Appendix II
List of Non-Selected Companies Subject to These Amended Final Results
1. Dailan Shengyu Science and Technology Development Co., Ltd.
2. Dalian Shumaike Floor Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
3. Dongtai Fuan Universal Dynamics, LLC
4. Dunhua City Jisen Wood Industry Co., Ltd.
5. Fine Furniture (Shanghai) Limited
6. Huzhou Chenghang Wood Co., Ltd.
7. Huzhou Sunergy World Trade Co., Ltd.
8. Jiangsu Guyu International Trading Co., Ltd.
9. Jiashan Huijiale Decoration Material Co., Ltd.
10. Jiangsu Simba Flooring Co., Ltd.
11. Kemian Wood Industry (Kunshan) Co., Ltd.
12. Kingman Floors Co., Ltd.
13. Linyi Anying Wood Co., Ltd.
14. Scholar Home (Shanghai) New Material Co., Ltd.
15. Sino-Maple (Jiangsu) Co., Ltd.
16. Tongxiang Jisheng Import and Export Co., Ltd.
17. Yihua Lifestyle Technology Co., Ltd.
18. Zhejiang Dadongwu Green Home Wood Co., Ltd.
19. Zhejiang Fuerjia Wooden Co., Ltd.
20. Zhejiang Jiechen Wood Industry Co., Ltd.
[FR Doc. 2025-17777 Filed 9-12-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
</pre></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on September 15, 2025.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.