Opinion ID: 216982
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Panel's Confused Approach

Text: The panel's opinion reflects confusion about the distinct roles of Commerce and the Commission in antidumping duty investigations. The respective roles of both agencies are clearly set out in the anti-dumping statute. [1] In pertinent part, this statute provides that an antidumping duty order shall be imposed with respect to imports of a class or kind of merchandise and that the Commission is required to make its final injury determination on the basis of imports or sales of the merchandise with respect to which the administrating authority has made an affirmative determination of sales at less-than-fair-value. 19 U.S.C. § 1673(b)(1) (1994). Put simply, Commerce investigates dumping, the Commission investigates injury, but the Commission's final determination must be based on the class or kind of merchandize reported by Commerce as sold at less than fair value. See id. § 1673. The panel improperly mixes the distinct statutory roles of Commerce and the Commission by requiring that the Commission ignore Commerce's class or kind determination. The statute does not provide that the Commission may disassemble Commerce's class or kind determination to select which products it will use in rendering its final determination. Yet, that precisely is what the panel has ordered the Commission to do.