862 F.Supp. 384 (CIT. 1994), 92-06-00422, Federal-Mogul Corp. v. United States

Docket Nº92-06-00422.
Citation862 F.Supp. 384
Party NameFEDERAL-MOGUL CORPORATION, Plaintiff, The Torrington Company, Plaintiff-Intervenor, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant, SKF USA Inc., SKF France S.A., SKF GmbH, SKF Industrie, S.p.A., SKF (U.K.) Limited and SKF Sverige, AB; FAG Kugelfischer Georg Schafer KGaA, FAG Cuscinetti SpA, FAG (UK) Limited, Barden Corporation (UK) Limited, FAG Bearings Corporation,
Case DateAugust 26, 1994
CourtCourt of International Trade

Page 384

862 F.Supp. 384 (CIT. 1994)

FEDERAL-MOGUL CORPORATION, Plaintiff,

The Torrington Company, Plaintiff-Intervenor,

v.

UNITED STATES, Defendant,

SKF USA Inc., SKF France S.A., SKF GmbH, SKF Industrie, S.p.A., SKF (U.K.) Limited and SKF Sverige, AB; FAG Kugelfischer Georg Schafer KGaA, FAG Cuscinetti SpA, FAG (UK) Limited, Barden Corporation (UK) Limited, FAG Bearings Corporation, the Barden Corporation and Barden Precision Bearings Corporation; RHP Bearings and RHP Bearings Inc.; Peer Bearing Company; Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd. and Koyo Corporation of U.S.A.; NSK Ltd. and NSK Corporation; SNR Roulements; NTN Bearing Corporation of America, American NTN Bearing Manufacturing Corporation, NTN Corporation and NTN Kugellagerfabrik (Deutschland) GmbH, Defendant-Intervenors.

No. 92-06-00422.

Slip Op. No. 94-136.

United States Court of International Trade.

Aug. 26, 1994

Page 385

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 386

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 387

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 388

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 389

Frederick L. Ikenson, P.C., Frederick L. Ikenson, J. Eric Nissley, Joseph A. Perna, V and Larry Hampel, Washington, DC, for plaintiff, Federal-Mogul Corp.

Stewart and Stewart, Eugene L. Stewart, Terence P. Stewart, Wesley K. Caine and Robert A. Weaver, Washington, DC, for plaintiff-intervenor the Torrington Co.

Frank W. Hunger, Asst. Atty. Gen., David M. Cohen, Director, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civ. Div., U.S. Dept. of Justice, Marc E. Montalbine; Stephen J. Claeys, Craig R. Giesze, Dean A. Pinkert, Thomas H. Fine and Alicia Greenidge, Atty.-Advisors, Office of the Chief Counsel for Import Admin., U.S. Dept. of Commerce, of counsel, Washington, DC, for defendant.

Howrey & Simon, Herbert C. Shelley, Alice A. Kipel, Juliana M. Cofrancesco and Thomas J. Trendl, Washington, DC, for defendant-intervenors SKF USA Inc., SKF France S.A., SKF GmbH, SKF Industrie, S.p.A., SKF (U.K.) Ltd. and SKF Sverige, AB.

Grunfeld, Desiderio, Lebowitz & Silverman, Max F. Schutzman, Andrew B. Schroth, David L. Simon and Matthew L. Pascocello, New York City, for defendant-intervenors FAG Kugelfischer Georg Schafer KGaA, FAG Cuscinetti SpA, FAG (UK) Ltd., Barden Corp. (UK) Ltd., FAG Bearings Corp., the Barden Corp. and Barden Precision Bearings Corp.

Covington & Burling, Harvey M. Applebaum, David R. Grace and Thomas A. Robertson, Washington, DC, for defendant-intervenors RHP Bearings and RHP Bearings Inc.

Venable, Baetjer, Howard & Civiletti, John M. Gurley and Lindsay B. Meyer, Washington, DC, for defendant-intervenor Peer Bearing Co.

Powell, Goldstein, Frazer & Murphy, Peter O. Suchman, Neil R. Ellis, T. George Davis and Niall P. Meagher, Washington, DC, for defendant-intervenors Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd. and Koyo Corp. of U.S.A.

Coudert Brothers, Robert A. Lipstein, Matthew P. Jaffe, Nathan V. Holt, Grace W. Lawson and Alice E.M. Aragones, Washington, DC, for defendant-intervenors NSK Ltd. and NSK Corp.

Grunfeld, Desiderio, Lebowitz & Silverman, Bruce M. Mitchell, David L. Simon, Philip S. Gallas, Jeffrey S. Grimson, Andrew B. Schroth and Matthew L. Pascocello, New York City, for defendant-intervenor SNR Roulements.

Barnes, Richardson & Colburn, Robert E. Burke, Donald J. Unger, Kazumune V. Kano and Diane A. MacDonald, Chicago, IL, for defendant-intervenors NTN Bearing Corp. of America, American NTN Bearing Mfg. Corp., NTN Corp. and NTN Kugellagerfabrik (Deutschland) GmbH.

Page 390

OPINION

TSOUCALAS, Judge:

Plaintiff, Federal-Mogul Corporation ("Federal-Mogul"), challenges certain aspects of the Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration's ("ITA") determination in Antifriction Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller Bearings) and Parts Thereof From France; et al.; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews (" Final Results "), 57 Fed.Reg. 28,360 (1992). Amendments to the Final Results did not alter the results in any respect relevant to the issues discussed herein. Antifriction Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller Bearings) and Parts Thereof From France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Romania, Singapore, Sweden, Thailand, and the United Kingdom; Amendment to Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, 57 Fed.Reg. 32,969, (1992); Antifriction Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller Bearings) and Parts Thereof From France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Sweden, and the United Kingdom; Amendment to Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, 57 Fed.Reg. 59,080 (1992).

Numerous defendant-intervenors oppose plaintiff's challenge.

Background

On June 28, July 19 and August 14, 1991, the ITA announced its initiation of administrative reviews of respondents' ball bearing, cylindrical roller bearing and spherical plain bearing imports. Antifriction Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller Bearings) and Parts Thereof From the Federal Republic of Germany, France, Italy, Japan, Romania, Singapore, Sweden, Thailand, and the United Kingdom; Initiation of Antidumping Administrative Reviews, 56 Fed.Reg. 29,618 (1991); Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 56 Fed.Reg. 33,251 (1991); Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 56 Fed.Reg. 40,305 (1991).

On March 31, 1992, the ITA published its preliminary determinations in the second administrative reviews. Antifriction Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller Bearings) and Parts Thereof From France; Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and Partial Termination of Administrative Reviews, 57 Fed.Reg. 10,859 (1992); 57 Fed.Reg. 10,862 (1992) (Federal Republic of Germany); 57 Fed.Reg. 10,865 (1992) (Italy); 57 Fed.Reg. 10,868 (1992) (Japan); 57 Fed.Reg. 10,875 (1992) (Sweden); 57 Fed.Reg. 10,878 (1992) (United Kingdom).

On June 24, 1992, the ITA published the consolidated Final Results of nine administrative reviews. Final Results, 57 Fed.Reg. at 28,360.

Federal-Mogul now moves pursuant to Rule 56.1 of the Rules of this Court for partial judgment on the agency record. Plaintiff alleges that the following actions by the ITA, with respect to Germany, France, Italy, Japan, Sweden and the United Kingdom, were unsupported by substantial evidence on the administrative record and not in accordance with law: (1) the ITA's use of a methodology for adjusting United States price ("USP") 1 and foreign market value ("FMV") 2 for value added tax ("VAT") that (A) improperly allowed a USP adjustment and misapplied best information available ("BIA"), (B) incorrectly calculated tax base for U.S. sales, (C) failed to measure the tax incidence or "pass through" of tax to the home market consumer, (D) failed to impose a cap on the VAT adjustment to USP, and (E) granted a circumstance of sale ("COS") adjustment to FMV to achieve tax neutrality; (2) allowance of a COS adjustment for currency hedging expenses; (3) incorrect treatment of commissions on purchase price ("PP") transactions in the calculation of FMV; (4) incorrect calculation of cash deposit rates; (5) application of a new "all other" rate for cash deposits to unreviewed companies; (6) failure to remove home market commission expenses from sales price before making the sales price to cost of production

Page 391

("COP") comparison in the calculation of FMV for SKF GmbH ("SKF-Germany"); (7) incorrect calculation of home market credit expenses for SKF Industrie, S.p.A. ("SKF-Italy"); (8) failure to correct a clerical error in FAG Cuscinetti SpA's ("FAG-Italy") reported financial expenses; (9) failure to add an amount for profit to the data FAG-Italy submitted in lieu of related-party transfer prices for purposes of constructed value ("CV") and COP analyses; (10) allowance of a COS adjustment to FMV for FAG-Italy for expenses incurred by FAG Kugelfischer Georg Schafer KGaA ("FAG-Germany"); (11) allowance of a direct COS adjustment to home market price for FAG-Italy's technical services and warranty expenses; (12) removal of home market packing costs from SNR's home market price in the calculation of FMV; (13) incorrect treatment of SKF-Italy's warehouse expense; (14) allowance of a duty drawback adjustment to USP for SKF-Italy; (15) incorrect calculation of Meter, S.p.A.'s ("Meter") credit expenses; and (16) allowance of an adjustment to USP for FAG-Italy, FAG (UK) Limited ("FAG-UK") and FAG-Germany for freight expenses reimbursed. Federal-Mogul Corporation's First Motion for Partial Judgment Upon the Agency Record at 10-124 (" Plaintiff's Brief ").

Discussion

The Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1516a(a)(2) (1988) and 28 U.S.C. § 1581(c) (1988).

This Court must uphold the ITA's final determination unless it is "unsupported by substantial evidence on the record, or otherwise not in accordance with law." 19 U.S.C. § 1516a(b)(1)(B) (1988). Substantial evidence is "more than a mere scintilla. It means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion." Universal Camera Corp. v. NLRB, 340 U.S. 474, 477, 71 S.Ct. 456, 459, 95 L.Ed. 456 (1951) (quoting Consolidated Edison Co. v. NLRB, 305 U.S. 197, 229, 59 S.Ct. 206, 217, 83 L.Ed. 126 (1938)). "It is not within the Court's domain either to weigh the adequate quality or quantity of the evidence for sufficiency or to reject a finding on grounds of a differing interpretation of the record." Timken Co. v. United States, 12 CIT 955, 962, 699 F.Supp. 300, 306 (1988), aff'd, 894 F.2d 385 (Fed.Cir.1990).

1. Treatment of Value Added Tax

Adjustments to USP for consumption taxes forgiven on merchandise which is exported to the United States are governed by 19 U.S.C. § 1677a(d)(1)(C) (1988) which states:

(d) Adjustments to purchase price and...

To continue reading

Request your trial
39 practice notes
  • 881 F.Supp. 622 (CIT. 1995), 92-07-00483, Torrington Co. v. United States
    • United States
    • Federal Cases Court of International Trade
    • March 31, 1995
    ...to make any adjustments to constructed value that may be required as a result. Federal-Mogul Corp. v. United States, 18 CIT ----, ----, 862 F.Supp. 384, 404 With regard to the COP calculation, the Court agrees with Commerce that no statutory authority requires what plaintiff seeks. See 19 C......
  • 924 F.Supp. 210 (CIT. 1996), 92-06-00422, Federal-Mogul Corp. v. United States
    • United States
    • Federal Cases Court of International Trade
    • April 19, 1996
    ...("Commerce") final results of redetermination on remand filed pursuant to Federal-Mogul Corp. v. United States, 18 CIT ----, 862 F.Supp. 384 (1994) concerning Antifriction Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller Bearings) and Parts Thereof From France, et al.; Final Results of Antidum......
  • 526 F.Supp.2d 1347 (CIT. 2007), 04-00240, Jinan Yipin Corp., Ltd. v. United States
    • United States
    • Federal Cases Court of International Trade
    • November 15, 2007
    ...the arguments were not included in the case brief submitted to the agency) and Federal-Mogul Corp. v. United States, 18 CIT 785, 803, 862 F.Supp. 384, 401 (1994) (where the court declined to hear a claim by plaintiff that was not made at the administrative level)). In contrast to the factua......
  • 932 F.Supp. 315 (CIT. 1996), 93-08-00493, FAG Kugelfischer Georg Schafer KGaA v. United States
    • United States
    • Federal Cases Court of International Trade
    • July 10, 1996
    ...requests a remand to decide this issue as well. Unsure of its reading of Federal-Mogul Corp. v. United States, 18 CIT ----, ----, 862 F.Supp. 384, 403-04 (1994), Commerce requests instruction from the Court as to the propriety of adding the minimum eight percent profit twice in the construc......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
32 cases
  • 881 F.Supp. 622 (CIT. 1995), 92-07-00483, Torrington Co. v. United States
    • United States
    • Federal Cases Court of International Trade
    • March 31, 1995
    ...to make any adjustments to constructed value that may be required as a result. Federal-Mogul Corp. v. United States, 18 CIT ----, ----, 862 F.Supp. 384, 404 With regard to the COP calculation, the Court agrees with Commerce that no statutory authority requires what plaintiff seeks. See 19 C......
  • 924 F.Supp. 210 (CIT. 1996), 92-06-00422, Federal-Mogul Corp. v. United States
    • United States
    • Federal Cases Court of International Trade
    • April 19, 1996
    ...("Commerce") final results of redetermination on remand filed pursuant to Federal-Mogul Corp. v. United States, 18 CIT ----, 862 F.Supp. 384 (1994) concerning Antifriction Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller Bearings) and Parts Thereof From France, et al.; Final Results of Antidum......
  • 526 F.Supp.2d 1347 (CIT. 2007), 04-00240, Jinan Yipin Corp., Ltd. v. United States
    • United States
    • Federal Cases Court of International Trade
    • November 15, 2007
    ...the arguments were not included in the case brief submitted to the agency) and Federal-Mogul Corp. v. United States, 18 CIT 785, 803, 862 F.Supp. 384, 401 (1994) (where the court declined to hear a claim by plaintiff that was not made at the administrative level)). In contrast to the factua......
  • 932 F.Supp. 315 (CIT. 1996), 93-08-00493, FAG Kugelfischer Georg Schafer KGaA v. United States
    • United States
    • Federal Cases Court of International Trade
    • July 10, 1996
    ...requests a remand to decide this issue as well. Unsure of its reading of Federal-Mogul Corp. v. United States, 18 CIT ----, ----, 862 F.Supp. 384, 403-04 (1994), Commerce requests instruction from the Court as to the propriety of adding the minimum eight percent profit twice in the construc......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
7 provisions
  • Antidumping: Antifriction bearings (other than tapered roller bearings) and parts from— France et al.,
    • United States
    • Federal Register February 23, 1998
    • February 11, 1998
    ...of which the following have resulted in changes to the antidumping margins calculated in AFBs II: Federal-Mogul Corp. v. United States, 862 F. Supp. 384 (CIT 1994), 872 F. Supp. 1011 (CIT 1994), and Slip Op. 95-184 (November 20, 1995) with respect to France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Sweden, a......
  • Antidumping: Hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from— Thailand,
    • United States
    • Federal Register November 08, 2006
    • October 31, 2006
    ...of New Shippers Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 62 FR 47632 (September 10, 1997) and Federal Mogul Corp. v. United States, 862 F. Supp. 384, 409 (CIT 1994). During the POR, NSM received duty drawback for its U.S. sales using the tax certificate program, which is based on periodic in......
  • Antidumping: Hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from— Thailand,
    • United States
    • Federal Register December 09, 2005
    • November 30, 2005
    ...of New Shippers Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 62 FR 47632 (September 10, 1997) and Federal Mogul Corp. v. United States, 862 F. Supp. 384, 409 (CIT During the POR, SSI received duty drawback for its U.S. sales under the Thai Board of Investment (BOI) duty drawback tax certificate ......
  • Antidumping: Forged stainless steel flanges from— India,
    • United States
    • Federal Register March 10, 2003
    • February 28, 2003
    ...of New Shippers Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 62 FR 47632 (September 10, 1997) and Federal Mogul Corp. v. United States, 862 F. Supp. 384, 409 (CIT 1994). We found at verification of Echjay that it had received Duty Entitlement Pass Book (``DEPB'') certificates from the Indian gov......
  • Request a trial to view additional results