David Smith is special counsel in the firm’s Washington, D.C. office. His practice focuses on international trade and customs matters, with a specialty in unfair trade investigations under the antidumping and countervailing duty law. He practices before the U.S. International Trade Commission, U.S. Commerce Department, U.S. Customs and Border Protection Service, and U.S. Trade Representative’s Office.
David counsels and represents domestic producers in unfair trade practice administrative proceedings before the Department of Commerce, International Trade Commission and U.S. Trade Representative. In addition, he represents these clients in appellate proceedings before the Court of International Trade and Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. He has provided general advice to clients on a variety of other international trade matters, including the trade remedy laws; applicability of tariff preference programs; customs’ valuation and classification issues; World Trade Organization rules, procedures and dispute settlement; most favored nation treatment; foreign trade zone operations; and international trade policy, negotiations and legislation.
David has represented domestic manufacturers of large power transformers in and antidumping duty proceeding before the Commerce Department and International Trade Commission. The case was filed initiated in the Summer of 2011, and final duties of between 15 to 29 percent were levied on imports of large power transformers from Korea in late 2012.
Represented a coalition of domestic pasta manufacturers in the continued imposition of duties on pasta imported from Italy and Turkey, including the successful maintenance of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders in five-year “sunset” reviews. David also has represents domestic pasta producers in appeals before the Court of International Trade and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Most recently, domestic pasta industry was able to defeat an appeal by an Italian pasta producer that claimed the Commerce Department wrongly applied its “quarterly cost methodology” to the Italian producers’ costs of production. The Federal Circuit rejected the Italian pasta producers’ claim, and affirmed the lower court, in 2012.
Representation of domestic producers requires vigilance in preventing and halting the circumvention and evasion of antidumping and countervailing duty orders. David has represented numerous clients before Commerce and U.S. Customs in these matters, most recently representing producers of carbon wire rod in an administrative proceeding that resulting in a finding that a Mexico-based wire rod producer was circumventing the antidumping duty order by making minor alterations to its exports and claiming the wire rod was not subject to existing 20 percent antidumping duties.
David has also represented the stainless steel industry, producers of kitchen appliance shelving, domestic manufacturers of man-made fibers, including polyester staple fiber, and many others in antidumping and countervailing investigations before the U.S. Department of Commerce and International Trade Commission.
Counseled domestic producers before the U.S. Department of Commerce and International Trade Commission in antidumping and countervailing duty investigations involving the People’s Republic of China and Commerce’s non-market economy methodology, including products of kitchen appliance shelves and racks, wire decking, as well as numerous other products.
International Trade Bar Association