- with Finance and Tax Executives and Inhouse Counsel
- in Asia
- with readers working within the Automotive, Chemicals and Healthcare industries
The U.S. Department of Commerce must decide by September 8, 2026 whether to initiate antidumping (“AD”) and countervailing duty (“CVD”) investigations of Linear Hydraulic Cylinders and Parts Thereof from Canada, China, India, Mexico, and South Korea.
The petitions, filed on July 29, 2026, seek AD investigations of imports from all five countries and CVD investigations of imports from China, India, and Mexico. The alleged AD margins are substantial: 60.16%–163.42% for Mexico, 78.70%–149.33% for South Korea, 102.59%–461.46% for India, 125.77%–511.41% for China, and 248.33%–744.85% for Canada.
The proposed scope is particularly noteworthy because it extends beyond stand-alone hydraulic cylinders. The petition expressly seeks to cover otherwise subject hydraulic cylinders that are “attached to or imported with any equipment or parts of equipment classified in Chapter 84” of the HTSUS, while providing that “only the hydraulic cylinder is covered by the scope.” As a result, the proposed scope could affect imports of downstream Chapter 84 machinery, including forklifts, excavators, front-end loaders, telehandlers, and certain other construction and material-handling equipment, containing covered cylinders from the subject countries.
Commerce Is Polling the U.S. Industry Before Initiation
Commerce ordinarily determines whether to initiate an AD or CVD investigation within 20 days after a petition is filed. Before initiating, Commerce must determine that a petition was filed “by or on behalf of” the relevant U.S. industry. Producers supporting a petition must account for:
- at least 25 percent of total U.S. production of the domestic like product; and
- more than 50 percent of the production accounted for by U.S. producers expressing either support for or opposition to the petition.
In this case, Commerce determined that it was not clear from the petitions whether the statutory industry support requirements had been satisfied and therefore polled U.S. producers regarding their support for or opposition to the petitions. When Commerce must poll or otherwise determine industry support, the statute permits Commerce to extend the normal 20-day initiation period by an additional 20 days.
The producers’ polling responses are now on the record, and Commerce has provided interested parties an opportunity to comment on those responses. Commerce must now determine whether the industry support requirements are satisfied and whether to initiate the investigations no later than September 8, 2026.
What Happens If Commerce Initiates?
If Commerce initiates, several important procedural steps will follow quickly. Commerce is expected to establish deadlines for scope comments and rebuttal comments and begin the process of selecting mandatory respondents in the AD and CVD investigations. Depending on the country and proceeding, Commerce may rely on U.S. Customs and Border Protection import data or information obtained from potential respondents to select the exporters or producers it will individually examine.
The ITC has already begun its preliminary injury investigations. Because Commerce extended its initiation deadline, the ITC revised its schedule and must now reach its preliminary injury determinations within 25 days after the date on which it receives notice from Commerce of initiation of the investigations. If Commerce initiates on September 8, the ITC determinations would be expected in early October 2026.
If the ITC reaches affirmative preliminary injury determinations, the Commerce investigations will continue. Commerce will then issue preliminary AD and CVD determinations under the applicable statutory timelines, subject to extensions. For entries subject to affirmative preliminary rates, Commerce may instruct CBP to suspend liquidation and require cash deposits at the applicable preliminary rates.
Why Early Participation May Be Important
The proposed scope is broad. It covers certain linear acting hydraulic cylinders with:
- a barrel made of steel;
- a bore size (inner diameter) of at least 25.4 millimeters (1 inch); and
- a return (retracted) length of at least 102.1 millimeters (4 inches).
The proposed scope covers numerous cylinder designs, including tie-rod, welded body, telescopic, plunger, rodless, differential, position-sensing, single-acting, double-acting, displacement, ram-type, piggy-back, double-rod, rod-fed, and spring-return linear acting hydraulic cylinders. It also covers certain steel barrel components, steel piston rod components, and components attached to, assembled with, or shipped with a covered steel barrel or piston rod. In addition, attachments, parts, or components imported with, attached to, or invoiced with a covered hydraulic cylinder or component may be included. The subject merchandise is currently identified under HTSUS statistical reporting numbers 8412.21.0015, 8412.21.0030, 8412.21.0045, 8412.21.0060, 8412.21.0075, and 8412.90.9005. The written description of the scope, however, is dispositive.
Most notably, the proposed scope expressly includes hydraulic cylinders meeting the physical description above when they are “attached to or imported with any equipment or parts of equipment classified in Chapter 84” of the HTSUS, while specifying that “only the hydraulic cylinder is covered by the scope.” This means the investigations could affect not only imports of stand-alone hydraulic cylinders, but also imports of Chapter 84 machinery containing covered cylinders, such as forklifts, excavators, front-end loaders, telehandlers, and certain other construction and material-handling equipment.
This downstream-product language could create significant administration and compliance issues. When a covered hydraulic cylinder is imported by itself, the subject merchandise, producer or exporter, entered value, and applicable AD/CVD treatment can be identified directly. Those determinations become more complicated when the cylinder is incorporated into a larger piece of equipment before importation. Questions may arise regarding whether the equipment contains a cylinder meeting the scope criteria, the country of origin and producer or exporter of that cylinder, the value attributable to the subject merchandise, and how the cylinder should be reported at entry when it is not separately imported or classified.
Companies that may be affected should closely monitor Commerce’s September 8 initiation decision and, if the investigations are initiated, the early procedural deadlines that follow. The scope-comment process may be particularly important given the breadth of the proposed coverage, and interested parties should consider whether early participation is warranted to address scope issues before the investigations progress further.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
[View Source]
