International Society of Primerus Law Firms

Home > Washington DC Antidumping Lawyer

Washington DC Antidumping Lawyer

Geert  De Prest, Esq.
Geert De Prest, Esq.
Terence P. Stewart, Esq.
Terence P. Stewart, Esq.
Elizabeth J. Drake, Esq.
Elizabeth J. Drake, Esq.
Philip A. Butler, Esq.
Philip A. Butler, Esq.
Stephanie  Manaker, Esq.
Stephanie Manaker, Esq.
Jennifer M. Smith, Esq.
Jennifer M. Smith, Esq.

Contact the Antidumping Law Firm of Stewart and Stewart

When an exporter sells a product abroad for a price that is less than what the same seller sells the product for in the home market, it is international price discrimination and in WTO-parlance is called “dumping”. Because dumping will benefit consumers in the importing country, not all instances of dumping are actionable under international rules or domestic law. Rather only dumped imports which are a cause of material injury to a domestic industry in the importing country (or a threat of such material injury) are actionable. Injurious dumping is an internationally recognized unfair trading practice. The GATT, and now WTO, have since 1947 indicated that injurious dumping is “condemned”.

Stewart and Stewart prides itself on being able to maximize the value of a case to an injured industry and its workers through a strong command of the facts, underlying laws, regulations and policy and thorough research to ensure that a determination by both the Department of Commerce and International Trade Commission are based upon the best record and after the best legal arguments have been made. Judicial review (and for cases involving Mexico or Canada, binational panel review) is available for parties at (first) the U.S. Court of International Trade in New York City and then (if pursued) at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C.

In hundreds of cases over the last 50 years, we have helped many industries remain competitive, whether in metals, glass, chemicals, consumer electronics, electronic components, rubber products, agricultural products, floricultural products, automotive parts, industrial equipment/systems and many other segments of U.S. production.

The Trade Remedies team has decades of experience representing clients before the International Trade Administration of the U.S. Department of Commerce and the U.S. International Trade Commission and in subsequent appeals to the specialized U.S. Court of International Trade and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (or for cases involving NAFTA partners, before NAFTA panels). We are the attorney of record in literally hundreds of decisions handed down by these courts (and their predecessor courts) over the years.

Since the late 1950s, first the founder and later the current lawyers of Stewart and Stewart have been involved in every major legislative endeavor to review and revise U.S. trade remedy laws, including the antidumping law.

Similarly, we have written extensively on U.S. trade remedies and on WTO agreements and WTO dispute settlement. When other countries challenge U.S. law, regulation or practice, we represent our clients by providing comments to the U.S. government on the elements of the WTO challenges made, by providing an analysis of WTO decisions. We provide input to U.S. negotiators and U.S. legislators and monitor negotiations in Geneva to ensure that any resulting modifications of existing agreements meet U.S. negotiating objectives and preserve the basic purpose and function of existing U.S. law.

Over the years, we have provided similar services either alone or in conjunction with local counsel in countries around the world where similar remedies are available.

In addition, Stewart and Stewart Trade Remedies team counsels U.S. and foreign companies on the operation of international agreements and foreign laws. Our Trade Remedies team assists in the development of internal review systems to help companies understand the potential exposure to actions abroad (whether abroad is the U.S., the EU, other countries in the Americas, China, India or elsewhere).

An importing government is allowed to offset the injurious dumping by the imposition of a duty up to the amount of dumping found. This remedy is prospective in effect, with duties being applicable to imports either after a preliminary determination of injury and dumping or after an order is finally issued (12-18 months after an investigation is started) meaning there is no remedy for past harm. Domestic law in the United States and in most other major trading partners allows industries (the U.S. also allows workers to bring cases) which have been harmed– or are likely to be harmed – by this practice to fight back by filing petitions seeking the imposition of the additional duty if both dumping and material injury are demonstrated. The lawyers and consultants at Stewart and Stewart are experts in anti-dumping cases.

Antidumping cases in the U.S. and around the world are investigations by government agencies, rather than adjudications . What this means practically to companies or their workers is that the burden on the domestic party seeking a remedy is to gather information reasonably available to it/them that show a likelihood that dumping is occurring and that a domestic industry is being injured. If there is sufficient information provided and if the standing requirements are found to be met, an investigation will be started. Different countries provide different levels of right of participation, access to information submitted and rights to provide factual information and legal argument. The WTO’s antidumping agreement provides a great deal of detail in terms of how WTO members (like the US and most of its major trading partners) are to investigate a claim of injurious dumping, the minimum levels of due process and transparency required, etc. As one of the oldest administrators of antidumping laws, the U.S. has a fully developed system that is highly transparent and provides maximum opportunities for participation by foreign exporters, US importers and domestic producers and their workers. The U.S. system also allows for access to outside counsel to all information submitted in the investigation under what is called an administrative protective order. Few other nations have comparable access to information or comparable due process rights.

The U.S. has a bifurcated investigation process – the U.S. Department of Commerce determines whether dumping from exporters in a country has occurred; the U.S. International Trade Commission determines whether the dumped imports are (or threathen to be) a cause of injury to the domestic industry. Other nations are split between whether they have a bifurcated system like the U.S. or have both dumping and injury determined by the same agency or ministry (the U.S. had a unitary system in the period 1921-1954).

Relief for an injured domestic industry and its workers often occurs at the time of the preliminary dumping determination which, if affirmative, requires importers post security on subsequent imports. If an order issues at the end of the investigation, an importer must post a cash deposit equal to the dumping found on the imports from the exporter in question.

Antidumping proceedings cover a number of stages including:

  • Original investigations (following the filing of a petition)
  • Administrative reviews (available annually after the issuance of an order; reviews the actual dumping liability for reviewed exporters for defined periods)
  • Changed circumstance reviews
  • New shipper reviews
  • Sunset reviews of antidumping duty orders

Contact The Antidumping Law Firm of Stewart and Stewart

Contact a Proven Washington DC Antidumping Lawyer

Contact This Firm

Stewart and Stewart

2100 M Street, N.W., Suite 200
Washington, DC 20037
United States

Law Firm Contacts: Terence P. Stewart

Tel: 202.315.0765

Fax: 202.466.1286


Member Since: 2003

Send Us An Email

Preferred Contact Method?

 Email Phone - AM Phone - PM

Disclaimer: Primerus and our member law firms welcome your emails, contact forms, phone calls and written letters. Contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not send any confidential information to Primerus or its member law firms until an attorney-client relationship has been established. Thank you and we look forward to serving you.

* Denotes Required Field