Beijing Tianhai Industry Co. v. United States

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a reference to a \firm\ in 19 C.F.R. § 351.511 (a)(2)(iv) does not refer to the respondent but to \a hypothetical firm located in the [country at issue].\
• holding that the inclusion of VAT in a tier-two benchmark was correct
• holding subsidy exists even if contribution and benefit received by different people
• permitting VAT calculation in a Tier 2 benchmark analysis because \a firm located in the PRC that imported steel tube would ordinarily have paid these duties.\
• averaging benchmark prices for three other countries under a tier two benchmark analysis
• “[T]here is nothing that requires that [Commerce] use prices for merchandise that are identical.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).