U.S. court rejects Section 232 complaint over steel and aluminum import tariffs

The U.S. Court of International Trade dismissed Thyssenkrupp Materials North America's claim for U.S. Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum, finding that the Section 232 exclusion process did not violate part of the U.S. Constitution and did not reflect misinterpretations of previously issued presidential proclamations. as stated.

It is about an exclusion process that was created when former President Donald Trump imposed tariffs in March 2018 under section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act 1962.

When the tariffs were introduced, the Department of Commerce was authorized to exclude aluminum and steel products from tariffs if it was determined that a particular product was “not manufactured in the United States in sufficient and reasonably available quantity or of satisfactory quality,” in addition to considering national security considerations, as published at the time. proclamations.

Thyssenkrupp argued that a process that grants application-based exemptions to specific requesters, rather than automatically to all importers of a specific product, creates a patchy tax across the United States, in violation of the Constitution's “uniformity clause,” according to a March 10 court ruling.

However, Thyssenkrupp describes its complaint as challenging the exclusion process, as there was no claim that the company itself requested an exclusion, which was wrongfully denied by Commerce, the court said.

“The complaint does not question how the regulation was applied to a specific exclusion request from Thyssenkrupp, but rather that the rules require Thyssenkrupp to file an exclusion request in the first place,” the court said in its conclusion. "... If Thyssenkrupp requests such an exception and is refused, it may apply for this remedy."

The US government insisted that the court should dismiss the case because Thyssenkrupp did not file a claim as it did not challenge any specific decisions. The Court noted that it regularly deals with the section 232 exclusion process, for example in the case of JSW Steel, but in these cases it deals with companies that have filed exclusion requests.

The US government argued that Thyssenkrupp was not harmed because it did not file a claim for the exception, which was dismissed.

“The company's argument does not work because Thyssenkrupp, like any other directly affected party in the United States, can still apply for an exclusion,” the court said. "Thyssenkrupp also does not claim that it has been or will be denied exclusion due to its geographic location in the United States."