NOTICES

                        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

                    International Trade Administration

       Certain Fasteners From Japan; Final Results of Administrative Review of
                        Countervailing Duty Order

                         Thursday, October 29, 1981

 *53484 AGENCY: International Trade Administration, Commerce.

 ACTION: Notice of final results of administrative review of countervailing duty order.

 SUMMARY: On March 31, 1981, the Department of Commerce published in the Federal
 Register a notice of "Preliminary Results of Administrative Review of Countervailing
 Duty Order" with respect to certain fasteners from Japan. The review is based upon
 information for the period January 1, 1978 through January 31, 1979. The notice stated
 that the Department had preliminarily determined the amount of net subsidy to be 0.27
 percent of the f.o.b. invoice price of the merchandise. Interested parties were invited to
 comment. Upon review and analysis of all comments received, the Department
 determines that countervailing duties in the amount of 0.37 percent ad valorem shall
 be assessed on entries of certain fasteners, classifiable under item numbers 646.54 and
 654.56 of the TSUS, during the period from June 4, 1979 through December 31, 1979.
 However, for entries on or after January 1, 1980, the Department has adjusted the rate
 and will direct the Customs Service not to collect estimated countervailing duty
 deposits on shipments of this merchandise entered on or after the date of publication of
 these final results.

 EFFECTIVE DATE: October 29, 1981.

 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

 Joseph A. Black, Office of Compliance, International Trade Administration, Room
 2802, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C. 20230 (202-377-1774).

 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

 Procedural Background

 On May 6, 1977, a notice of "Imposition of Countervailing Duties," T.D. 77- 128, was
 published in the Federal Register (42 FR 23147). The notice stated that the Treasury
 Department had determined that certain fasteners from Japan were provided bounties
 or grants within the meaning of section 303 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1303) ("the
 Tariff Act"). Accordingly, imports into the United States of certain fasteners were
 subject to countervailing duties. On June 4, 1979, a second notice, "Final
 Countervailing Duty Determination and Suspension of Liquidation," T.D. 79-158, was
 published in the Federal Register (44 FR 31972), expanding the scope of the previous
 order to include other types of fasteners. Despite its title this notice did not suspend
 liquidation.
 On March 31, 1981, the Department published in the Federal Register a notice of the
 preliminary results of its administrative review of the countervailing duty order
 regarding this merchandise (46 FR 19511). The Department has now completed that
 administrative review.

 Scope of Review

 Imports covered by this review are all fasteners currently classifiable under item
 numbers 646.54 and 646.56, and non-metric fasteners currently classifiable under item
 numbers 646.17, 646.40, 646,41, 646.49, 646.51, 646.53, 646.58, 646.60, 646.63,
 646.65, 646.72, 646.74, 646.75, 646.76, and 646.78, Tariff Schedules of the United
 States (TSUS). The review is based upon information for the period January 1, 1978
 through January 31, 1979. The programs investigated were: (1) The deferral of income
 taxes on export earnings under the Overseas Market Development Reserve ("OMDR"), (2)
 export promotional assistance provided by the Japanese External Trade Organization
 ("JETRO") and (3) benefits received under the "Temporary Measures Act for Small and
 Midsized Businesses with Regard to the High Yen Exchange Market" ("High Yen Law").

 Analysis of Comments Received

 The petitioner claims that we should have reinvestigated certain programs that were
 originally investigated by the Department of the Treasury and found not to constitute a
 bounty or grant. The petitioner's position is based on a decision of the Court of Customs
 and Patent Appeals in ASG Industries, Inc. v. United States, 610 F. 2d 770 (CCPA 1979)
 ("ASG"), which held incorrect Treasury's practice of not finding a domestic subsidy
 program countervailable when exports did not exceed 20 percent of total production
 (the "trade distortion" test).

 While the petitioner maintains that there were many programs that should have been
 investigated, we conclude that there are only four lending programs which Treasury did
 not find to constitute a bounty or grant because of the trade distortion test. Those
 programs are loans by the People's Finance Corporation, the Bank of Commerce and
 Industrial Cooperatives, the Small Business Finance Corporation, and the Japan
 Development Bank. Treasury dismissed the balance of the programs cited by the
 petitioner because "* * * they do not on their face describe a bounty or grant or because
 the allegations are too vague or remote from the fasteners industry to warrant further
 investigation." (T.D. 77-128).
 In opposition to petitioner's position, we received two sets of comments from importers
 of the merchandise. They expressed the view that to add programs to the outstanding
 countervailing duty order would be to question the validity of the final determination
 (as it applies to entries prior to January 1, 1980).
 The substantive law and the applicable Treasury Decision(s) in effect before January 1,
 1980 govern liquidation of entries made prior to that date. The ASG case changed the
 interpretation of the law in regard to domestic subsidies and requires us to consider them
 in this case. T.D. 79-158 allows us to make an adjustment in the rate of subsidy owing to
 the countervailable programs cited in that order. This is because, as stated in T.D.
 79-158, the rates established in that order were "estimates * * * made in the absence of
 information regarding benefits specifically conferred on manufacturers * * * "and they
 would be"* * * reviewed upon receipt of information of the precise benefit received by
 individual Japanese fastener manufacturers/exporters."
 We are adjusting the rate Treasury promulagted in T.D. 79-158 for entries made in 1979
 based on the programs that were the subject of that decision. We are also adding the
 subsidy component due to the domestic lending programs. We have asked for and
 received from the Japanese government additional information concerning the four
 lending programs listed above. The additional subsidy from these four programs is 0.1
 percent.
 We stated in our preliminary notice that we were reviewing our positions with regard to
 the countervailability under the Tariff Act of the assistance *53485 provided by JETRO
 and with regard to Treasury's determination in this case that an ad valorem met subsidy
 in the range of 0.2 percent was more than de minimis.

 The Japanese government presented comments that JETRO is an organization which
 promotes both export and import activity by Japanese firms. It conducts research and
 public relations activities to meet those ends. The comments included a list of such
 activities.
 One importer commented that the proposed 0.27 percent rate was de minimis by the
 application of three tests. Those tests are: (1) Comparison with the effective rate of duty;
 (2) by a comparison of the value of the merchandise; and (3) by comparison with the
 potential revenue collection and cost of administration. While Treasury came to the
 opposite conclusion using the first test, the importer pointed out that in 1978, under the
 authority of section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2251), the President imposed
 a temporary 15 percent rate on fasteners. Therefore, the current temporary rate of duty
 is 15.7 percent and 15.2 percent for tariff item numbers 646.54 and 646.56, respectively.
 The petitioner did not submit comments regarding these two issues. We conclude that the
 import and export promotion activities of JETRO are proper functions of a government
 and not activities which would constitutute a bounty or grant under our law. Therefore,
 we find that the activities of JETRO are not subsidies within the meaning of the Tariff Act.
 (As was stated in the preliminary notice, the benefit from JETRO was 0.05 percent.)
 With regard to the remaining programs, the benefit under the OMDR program was 0.1
 percent. 

The benefit under the High Yen Law totaled 0.12 percent. Therefore, the benefit
 conferred by these two programs, plus the 0.1 percent benefit from the four additional
 lending programs, results in a total net benefit of 0.32 percent. After consideration of the
 comments, the Department now considers this rate to be de minimis. The decisions
 regarding JETRO and the de minimis issue apply to shipments entered on or after January
 1, 1980.

 Final Results of the Review

 As a result of our review we determine that fasteners from Japan have benefitted from
 a total net subsidy of 0.32 percent of the f.o.b. invoice price during the period of review.
 However, the provisions of T.D. 79-158 and of section 303(a)(5) of the Tariff Act apply to
 all entries prior to January 1, 1980.
 The rate of subsidy based on the three programs held countervailable by T.D. 79-158 plus
 the four additional lending programs during the period of review was 0.37 percent ad
 valorem. Accordingly, the Department will instruct the Customs Service to assess
 countervailing duties of 0.37 percent of the f.o.b. invoice price on all unliquidated
 shipments entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption from June 4, 1979
 through December 31, 1979, and currently classifiable under TSUS item numbers 646.54
 and 646.56. With regard to nonmetric fasteners currently classifiable under TSUS item
 numbers 646.17, 646.40, 646.41, 646.49, 646.51, 646.53, 646.58, 646.60, 646.63,
 646.65, 646.72, 646.74, 646.75, 646.76, and 646.78, the Department, in conformity
 with T.D. 77- 128, considers the rate of net subsidy to be de minimis. Therefore, we will
 instruct the Customs Service to liquidate unliquidated shipments of such merchandise
 entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption from June 4, 1979 through
 December 31, 1979 without regard to countervailing duties.
 Normally we declare the rate determined during our review to be the estimated
 countervailing duty deposit rate for entries made on or after the date of publication of
 the final results. However, as stated above we determine that the 0.32 percent rate is de
 minimis for all fasteners subject to the order. Therefore, cash deposits of estimated
 countervailing duties will not be required on shipments entered, or withdrawn from
 warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of these final results. This
 waiver of deposit shall remain in effect until completion of the next administrative
 review.
 The Department intends to complete the next administrative review by the end of May
 1982. The amount of countervailing duties to be imposed on entries made during
 1980 will be determined during that review. Consequently, the suspension of liquidation
 previously ordered will continue on all shipments entered, or withdrawn from
 warehouse, for consumption on or after January 1, 1980.
 This administrative review and notice are in accordance with section 751(a)(1) of the
 Tariff Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)) and § 355.41 of the Commerce Regulations (19 CFR
 355.41).

 October 23, 1981.

 Gary N. Horlick,

 Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

 [FR Doc. 81-31385 Filed 10-28-81; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 3510-25-M