The Argentine Republic, member of the WTO since 1995, has regularly resorted to the application of antidumping duties in the last 30 years, as an answer to unfair trade practices, following the rules of the multilateral space in which it participates (formerly GATT, now WTO).

At the end of 2021, Argentina had 5 % of the total antidumping measures, initiated or in force by WTO members, according to the official statistics found in: http://i-tip.wto.org/goods/Forms/MemberView.aspx?mode=modify&action=search

During more than 25 years working on dumping cases, either as member of the official team for antidumping investigations in Argentina, or as counselor advising companies in the private sector, it was always interesting for me to observe whether the adopted final antidumping measure had really served to achieve the objectives pursued.

At this point we must be clear: in an antidumping case, while the government will seek to temporarily protect the domestic producers of certain product, the private sector will be looking to harm the competitor's economic equation and/or to take/defend its market share.

New sustainability regulatory initiatives are establishing requirements for supply chains to collect additional data on a range of sustainability metrics including deforestation, labor conditions, carbon intensity, and recycled content. As one observer noted, “this proliferation of objectives is making value chain management enormously complex.”

Effective beginning November of 2021, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) updated its Prior Disclosure (or PD) extension request guidelines. The new requirements, which have not been circulated publicly, streamline but shorten the amount of time available for Prior Disclosure filers to perfect their disclosure. Previously, from our firm’s personal experience, CBP routinely granted requests for 180 days to perfect a Prior Disclosure, and if additional extensions were needed they were routinely granted. However, CBP has now significantly shortened extension periods to 30 days with only one additional 60-day extension granted (more details below). Due to the potentially large amount of work needed to perfect a Prior Disclosure, this shortening of the time to perfect makes the Prior Disclosure process more onerous for importers seeking to proactively disclose their suspected violations. Even worse, the limitation of time to perfect a disclosure opens up the possibility that an importer may disclose a violation to CBP, not have the opportunity to perfect the disclosure, and lose the benefits of the PD protection, allowing CBP the ability to penalize the importer. This article provides a background on CBP prior disclosures, explains the new requirements, and identifies best practices.

In response to Russia’s continued invasion of Ukraine, the U.S and its allies have imposed several layers of economic sanctions and actions against Russia and Belarus. In addition to decimating the Ruble to a value of less than $0.01 (USD), the prohibitive actions by the U.S. and its trading partners have left global supply chain participants in a mire of new requirements. This article touches on each of the economic actions by the U.S. government in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Welcome to what is, optimistically, the CITBA Export Control Committee’s inaugural annual recap of major developments in export controls. 2021 ushered in a new presidential administration, but all signs point to continuity in the export control space. If an overall theme can be distilled, it is that the new administration will likely dole out new export controls more methodically than its predecessor, but that it is unlikely to scale back any of the existing controls in the near term.

Every day, the news media has headline news of the disruption in the international supply chain. From cars to TVs, Americans are told that it is taking longer to get merchandise from overseas into the department stores for your purchase. You probably have seen video of dozens of mega-size cargo vessels off the coast of California waiting to unload containers into the Port of Los Angeles/Long Beach. It seems as if the way cargo has moved from overseas to the United States no longer works, or at least is in serious jeopardy. My thesis is that the international supply chain has never worked so well in getting the massive amount of cargo from overseas (mostly Asia) to the United States to satisfy the consumption demands of American consumers.

In an appeal of antidumping (“AD”) or countervailing duty (“CVD”) determinations, the government (the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”) or the U.S. Department of Justice on behalf of the U.S. Department of Commerce (“Commerce”)) and defendant-intervenor will, in most cases, both defend the challenged administrative determination before the U.S. Court of International Trade (“USCIT”). Despite the agreed-upon outcome––i.e., affirming the agency determination––the government and defendant-intervenor often have divergent interests in litigating the matter. The defendant-intervenor often has more at stake than the government and accordingly, Congress has provided a special role for the defendant-intervenor in challenges to Title VII determinations.

As virtual currencies gain popularity and are touted as a legitimate, reliable, and potentially useful medium of exchange, there is significant concern about how the new technology will be effectively regulated. Virtual currencies have vast implications in a wide array of regulatory areas including privacy, tax, and securities, just to name a few. This article will focus on virtual currencies scrutiny under U.S. sanctions programs administered by the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) given the potential national security and foreign policy threats posed by their increasingly widespread use.

The year began with a lot of anticipation and speculation regarding the direction that the new Administration would take on international trade matters. Throughout 2021, the agencies and the courts have continued to grapple with trade disputes left over from the prior Administration, as well as issuing new decisions and launching novel initiatives. This overview highlights some of the key developments in international trade law in 2021.