ITC issues affirmative preliminary injury determination in truck trailer duty investigation

Two days after the commission issued its affirmative preliminary determination, Hydro reported a 15% sequential quarterly decline in North American extrusion sales, which it largely attributed to weaker commercial transportation demand and lower trailer builds.

The update highlights the role truck trailer manufacturing plays in aluminum extrusion demand across North America.

At this stage, the affirmative ruling is confirmed, but the commission’s reasoning will not be published until Mar. 19, leaving time for the petitioners to submit rebuttal comments.

The investigations began Nov. 20 following petitions filed by the American Trailer Manufacturers Coalition (ATMC), whose members are Great Dane LLC, Stoughton Trailers LLC, and Wabash National Corp.

On Feb. 19, counsel for the ATMC requested an extension to submit rebuttals on product characteristics and scope. The Department of Commerce granted the request, moving the deadline for rebuttals to Mar. 5.

Scope of the investigation

ITC’s institution notice defines the merchandise as van-type trailers and subassemblies from Canada, China and Mexico under Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) subheadings 8716.39.00, 8716,90,50, and additional structural and component categories.

The scope includes certain van-type trailer subframes, nose wall, side wall and roof subassemblies, rear impact guard subassemblies, coupler assemblies, running gear or axle assemblies and landing gear subassemblies.

Commerce’s initiation

The Department of Commerce issued quantity and value questionnaires to 11 Mexican producers and exporters identified in the petition. These include Hyundai de Mexico S.A. de C.V., Fruehauf de Mexico, Inland Trailers S. de R.L. de C.V. and Utility Trailers de Mexico S.A.P.I. de C.V., among others.

Canadian producers named in the petition include Collins Manufacturing Company, Di-Mond Sales Inc., GINCOR Werx, ITD Industries, MANAC Inc., Morgan Canada Corporation and CIMC Refrigerated Trailers Co. Ltd. The petitioners also cited more than 30 companies in China.

The record includes delivery conformation for quantity and value questionnaires sent to Mexican and Chinese manufacturers. However, as of this writing, no delivery confirmation documents have been filed by the Commerce Department for the Canadian producers on the same platform.

Foreign producers and exporters, through their counsel, submitted scope and product-characteristic comments, which were submitted during Commerce’s comment period following initiation.

Dispute over domestic-like product

A central dispute has emerged over whether dry van trailers and refrigerated trailers constitute a single domestic like product.

Utility Trailer Manufacturing Company LLC argued dry vans and refergerated trailers are separate like products made by separate domestic industries.

Utility Trailers states it operates six North American factories, five in the US. Fore dry vans it states it’s exclusively a domestic producer with factories in Arkansas and Virginia. For refrigerated trailers, it says it’s primarily a domestic producer with factories in Utah and Virginia, and has a factory in Peidras Negras, Mexico.

The company says its shipments account for more than 50% of US refrigerated trailer consumption for at least the last decade.

It argues refrigerated trailers differs in insulation, flooring, transport refrigeration unit housing, sanitation requirements and interior construction. This dispute bears directly on industry support and on how the Commission defines the domestic industry for injury analysis.

Refrigerated trailer challenge

Respondents have also challenged whether the petition demonstrates sufficient industry support under the statute.

Qingdao CIMC Reefer Trailer Co. Ltd. and affiliated Vanguard entities argued the petitions failed to include all domestic producers of van-type trailers and subassemblies in calculating industry support.

The submission identifies domestic producers of refrigerated trailers, door assemblies, rear impact subassemblies, coupling systems and axle assemblies it contends were omitted. Because subassemblies are included in the proposed scope, domestic producers of those subassemblies should be included in the analysis, it argued.

Looking ahead

AD/CVD duties are quasi-judicial outcomes. They are initiated through a petition, adjudicated by the Department of Commerce and the International Trade Commission, and imposed only if Commerce finds dumping or subsidization and the ITC finds material injury or threat. In contrast, Section 232 actions and derivative inclusions can be reshaped, withdrawn, or expanded at the discretion of the executive branch.

This means that, once in place, AD/CVD duties typically remain for many years. Their primary check is the statutory five-year sunset review, in which the DOC and ITC reassess whether removing the duties would likely lead to the continuation or recurrence of dumping, subsidization, or injury.

A large portion of aluminum used in trailer construction comes from extrusions. The remainder is mostly comprised of flat-rolled products. Castings are largely used under the hood of the truck itself. Common alloys employed in trailer manufacture include 5052, 3003, 3105 for skin panels and roofing, also prevalent in commercial truck builds.

Forged aluminum wheels are a preferred lightweighting solution in the trucking industry. High-strength 6XXX series flat-rolled and extrusions, particularly 6061, are used in floors and truck bodies.