DONP 2020 IN: Decorative and other non-structural plywood
Statement of Reasons—Final decisions

Complainants

[15] The names and addresses of the complainants are as follows:

Columbia Forest Products (CFP)
225 Prince Street
Hearst, ON  P0L 1N0

Husky Plywood (a Division of Commonwealth Plywood Co. Ltd.) (Husky)
15 Labelle Blvd.
P.O. Box 90
Ste-Therese, QC  J7E 4H9

Rockshield Engineered Wood Products, ULC (Rockshield)
4 Boisvert Cr.
Cochrane, ON  P0L 1C0

Canadian Hardwood Plywood and Veneer Association (CHPVA)
89, ave Godfrey
St-Sauveur, QC  J0R 1R5

[16] CFP is a domestic producer of decorative plywood, headquartered in North Carolina and has operations in both the United States and Canada. CFP operates three production facilities located in Hearst and Kitchener, Ontario, as well as Saint-Casimir, Quebec.^{Footnote 1}

[17] Husky is a division of Commonwealth Plywood Company Limited and operates a production facility in St-Therese, Québec.^{Footnote 2}

[18] Rockshield is a domestic producer of decorative plywood, with its operations based in Cochrane, Ontario.^{Footnote 3}

[19] CHPVA is a national trade association representing both producers of decorative plywood and face veneer. There are a total of seven members of the CHPVA, which includes CFP, Husky and Rockshield.^{Footnote 4}

[20] The other known manufacturers of like goods in Canada are: Precision Veneer Products (Precision), ProPly Custom Plywood Inc. (ProPly), Corporation Internationale Masonite—Megantic (CIM), Panneaux Optimum Inc. (Panneaux), Birchland Plywood Limited, Executive Woodwork, Monarch Custom Plywood, Spécialité MGH, and Rainbow Wood Veneer.^{Footnote 5} Contact information for these manufacturers is as follows:

[21] Precision, ProPly, CIM, and Panneaux are all members of the CHPVA. The remaining five producers of decorative plywood are not members of the CHPVA. Precision and ProPly both support the complaint. The complainants are not aware of any domestic producers that oppose the complaint.^{Footnote 6}

Trade Unions^{Footnote 7}

[22] The complainants identified the following three trade unions that represent persons employed in the production of decorative plywood in Canada:

• United Steelworkers
• UNIFOR and
• Association des Salariés du Contre-Plaqué de Ste-Thérèse

[23] The trade unions did not make any submissions during the investigations.

Importers

[24] At the initiation of the investigations, the CBSA identified 175 potential importers of the subject goods based on CBSA import documentation and information provided by the complainants. All of the potential importers were asked to respond to the CBSA’s Importer request for information (RFI). The CBSA received 18 responses to the Importer RFI.

Exporters

[25] At the initiation of the investigations, the CBSA identified 765 potential exporters/producers of the subject goods based on CBSA import documentation and information provided by the complainants. All of the potential exporters/producers were asked to respond to the CBSA’s Dumping and Subsidy RFI.

[26] Nine companies provided responses to the CBSA’s Dumping and Subsidy RFI. Respondents included producers and exporters. The submissions and results for the producers/exporters have been summarized in the Results of the dumping investigation and Results of the subsidy investigation sections, found below.

[27] CBSA officers performed verifications by way of Verification Questionnaires for Linyi Celtic Wood Co., Ltd. and Celtic Co., Ltd. (Celtic Group); Evergreen; Huasheng Yongbin; Linyi Jiahe; Jinniu; Jiangshan; Shandong Good Wood; Xuzhou Shenping Imp. and Exp. Co., Ltd., Xuzhou Longyuan Wood Industry Co., Ltd., and Fengxian Weiheng Wood Co., Ltd. (Longyuan Group); and Zhejiang Dehua TB Import & Export Co, Ltd., and Dehua TB New Decoration Material Co., Ltd. (Dehua Group).

Government

[28] For the purposes of these investigations, GOC refers to all levels of government, i.e., federal, central, provincial/state, regional, municipal, city, township, village, local, legislative, administrative or judicial, singular, collective, elected or appointed. It also includes any person, agency, enterprise, or institution acting for, on behalf of, or under the authority of, or under the authority of any law passed by, the government of that country or that provincial, state or municipal or other local or regional government.

[29] At the initiation of the investigations, the CBSA sent a Government Subsidy RFI^{Footnote 8} to the GOC. In addition, the GOC was sent a Particular Market Situation (PMS) RFI^{Footnote 9}.

[30] The GOC did not provide a response to the CBSA’s Government Subsidy RFI nor to the PMS RFI. However, the GOC did provide a submission concerning the PMS questionnaire^{Footnote 10}.

Definition

[31] For the purpose of these investigations, subject goods are defined as:

Additional product information^{Footnote 11}

[32] The following is a brief explanation of certain key terms:

1. Decorative and other non-structural plywood: a flat, multilayered plywood or other veneered panel, consisting of two or more layers or plies of wood veneers and a core, with the face and/or back veneer made of wood
2. Veneer: a slice of wood which is cut, sliced or sawed from a log, bolt, or flitch. To be called a “veneer”, the slice of wood would generally be 6mm or less in thickness. The face and back veneers are the outermost veneer of wood on either side of the core irrespective of additional surface coatings or covers as described below
3. Cores: The core of decorative plywood consists of the layer or layers of one or more material(s) that are situated between the face and back veneers. The core may be composed of a range of materials, including but not limited to veneer core platforms (consisting of one or more veneers of hardwood or softwood), particleboard, or medium-density fiberboard (MDF)
4. Veneer core platforms: are cores composed of hardwood or softwood veneers. A veneer core platform would consist of at least two plies of wood. A veneer core platform may also be called a veneer core blank. A veneer core platform is itself covered by the product definition when the veneer core platforms are for the production of decorative and other non-structural plywood, and are themselves included as subject goods. The other types of cores (e.g. particleboard, MDF) on their own are not covered by the product definition. Decorative and other non-structural plywood which are made with those other cores are covered by the product definition

[33] Other than the products excluded from the product definition, all decorative plywood is included within the scope of these investigations regardless of whether or not the face and/or back veneers are surface coated or covered and whether or not such surface coating(s) or cover(s) obscures the grain, textures, or markings of the wood. Examples of surface coatings and covers include, but are not limited to: ultra-violet light cured polyurethanes; oil or oil-modified or water based polyurethanes; wax; epoxy-ester finishes; moisture-cured urethanes; paints; stains; paper; aluminum; high pressure laminate; MDF; medium density overlay (MDO); and phenolic film. Additionally, the face veneer of non-structural and decorative plywood may be sanded; smoothed or given a “distressed” appearance through such methods as hand-scraping or wire brushing.

[34] Decorative plywood is primarily manufactured as a panel. The most common panel sizes are 1219 x 1829 mm (48 x 72 inches), 1219 x 2438 mm (48 x 96 inches), and 1219 x 3048 mm (48 x 120 inches). However, these panels are often cut-to-size by the manufacturer in accordance with a customer’s requirements. The most common thicknesses of the panels range from 3.2 mm (1/8 inch) to 25.4 mm (1 inch). Regardless of the actual dimensions, all products that meet the production definition are included as subject goods.

[35] For further clarity regarding the cores, particle boards and MDF boards on their own (i.e., a particle board core or an MDF core) are not covered by the product definition. However, decorative plywood that includes a particle board core or MDF core or veneer core, or a combination of veneer, MDF and particleboard as the core, is covered by the product definition. Separately, a veneer core platform on its own is covered by the definition. A veneer core platform consists of a series of wood plies. The key distinction between a veneer core platform and decorative plywood is that decorative plywood generally has, as its outer plies, wood plies which are usually of a higher quality for their appearance.

[36] Decorative plywood is sometimes referred to by other terms, e.g., “hardwood plywood”, “plywood” or “engineered wood”. Regardless of the particular terminology, all products that meet the product definition are intended for inclusion within the product definition and are Subject Goods.

[37] Finished plywood which is used as flooring is excluded from the product definition. Separately, construction-grade plywood is used in subflooring. Since this is structural plywood, it is not covered by the product definition. However, the underlayment (a thin panel installed above the subflooring) is not structural and is not used as flooring, and therefore falls within the product definition.

[38] PFF, also known as PSF, as described in the product definition exclusion section, is excluded from the product definition. This product is a film-faced plywood for use in concrete forming.

[39] Part (e) of the exclusions excludes laminated veneer lumber door and window components. Conditions associated with this exclusion ensure that only legitimate door and window components are excluded.

[40] In the context of this product definition, “non-structural” plywood refers to plywood which does not meet the requirements of a “structural” plywood, but is also not “decorative” in its application. These products are sometimes referred to as “utility panels” or “industrial panels”. Generally, these products would not have a thin face veneer. Non-structural plywood is used in applications such as shelving, garage cabinets, or dog houses. This type of plywood could also be used as “framestock” for the frames of sofas. It could even be possible that some manufacturers could use these for the interiors of cabinets or furniture if the plywood will be painted.

[41] Most decorative plywood is produced on a custom basis. The production process is highly flexible and can produce goods to exact customer specifications. While some distributors may stock inventory for purchase by end-users, the typical purchase of decorative plywood is made in advance of production, on a spot (as opposed to contractual) basis.

[42] Decorative plywood is generally described by the number of plies, overall thickness, width, length, species of face ply, grade of face and back ply, pattern or type of cut of face ply, and type of core.

[43] Decorative plywood is not required to meet a standard or certification. There is a voluntary (not mandatory) standard call the American National Standard for Hardwood and Decorative Plywood, ANSI/HPVA HP-1-2016 (current version). In contrast, structural plywood (which is not subject) must be certified as it is intended to be used for construction applications; it is manufactured to meet U.S. Products Standard PS 1-09, PS 2-09, or PS 2- 10 for Structural Plywood.

[44] Because decorative plywood is typically used for decorative purposes, the appearance of the face ply, and, where exposed, the back ply, is often an important feature of the plywood. For this reason, grades are assigned to the face and back plies which encompass such characteristics as colour streaks or spots, colour variations, burls, and pin knots. Some manufacturers offer proprietary or custom grades. However, the consensus grading standards are set forth in ANSI/HPVA HP-1-2016 (current version).

[45] The face ply is the side of the product that is exposed to view after installation. Face grades are delineated as “AA”, “A”, “B”, “C”, “D” and “E”, where “AA” would have the best looking veneer face and “E” would have the worst looking veneer face (e.g. lots of knots in the wood). A veneer face with a higher grade (e.g. “AA”) would generally entail a higher price compared to a veneer face with a lower grade (e.g. “E”). Wood species commonly used for the face veneer include oak (red and white), birch, maple, ash, pine, walnut, southern pine, cherry, lauan, poplar, alder and numerous tropical hardwood species such as mahogany and Brazilian Cherry (also referred to as Jatoba). Bamboo may also be used for the face ply.

[46] Back grades are delineated as “1”, “2”, “3” or “4” (also listed in descending order of quality of grade).

[47] Decorative plywood is generally made from hardwood trees (i.e. deciduous or nonconiferous trees), but may also be made from softwood trees. Structural or construction plywood is generally made from softwood trees (i.e., coniferous trees).

[48] The manner in which a log is cut determines the appearance of the wood grain in the resulting veneers. This is of particular importance for the face ply, and where exposed, the back ply. The most common cuts for decorative plywood are rotary, quarter sliced, plain-cut (or flat-cut), and rift-cut.

Production process^{Footnote 12}

[49] As described above, the production of decorative plywood involves laminating a decorative face of veneer to different types of core. The production of the face veneer is done with a process of its own and mainly with different equipment. All decorative plywood producers must source their face veneer from face veneer producers. Some decorative plywood producers also produce the face veneers (so they do not need to source it externally), but the face veneer will always be made either at another location or on a different production line.

[50] There are two types of decorative plywood manufacturers: 1-step producers (CFP at its Hearst facility and Rockshield) and 3-ply producers (Husky, CFP at Kitchener and Saint- Casimir, and the other domestic producers).

[51] Notwithstanding slight variations that might exist from one manufacturer to another, decorative plywood is generally produced through the same basic production process in all countries.

3-Ply producers

[52] These producers externally source all their cores. The cores may be particle board, MDF or veneer core blanks. These blanks are also called platforms. The platforms are basically panels, which do not yet have an external ply of decorative veneer.

[53] The production process is relatively straightforward. Veneers are peeled or cut from logs into sheets. The core (regardless of whether it is veneer, particle board or MDF) will pass through a glue spreader. The face and the back veneer are then applied to the glue-covered core. This “wood sandwich” is then sent to a press where heat and pressure will laminate the three components together. The laminated panel will then be trimmed, sanded, and inspected.

[54] While this is the only way to produce decorative plywood with particle core or MDF core, there is another way to produce veneer core panels, discussed below.

[55] 3-ply producers may also be referred to as 2-step producers. Chinese producers are generally 3-ply producers.

1-Step producers

[56] Instead of externally sourcing their veneer core platform, some producers have the equipment to produce each ply of the core directly from logs. These plants are always located close to the log harvesting locations. For example, CFP’s plant is located in Hearst, Ontario, in the heart of the boreal forest.

[57] Producing core ply requires the logs to be rotary peeled on a lathe. The long rolls of thick veneer produced this way are then cut to size and dried in a veneer dryer. When ready, these inner plies of veneer will then pass through a glue spreader, they will be stacked together along with the decorative face and back veneer. This multiple layered “wood sandwich” is then sent to a press where heat and pressure will laminate all these plies together.

[58] The laminated panel will then be trimmed, sanded, and inspected.

[59] Since the inner plies and the face and back plies are laminated at the same time, this process is also called one step production and therefore these producers are called 1-step producers.

Product use^{Footnote 13}

[60] Decorative plywood has a variety of end uses, including kitchen cabinets, furniture, wall paneling and architectural woodwork, seat backs, table and desk tops, drawer sides, television and stereo cabinets, furniture components, trailer components, and other uses.

[61] However, in all cases, as a result of the type of glue used in its production, it is intended for interior (indoor) uses and is distinguishable from construction plywood, which is used for structural applications and is suitable for outdoor use.

Classification of imports

[62] The dumped and subsidized goods are normally classified under the following tariff classification numbers:

• 4412.10.00.00
• 4412.33.00.20
• 4412.34.00.00
• 4412.39.00.22
• 4412.94.00.00
• 4412.99.90.30
• 4412.31.00.00
• 4412.33.00.30
• 4412.39.00.10
• 4412.39.00.23
• 4412.99.10.00
• 4412.99.90.90
• 4412.33.00.10
• 4412.33.00.90
• 4412.39.00.21
• 4412.39.00.90
• 4412.99.90.10

[63] The listing of tariff classification numbers is for convenience of reference only. The tariff classification numbers include non-subject goods. Also, subject goods may fall under tariff classification numbers that are not listed. Refer to the product definition for authoritative details regarding the subject goods.

Normal value

[79] Normal values are generally determined based on the domestic selling prices of like goods in the country of export, in accordance with section 15 of SIMA, or based on either the methodology of paragraph 19(a) or on the aggregate of the cost of production of the goods, a reasonable amount for administrative, selling and all other costs, plus a reasonable amount for profits, in accordance with paragraph 19(b) of SIMA.

[80] If, in the opinion of the President, domestic sales of like goods in the country of export do not permit a proper comparison with the sales of the goods to the importer in Canada because a PMS prevails, the sale of such goods, in accordance with paragraph 16(2)(c) of SIMA, will not be taken into account in determining the normal value under section 15. The CBSA will then look to one of the methodologies of section 19. A PMS can be found to exist in respect of any goods of a particular exporter or of a particular country.

[81] Where, in the opinion of the CBSA, sufficient information has not been furnished or is not available, normal values are determined pursuant to a ministerial specification in accordance with subsection 29(1) of SIMA.

Export price

[82] The export price of goods sold to importers in Canada is generally determined in accordance with section 24 of SIMA based on the lesser of the adjusted exporter’s sale price for the goods or the adjusted importer’s purchase price. These prices are adjusted where necessary by deducting the costs, charges, expenses, duties and taxes resulting from the exportation of the goods as provided for in subparagraphs 24(a)(i) to 24(a)(iii) of SIMA.

[83] Where there are sales between associated persons or a compensatory arrangement exists, the export price may be determined based on the importer’s resale price of the imported goods in Canada to non-associated purchasers, less deductions for all costs incurred in preparing, shipping and exporting the goods to Canada that are additional to those incurred on the sales of like goods for use in the country of export, all costs that are incurred in reselling the goods (including duties and taxes) or associated with the assembly of the goods in Canada, and an amount representative of the average industry profit in Canada, pursuant to paragraphs 25(1)(c) and 25(1)(d) of SIMA. In any cases not provided for under paragraphs 25(1)(c) and 25(1)(d) of SIMA, the export price is determined in such a manner as the Minister specifies, pursuant to paragraph 25(1)(e).

[84] Where, in the opinion of the CBSA, sufficient information has not been furnished or is not available, export prices are determined pursuant to a ministerial specification under subsection 29(1) of SIMA.

Margin of dumping

[85] The margin of dumping by exporter is equal to the amount by which the total normal value exceeds the total export price of the goods, expressed as a percentage of the total export price. All the subject goods shipped to Canada during the dumping POI are included in the margins of dumping of the goods. Where the total normal value of the goods does not exceed the total export price of the goods, the margin of dumping is zero.

Particular market situation

[86] The CBSA may form the opinion that a PMS exists, which does not permit a proper comparison with the sale of the goods to the importer in Canada, if one or more of the following factors have had a significant impact on the domestic sales of like goods in the country of export:

• government regulations such as price floors, price ceilings, production quotas, import and export controls
• taxation policies
• government support programs (financial or otherwise)
• the presence and activities of state-owned or state-controlled enterprises in the domestic market as suppliers or purchasers of the like goods (also including other state-owned or state-controlled enterprises such as financial institutions)
• the acquisition of production inputs or processing services that do not reflect market-based costs because they are acquired from suppliers which are state-owned or state-controlled or that are affected by government influence or control
• significant volatility in economic conditions in the home market of the exporter
• evidence of distorted input costs and
• any other circumstances which may or may not be the result of government intervention, in which normal market conditions or patterns of supply and demand do not prevail

[87] The CBSA investigated allegations that a PMS exists with respect to China’s decorative plywood market.

[88] Paragraph 16(2)(c) is a provision of SIMA that may be applied when the President is of the opinion that domestic sales of like goods in the country of export do not permit a proper comparison with the sales of the goods to the importer in Canada because a PMS prevails.

[89] Pursuant to subsection 16(2.1), the President may form the opinion that a PMS exists in respect of any goods of a particular exporter or of a particular country.

[90] In such cases, the CBSA would not determine normal values using the methodology of section 15 of SIMA, which relies on domestic prices. Accordingly, and where such information is available, the CBSA would look to use one of the methodologies of section 19 to determine normal values.

[91] Where the President is of the opinion that a PMS also distorts the cost of inputs that are significant in the production of the goods, the President will use information in accordance with subsection 11.2(2) of the Special Imports Measures Regulations (SIMR), that best represents the actual cost of the input to permit a proper comparison.

[92] The complainants made the allegation that a PMS may exist in the Chinese decorative plywood market due to the combined effect of a multitude of factors. They claimed that pursuant to paragraph 16(2)(c) of SIMA, the CBSA should not take into account domestic sales in China’s market, where the PMS does not permit a proper comparison of the sale of like goods with the sale of the goods to importers in Canada, when calculating normal values under section 15 of SIMA.

[93] The complainants also argued that as a result of the PMS in China, Chinese producers’ and exporters’ cost of production data do not reasonably reflect the cost of production and therefore should not be used.

[94] At the initiation of the dumping investigation, the CBSA sent a PMS RFI to the GOC. The GOC did not respond to the PMS RFI, but made a submission^{Footnote 15} that included a statement that there are no government regulations, programs, or other policies that impact the decorative plywood industry.

[95] The Dumping RFI sent to exporters in China included questions relating to PMS.

[96] The CBSA received case briefs and, in some cases, reply submissions, from the complainants and exporters in China concerning the allegations that a PMS exists in the decorative plywood market in China.

Factors impacting the Chinese decorative plywood market

[97] The complainants specifically alleged that in the decorative plywood market in China, the acquisition costs of inputs are distorted by illegal supply chains, as well as significant state control over domestic timber supplies;^{Footnote 16} the manufacturing costs for the production of decorative plywood are distorted as certification standards are routinely circumvented;^{Footnote 17} the GOC heavily regulates the industry, affecting pricing, production, imports and exports;^{Footnote 18} and the GOC heavily subsidizes the decorative plywood industry in China.^{Footnote 19}

[98] In the course of the dumping investigation, the CBSA analysed the domestic market of decorative plywood in China. While the CBSA did find some evidence of the existence of government regulations, state-owned enterprises and subsidization in the market as alleged by the complainants, these were not found to be widespread and there was insufficient indication that these factors were contributing to the existence of a PMS.

[99] The CBSA’s analysis primarily addressed how worldwide illegal logging impacts the decorative plywood industry in China, and whether that leads to distorted input costs. Information provided by the complainants, includes documents showing that China is an importer of illegally sourced timber;^{Footnote 20} both the United States and European Union have found that products imported from China have contained illegally sourced timber;^{Footnote 21} hardwood, the primary input in decorative plywood, is more likely to be illegally harvested than softwood;^{Footnote 22} and illegal logging depresses all timber prices, including those harvested legally.^{Footnote 23}

[100] The CBSA obtained published benchmark prices for logs from four different sources in Canada and the United States.^{Footnote 24} However, the Chinese and North American timber markets are different and benchmarks in one may not be a reasonable surrogate for prices in another. This is due to several reasons including differences in species, seasonality and locations of forests. Further, there was no information on the record detailing how an adjustment could be made to allow for comparability between Chinese and North American prices. Without such a comparison, and without sufficient qualitative evidence, it is not clear that the log prices in China are distorted.

[101] As a result, based on the information on the administrative record, the CBSA has not formed the opinion that a PMS exists in the decorative plywood market in China that affects the domestic sales such that they do not permit a proper comparison with the sales to the importers in Canada.

Results of the dumping investigation

[102] The following summarizes the results of the dumping investigation for the exporters in China which provided a response to the dumping RFI.

Normal values, export prices and margins of dumping

Linyi Celtic Wood Co., Ltd. and Celtic Co., Ltd. (Celtic Group)

[103] Linyi Celtic Wood Co., Ltd. (Linyi Celtic) and Celtic Co., Ltd. (Celtic) are two affiliated companies that produce and export decorative plywood. The two companies, collectively known as the Celtic Group, share the same management, and are privately-owned limited liability companies located in Shandong, China.

[104] Celtic Group provided responses to the Dumping RFI^{Footnote 25} and SRFIs^{Footnote 26} that were sent to gather additional information and seek clarification. A verification of the Celtic Group was conducted in November 2020 by way of Verification Questionnaire SRFIs.

[105] As per the CBSA’s review and verification of Celtic Group’s information, all of the issues raised during the course of the dumping investigation were addressed.

[106] Normal values could not be determined in accordance with section 15 of SIMA as there were not such a number of sales of like goods that complied with all the terms and conditions referred to in sections 15 and 16 of SIMA as to permit a proper comparison with the sales of the goods to the importer in Canada. As such, normal values were determined pursuant to paragraph 19(b) of SIMA, based on the aggregate of the cost of production of the goods, a reasonable amount for administrative, selling and all other costs and a reasonable amount for profits.

[107] The cost of production was determined in accordance with paragraph 11(1)(a) of the SIMR, based on Celtic Group’s verified cost data associated with the subject goods shipped to Canada. The amount for administrative, selling, and all other costs was determined in accordance with subparagraph 11(1)(c)(ii) of the SIMR, based on Celtic Group’s selling and administrative expenses incurred during the PAP. The amount for profits was determined in accordance with subparagraph 11(1)(b)(ii) of the SIMR, based on Celtic Group’s sales of goods in their domestic market, during the PAP, that were of the same general category as the subject goods exported to Canada.

[108] For the subject goods exported from Celtic Group to Canada during the dumping POI, export prices were determined in accordance with section 24 of SIMA, based on the exporter’s selling price less all costs, charges and expenses resulting from the exportation of the goods.

[109] For purposes of the final determination, the total normal value compared to the total export price results in a zero margin of dumping. As such, the dumping investigation in respect of the goods of this exporter was terminated pursuant to paragraph 41(1)(a) of SIMA.

Linyi Evergreen Wood Co., Ltd. (Evergreen)

[110] Linyi Evergreen Wood Co., Ltd. (Evergreen) is a producer and exporter of plywood located in Linyi City, China. All of Evergreen’s production operations are located at the same address in Linyi City, China.

[111] Evergreen provided responses to the Dumping RFI^{Footnote 27} and SRFIs^{Footnote 28} that were sent to gather additional information and seek clarification. A verification of Evergreen was conducted in November 2020 by way of Verification Questionnaire SRFIs.

[112] As per the CBSA’s review and verification of Evergreen’s information, all of the issues raised during the course of the dumping investigation were addressed.

[113] Normal values could not be determined in accordance with section 15 of SIMA as there were not such a number of sales of like goods that complied with all the terms and conditions referred to in sections 15 and 16 of SIMA as to permit a proper comparison with the sales of the goods to the importer in Canada. As such, normal values were determined pursuant to paragraph 19(b) of SIMA, based on the aggregate of the cost of production of the goods, a reasonable amount for administrative, selling and all other costs, and a reasonable amount for profits.

[114] The cost of production was determined in accordance with paragraph 11(1)(a) of the SIMR, based on Evergreen’s verified cost data associated with the subject goods shipped to Canada. The amount for administrative, selling, and all other costs was determined in accordance with subparagraph 11(1)(c)(ii) of the SIMR, based on Evergreen’s selling and administrative expenses incurred during the PAP. The amount for profits was determined in accordance with subparagraph 11(1)(b)(iv) of the SIMR, based on other producers’ sales of goods in their domestic market, during the PAP, of the same general category as the subject goods exported to Canada.

[115] For the subject goods exported from Evergreen to Canada during the dumping POI, export prices were determined in accordance with section 24 of SIMA, based on the exporter’s selling price less all costs, charges and expenses resulting from the exportation of the goods.

[116] For purposes of the final determination, the total normal value compared to the total export price results in a zero margin of dumping. As such, the dumping investigation in respect of the goods of this exporter was terminated pursuant to paragraph 41(1)(a) of SIMA.

Linyi Huasheng Yongbin Wood Co., Ltd. (Huasheng)

[117] Linyi Huasheng Yongbin Wood Co., Ltd. (Huasheng) is a producer and exporter of subject goods located in Linyi, China.

[118] Huasheng provided responses to the Dumping RFI^{Footnote 29} and SRFIs^{Footnote 30} that were sent to gather additional information and seek clarification. A verification of Huasheng was conducted in November 2020 by way of Verification Questionnaire SRFIs.

[119] Issues raised during the course of the dumping investigation were addressed in the CBSA’s review and verification of Huasheng’s information.

[120] Normal values could not be determined in accordance with section 15 of SIMA as there were not such a number of sales of like goods that complied with all the terms and conditions referred to in sections 15 and 16 of SIMA as to permit a proper comparison with the sales of the goods to the importer in Canada. As such, normal values were determined pursuant to paragraph 19(b) of SIMA, based on the aggregate of the cost of production of the goods, a reasonable amount for administrative, selling and all other costs, and a reasonable amount for profits.

[121] The cost of production was determined in accordance with paragraph 11(1)(a) of the SIMR, based on Huasheng’s verified cost data associated with the subject goods shipped to Canada. The amount for administrative, selling and all other costs was determined in accordance with subparagraph 11(1)(c)(ii) of the SIMR, based on Huasheng’s selling and administrative expenses incurred during the PAP. The amount for profits was determined in accordance with subparagraph 11(1)(b)(ii) of the SIMR, based on Huasheng’s sales of goods in their domestic market, during the PAP, that were of the same general category as the subject goods exported to Canada.

[122] For the subject goods exported from Huasheng to Canada during the dumping POI, export prices were determined in accordance with section 24 of SIMA, based on the exporter’s selling price less all costs, charges and expenses resulting from the exportation of the goods.

[123] For purposes of the final determination, the total normal value compared to the total export price for subject goods exported by Huasheng results in a zero margin of dumping. As such, the dumping investigation in respect of the goods of this exporter was terminated pursuant to paragraph 41(1)(a) of SIMA.

Linyi Jiahe Wood Industry Co., Ltd. (Linyi Jiahe)

[124] Linyi Jiahe Wood Industry Co., Ltd. (Linyi Jiahe) is a producer and exporter of subject goods located in Linyi City, China.

[125] Linyi Jiahe provided responses to the Dumping RFI^{Footnote 31} and SRFIs^{Footnote 32} that were sent to gather additional information and seek clarification. A verification of Linyi Jiahe was conducted in November 2020 by way of Verification Questionnaire SRFIs.

[126] As per the CBSA’s review and verification of Linyi Jiahe’s information, all of the issues raised during the course of the dumping investigation were addressed.

[127] Normal values could not be determined in accordance with section 15 of SIMA as there were not such a number of sales of like goods that complied with all the terms and conditions referred to in sections 15 and 16 of SIMA as to permit a proper comparison with the sales of the goods to the importer in Canada. As such, normal values were determined pursuant to paragraph 19(b) of SIMA, based on the aggregate of the cost of production of the goods, a reasonable amount for administrative, selling and all other costs and a reasonable amount for profits.

[128] The cost of production was determined in accordance with paragraph 11(1)(a) of the SIMR, based on Linyi Jiahe’s verified cost data associated with the subject goods shipped to Canada. The amount for administrative, selling, and all other costs was determined in accordance with subparagraph 11(1)(c)(ii) of the SIMR, based on Linyi Jiahe’s selling and administrative expenses incurred during the PAP. The amount for profit was determined in accordance with subparagraph 11(1)(b)(ii) of the SIMR, based on the Linyi Jiahe’s sales of goods in their domestic market, during the PAP, that were of the same general category as the subject goods exported to Canada.

[129] For the subject goods exported from Linyi Jiahe to Canada during the dumping POI, export prices were determined in accordance with section 24 of SIMA, based on the exporter’s selling price less all costs, charges and expenses resulting from the exportation of the goods.

[130] For purposes of the final determination, the total normal value compared to the total export price results in a margin of dumping of 16.03% for Linyi Jiahe, expressed as a percentage of the total export price.

Pingyi Jinniu Wood Co., Ltd. (Jinniu)

[131] Pingyi Jinniu Wood Co., Ltd. (Jinniu) is a producer and exporter of subject goods to Canada. Jinniu is located in Linyi City, Shandong Province, China and has one production facility capable of producing the subject goods.

[132] Jinniu provided responses to the Dumping RFI^{Footnote 33} and SRFIs^{Footnote 34} that were sent to gather additional information and seek clarification. A verification of Jinniu was conducted in November 2020 by way of Verification Questionnaires SRFIs.

[133] As per the CBSA’s review and verification of Jinniu’s information, all of the issues raised during the course of the dumping investigation were addressed.

[134] Normal values could not be determined in accordance with section 15 of SIMA as there were not such a number of sales of like goods that complied with all the terms and conditions referred to in sections 15 and 16 of SIMA as to permit a proper comparison with the sales of the goods to the importer in Canada. As such, normal values were determined pursuant to paragraph 19(b) of SIMA, based on the aggregate of the cost of production of the goods, a reasonable amount for administrative, selling and all other costs and a reasonable amount for profits.

[135] The cost of production was determined in accordance with paragraph 11(1)(a) of the SIMR, based on Jinniu’s verified cost data associated with the subject goods shipped to Canada. The amount for administrative, selling, and all other costs was determined in accordance with subparagraph 11(1)(c)(ii) of the SIMR, based on Jinniu’s selling and administrative expenses incurred during the PAP. The amount for profit was determined in accordance with subparagraph 11(1)(b)(ii) of the SIMR, based on the Jinniu’s sales of goods in their domestic market, during the PAP, that were of the same general category as the subject goods exported to Canada.

[136] For the subject goods exported from Jinniu to Canada during the dumping POI, export prices were determined in accordance with section 24 of SIMA, based on the exporter’s selling price less all costs, charges and expenses resulting from the exportation of the goods.

[137] For purposes of the final determination, the total normal value compared to the total export price results in a zero margin of dumping. As such, the dumping investigation in respect of the goods of this exporter was terminated pursuant to paragraph 41(1)(a) of SIMA.

Pizhou Jiangshan Wood Co., Ltd. (Jiangshan)

[138] Pizhou Jiangshan Wood Co., Ltd. (Jiangshan) is a producer and exporter of subject goods located in Pizhou City, China.

[139] Jiangshan provided responses to the Dumping RFI^{Footnote 35} and SRFIs^{Footnote 36} that were sent to gather additional information and seek clarification. A verification of Jiangshan was conducted in November 2020 by way of Verification Questionnaire SRFIs.

[140] As per the CBSA’s review and verification of Jiangshan’s information, all of the issues raised during the course of the dumping investigation were addressed.

[141] Normal values could not be determined in accordance with section 15 of SIMA as there were not such a number of sales of like goods that complied with all the terms and conditions referred to in sections 15 and 16 of SIMA as to permit a proper comparison with the sales of the goods to the importer in Canada. As such, normal values were determined pursuant to paragraph 19(b) of SIMA, based on the aggregate of the cost of production of the goods, a reasonable amount for administrative, selling and all other costs and a reasonable amount for profits.

[142] The cost of production was determined in accordance with paragraph 11(1)(a) of the SIMR, based on Jiangshan’s verified cost data associated with the subject goods shipped to Canada. The amount for administrative, selling, and all other costs was determined in accordance with subparagraph 11(1)(c)(ii) of the SIMR, based on Jiangshan’s selling and administrative expenses incurred during the PAP. The amount for profit was determined in accordance with subparagraph 11(1)(b)(ii) of the SIMR, based on the Jiangshan’s sales of goods in their domestic market, during the PAP, that were of the same general category as the subject goods exported to Canada.

[143] For the subject goods exported from Jiangshan to Canada during the dumping POI, export prices were determined in accordance with section 24 of SIMA, based on the exporter’s selling price less all costs, charges and expenses resulting from the exportation of the goods.

[144] For purposes of the final determination, the total normal value compared to the total export price results in a zero margin of dumping. As such, the dumping investigation in respect of the goods of this exporter was terminated pursuant to paragraph 41(1)(a) of SIMA.

Shandong Good Wood Imp. And Exp. Co., Ltd. (Shandong Good Wood)

[145] Shandong Good Wood Imp. And Exp. Co., Ltd. (Shandong Good Wood)is an exporter of subject goods located in Weifang City, Shandong Province, China. The subject goods exported to Canada during the dumping POI by Shandong Good Wood were produced by unrelated manufacturers in China.

[146] Shandong Good Wood provided responses to the Dumping RFI^{Footnote 37} and SRFIs^{Footnote 38} that were sent to gather additional information and seek clarification. Linyi Fred Wood Co., Ltd. (Linyi Fred), a producer of a portion of subject goods exported by Shandong Good Wood, also provided responses to the Dumping RFI^{Footnote 39} and SRFIs^{Footnote 40}, including information on the cost of production. Other producers of subject goods exported by Shandong Good Wood did not provide a response to the Dumping RFI. A verification of Shandong Good Wood and Linyi Fred was conducted in November 2020 by way of Verification Questionnaire SRFIs.

[147] Issues raised during the course of the dumping investigation were addressed in the CBSA’s review and verification of the information of Shandong Good Wood and Linyi Fred.

[148] Normal values could not be determined in accordance with section 15 of SIMA as there were not such a number of sales of like goods that complied with all the terms and conditions referred to in sections 15 and 16 of SIMA as to permit a proper comparison with the sales of the goods to the importer in Canada. As such, for the portion of subject goods exported by Shandong Good Wood for which the cost of production was available from the producer, normal values were determined pursuant to paragraph 19(b) of SIMA, based on the aggregate of the cost of production of the goods, a reasonable amount for administrative, selling and all other costs and a reasonable amount for profits.

[149] Where normal values were determined pursuant to paragraph 19(b) of SIMA, the cost of production was determined in accordance with paragraph 11(1)(a) of the SIMR, based on Linyi Fred’s verified cost data associated with subject goods shipped to Canada. The amount for administrative, selling and all other costs was determined in accordance with subparagraph 11(1)(c)(ii) of the SIMR, based on expenses of Shandong Good Wood and Linyi Fred incurred during the PAP. The amount for profits was determined in accordance with subparagraph 11(1)(b)(iv) of the SIMR, based on other producers’ sales of goods in their domestic market in China, during the PAP, of the same general category as the subject goods exported to Canada.

[150] For the subject goods exported to Canada by Shandong Good Wood and produced by the unrelated producers that did not provide a response to the Dumping RFI, the CBSA did not have cost of production information, and as a result, normal values for such goods were determined using the All other exporters—China methodology described below.

[151] For the subject goods exported from Shandong Good Wood to Canada during the dumping POI, export prices were determined in accordance with section 24 of SIMA, based on the exporter’s selling price less all costs, charges and expenses resulting from the exportation of the goods.

[152] For purposes of the final determination, the total normal value compared to the total export price for subject goods exported by Shandong Good Wood results in a zero margin of dumping. As such, the dumping investigation in respect of the goods of this exporter was terminated pursuant to paragraph 41(1)(a) of SIMA.

Xuzhou Shengping Imp and Exp Co., Ltd. (Shengping); Xuzhou Longyuan Wood Industry Co., Ltd. (Longyuan); and Fengxian Weiheng Wood Co., Ltd. (Weiheng) (Longyuan Group)

[153] Xuzhou Shengping Imp. and Exp. Co., Ltd. (Shengping), Xuzhou Longyuan Wood Industry Co., Ltd. (Longyuan) and Fengxian Weiheng Wood Co., Ltd. (Weiheng), collectively referred to as Longyuan Group, are three affiliated companies that produce and export decorative plywood. Longyuan and Weiheng are the producers, while Shengping is an export trading company. All of Longyuan Group's production operations are located at the same address in Xuzhou City, China.

[154] Longyuan Group provided responses to the Dumping RFIfn^{Footnote 41} and SRFIs^{Footnote 42} that were sent to gather additional information and seek clarification. A verification of Longyuan Group was conducted in November 2020 by way of Verification Questionnaire SRFIs.

[155] As per the CBSA’s review and verification of Longyuan Group’s information, all of the issues raised during the course of the dumping investigation were addressed.

[156] Normal values could not be determined in accordance with section 15 of SIMA as there were not such a number of sales of like goods that complied with all the terms and conditions referred to in sections 15 and 16 of SIMA as to permit a proper comparison with the sales of the goods to the importer in Canada. As such, normal values were determined pursuant to paragraph 19(b) of SIMA, based on the aggregate of the cost of production of the goods, a reasonable amount for administrative, selling and all other costs and a reasonable amount for profits.

[157] The cost of production was determined in accordance with paragraph 11(1)(a) of the SIMR, based on Longyuan Group’s verified cost data associated with the subject goods shipped to Canada. The amount for administrative, selling, and all other costs was determined in accordance with subparagraph 11(1)(c)(ii) of the SIMR, based on Longyuan Group’s selling and administrative expenses incurred during the PAP. The amount for profit was determined in accordance with subparagraph 11(1)(b)(ii) of the SIMR, based on the Longyuan Group’s sales of goods in their domestic market, during the PAP, that were of the same general category as the subject goods exported to Canada.

[158] For the subject goods exported from Longyuan Group to Canada during the dumping POI, export prices were determined in accordance with section 24 of SIMA, based on the exporter’s selling price less all costs, charges and expenses resulting from the exportation of the goods.

[159] For purposes of the final determination, the total normal value compared to the total export price results in a zero margin of dumping. As such, the dumping investigation in respect of the goods of this exporter was terminated pursuant to paragraph 41(1)(a) of SIMA.

Zhejiang Dehua TB Import & Export Co., Ltd and Dehua TB New Decoration Material Co., Ltd. (Dehua Group)

[160] Zhejiang Dehua TB Import & Export Co., Ltd and Dehua TB New Decoration Material Co., Ltd, collectively referred to as Dehua Group, are two affiliated companies that produce and export decorative plywood. They are located in Zhejiang Province, China. Some of the subject goods exported to Canada by Dehua Group during the dumping POI were produced by an unrelated producer.

[161] Dehua Group provided responses to the Dumping RFI^{Footnote 43} and SRFIs^{Footnote 44} that were sent to gather additional information and seek clarification. The other producer of subject goods exported by Dehua Group did not provide a response to the Dumping RFI. A verification of Dehua Group was conducted in November 2020 by way of Verification Questionnaire SRFIs.

[162] As per the CBSA’s review and verification of Dehua Group’s information, all of the issues raised during the course of the dumping investigation were addressed.

[163] Normal values could not be determined in accordance with section 15 of SIMA as there were not such a number of sales of like goods that complied with all the terms and conditions referred to in sections 15 and 16 of SIMA as to permit a proper comparison with the sales of the goods to the importer in Canada. As such, for the portion of subject goods exported by Dehua Group for which the cost of production was available from the producer, normal values were determined pursuant to paragraph 19(b) of SIMA, based on the aggregate of the cost of production of the goods, a reasonable amount for administrative, selling and all other costs and a reasonable amount for profits.

[164] Where normal values were determined pursuant to paragraph 19(b) of SIMA, the cost of production was determined in accordance with paragraph 11(1)(a) of the SIMR, based on Dehua Group’s verified cost data associated with the subject goods shipped to Canada. The amount for administrative, selling, and all other costs was determined in accordance with subparagraph 11(1)(c)(ii) of the SIMR, based on Dehua Group’s selling and administrative expenses incurred during the PAP. The amount for profit was determined in accordance with subparagraph 11(1)(b)(ii) of the SIMR, based on the Dehua Group’s sales of goods in their domestic market, during the PAP, that were of the same general category as the subject goods exported to Canada.

[165] For the subject goods exported to Canada from Dehua Group but produced by the unrelated producer, as the CBSA did not receive a response to the Dumping RFI and therefore did not have any cost or domestic sales information from the unrelated producer, normal values were determined using the All other exporters—China methodology described below.

[166] For the subject goods exported from Dehua Group to Canada during the dumping POI, export prices were determined in accordance with section 24 of SIMA, based on the exporter’s selling price less all costs, charges and expenses resulting from the exportation of the goods.

[167] For purposes of the final determination, the total normal value compared to the total export price results in a margin of dumping of 33.70% for Dehua Group, expressed as a percentage of the total export price.

All other exporters—China

[168] For exporters of subject goods originating in or exported from China that did not provide a response to the Dumping RFI or did not furnish sufficient and reliable information, normal values and export prices were determined pursuant to a ministerial specification under subsection 29(1) of SIMA, which is based on a comparative analysis of facts available.

[169] In establishing the methodology for determining the normal value and export price under the ministerial specification, the CBSA analysed all of the information on the administrative record including the complaint filed by the domestic industry, the CBSA’s estimates at the initiation of the dumping investigation, information submitted by cooperative exporters, and customs documentation.

[170] The CBSA decided that the normal values and export prices determined for the cooperative exporters whose submissions were substantially complete and verified for the final determination, rather than the information provided in the complaint or estimated at initiation, would be used to establish the methodology for determining normal values for all other exporters in China since it reflects the actual trading practices of exporters during the dumping POI.

[171] As a result, based on the analysis of the facts available presented above, the normal values for all other exporters of subject goods in China were determined based on the highest amount by which a normal value exceeded an export price on an individual transaction during the dumping POI. The normal values for all other exporters was based on the amount determined for an exporter, whose submission was verified and complete for the final determinations. The transactions were examined to ensure that no anomalies were considered, such as very low volume and value, effects of seasonality or other business factors. A few anomalies were identified and removed.

[172] This methodology limits the advantage that an exporter may gain from not providing necessary information requested in a dumping investigation as compared to an exporter that did provide the necessary information.

[173] The export prices were based on the declared selling prices on import documentation of certain decorative and other non-structural plywood. The CBSA considers this the best available information on which to base the export prices of goods for all other exporters as it reflects actual import data.

[174] Based on the above methodologies, the margin of dumping for all other exporters of subject goods originating in or exported from China is 181.81%, expressed as a percentage of the export price.

Summary of results—dumping

[175] A summary of the results of the dumping investigation respecting all subject goods released into Canada during the dumping POI is as follows:

[176] In order to make a final determination of dumping, the CBSA must be satisfied that:

• the subject goods have been dumped and
• that the margin of dumping is not insignificant

[177] Under paragraph 41(1)(a) of SIMA, the CBSA is required to terminate an investigation in respect of any goods of an exporter if it is satisfied that the goods have not been dumped or the margin of dumping of the goods of that exporter is insignificant, meaning a margin of dumping that is less than 2% of the export price of the goods. Therefore, the CBSA is required to terminate the dumping investigation in respect of certain decorative plywood exported to Canada from China by Celtic, Evergreen, Huasheng, Jinniu, Jiangshan, Shandong Good Wood, and Shengping.

[178] The remaining goods under investigation have been dumped and the margins of dumping determined for those goods, are greater than the threshold of 2% and are therefore not considered insignificant. As a result, the legislative requirement is satisfied for making a final determination of dumping respecting certain decorative plywood from China.

[179] A summary of the results of the dumping investigation respecting the subject goods released into Canada during the dumping POI are presented in Appendix 1.

Results of the subsidy investigation

[187] The following summarizes the results of the subsidy investigation for the exporters in China which provided a response to the subsidy RFI.

[188] A description of identified programs and incentives is included in Appendix 3.

Amounts of subsidy

Government of China (GOC)

[189] The GOC did not respond to the CBSA’s Government Subsidy RFI, which limited the CBSA’s ability to determine the amount of subsidy in the prescribed manner as the required information relating to financial contribution, benefit and specificity was not provided. It also limited the CBSA’s ability to determine whether producers, or other suppliers of goods and services are public bodies.

[190] Due to a lack of government response, subsidy amounts for all exporters were determined pursuant to subsection 30.4(2) of SIMA, based on a ministerial specification. However, in consideration of the fact that Celtic Group, Evergreen, Huasheng, Linyi Jiahe, Jinniu, Jiangshan, Shandong Good Wood, Longyuan Group, and Dehua Group provided sufficient information in response to their Subsidy RFI, for each of these exporters, an individual amount of subsidy was determined based on the information provided in response to the Subsidy RFI and obtained during the verification.

[191] For exporters that did not provide sufficient information in response to the RFI, amounts of subsidy were determined under subsection 30.4(2) of SIMA on the basis of facts available.

Linyi Celtic Wood Co., Ltd. and Celtic Co., Ltd. (Celtic Group)

[192] Celtic Group is a producer and exporter of subject goods located in Shandong, China.

[193] Celtic Group provided responses to the Subsidy RFI^{Footnote 45} and SRFIs^{Footnote 46}, including Verification Questionnaire SRFIs. For purposes of the final determination, Celtic Group was found to have benefited from the following subsidy program during the subsidy POI:

1. Program 24: Reduced Corporate Tax Rate Program

[194] The above subsidy program was considered to be specific and therefore actionable. This determination was made from the analysis of the information available on the administrative record.

[195] For purposes of the final determination, the amount of subsidy for Celtic Group is 0.02%. This amount is insignificant, and as such, the subsidy investigation in respect of the goods of this exporter was terminated pursuant to paragraph 41(1)(a) of SIMA.

Linyi Evergreen Wood Co., Ltd. (Evergreen)

[196] Evergreen is a producer and exporter of subject goods located in Linyi City, China.

[197] Evergreen provided responses to the Subsidy RFI^{Footnote 47} and SRFIs^{Footnote 48}, including Verification Questionnaire SRFIs. For purposes of the final determination, Evergreen was found to have benefited from the following subsidy programs during the subsidy POI:

1. Program 7: Export Development and Performance Grants—Exhibition subsidy—Vietnam exhibition / carb-epa TSCA VI certification
2. Program 24: Reduced Corporate Tax Rate Program
3. Program 33: Unemployment Insurance Subsidy
4. Program 34: Job Stabilization Subsidy of Unemployment Insurance
5. Program 35: Social Security Fund for Social Security of Junan County
6. Program 37: Export Development and Performance Grants—Central Foreign Trade and Economic Development Fund Subsidy in 2019—Turkey exhibition

[198] The above subsidy programs were considered to be specific and therefore actionable. This determination was made from the analysis of the information available on the administrative record.

[199] For purposes of the final determination, the amount of subsidy for Evergreen is 0.30%. This amount is insignificant, and as such, the subsidy investigation in respect of the goods of this exporter was terminated pursuant to paragraph 41(1)(a) of SIMA.

Linyi Huasheng Yongbin Wood Co., Ltd. (Huasheng)

[200] Huasheng is a producer and exporter of subject goods located in Linyi City, China.

[201] Huasheng provided responses to the Subsidy RFI^{Footnote 49} and SRFIs^{Footnote 50}, including Verification Questionnaire SRFIs.

[202] Huasheng did not report and the CBSA did not find any benefit to Huasheng from actionable subsidies during the subsidy POI, and as such, the subsidy investigation in respect of the goods of this exporter was terminated pursuant to paragraph 41(1)(a) of SIMA.

Linyi Jiahe Wood Industry Co., Ltd. (Linyi Jiahe)

[203] Linyi Jiahe is a producer and exporter of subject goods located in Linyi City, China.

[204] Linyi Jiahe provided responses to the Subsidy RFI^{Footnote 51} and SRFIs^{Footnote 52}, including Verification Questionnaire SRFIs. For purposes of the final determination, Linyi Jiahe was found to have benefited from the following subsidy program during the subsidy POI:

1. Program 24: Reduced Corporate Tax Rate Program

[205] The above subsidy program was considered to be specific and therefore actionable. This determination was made from the analysis of the information available on the administrative record.

[206] For purposes of the final determination, the amount of subsidy for Linyi Jiahe is 0.11%. This amount is insignificant, and as such, the subsidy investigation in respect of the goods of this exporter was terminated pursuant to paragraph 41(1)(a) of SIMA.

Pingyi Jinniu Wood Co., Ltd. (Jinniu)

[207] Jinniu is a producer and exporter of subject goods to Canada. Jinniu provided responses to the Subsidy RFI^{Footnote 53} and SRFIs^{Footnote 54}, including Verification Questionnaire SRFIs.

[208] Jinniu did not report and the CBSA did not find any benefit to Jinniu from actionable subsidies during the subsidy POI, and as such, the subsidy investigation in respect of the goods of this exporter was terminated pursuant to paragraph 41(1)(a) of SIMA.

Pizhou Jiangshan Wood Co., Ltd. (Jiangshan)

[209] Jiangshan is a producer and exporter of subject goods located in Pizhou City, China.

[210] Jiangshan provided responses to the Subsidy RFI^{Footnote 55} and SRFIs^{Footnote 56}, including Verification Questionnaire SRFIs. For purposes of the final determination, Jiangshan was found to have benefited from the following subsidy programs during the subsidy POI:

1. Program 6: Design, Research and Development Grants
2. Program 9: Reductions in Land Use and/or Rental Fees
3. Program 10: Grant - Patent Assistance/Award
4. Program 18: Preferential Tax Policies related to Research and Investment
5. Program 25: Job Security Assistance

[211] The above subsidy programs were considered to be specific and therefore actionable. This determination was made from the analysis of the information available on the administrative record.

[212] For purposes of the final determination, the amount of subsidy for Jiangshan is 0.13%. This amount is insignificant, and as such, the subsidy investigation in respect of the goods of this exporter was terminated pursuant to paragraph 41(1)(a) of SIMA.

Shandong Good Wood Imp. And Exp. Co., Ltd. (Shandong Good Wood)

[213] Shandong Good Wood is an exporter of subject goods located in Weifang City, Shandong Province, China. The subject goods exported to Canada during the subsidy POI by Shandong Good Wood were produced by unrelated manufacturers in China.

[214] Shandong Good Wood provided responses to the Subsidy RFI^{Footnote 57} and SRFIs^{Footnote 58}, including Verification Questionnaire SRFIs. Linyi Fred Wood Co., Ltd. (Linyi Fred), a producer of a portion of subject goods exported by Shandong Good Wood, also provided responses to the Subsidy RFI^{Footnote 59} and SRFIs^{Footnote 60}, including Verification Questionnaire SRFIs. Other producers of subject goods exported by Shandong Good Wood did not provide a response to the Subsidy RFI.

[215] For purposes of the final determination, exporter Shandong Good Wood and producer Linyi Fred were both found to have benefited from the following subsidy program during the subsidy POI:

1. Program 24: Reduced Corporate Tax Rate Program

[216] The above subsidy program was considered to be specific and therefore actionable. This determination was made from the analysis of the information available on the administrative record.

[217] For the portion of subject goods exported by Shandong Good Wood for which the producers of the goods did not provide responses to the Subsidy RFI, the CBSA determined the amount of subsidy using the methodology for All other exporters—China described below.

[218] For purposes of the final determination, the amount of subsidy for Shandong Good Wood is 0.89%. This amount is insignificant, and as such, the subsidy investigation in respect of the goods of this exporter was terminated pursuant to paragraph 41(1)(a) of SIMA.

Xuzhou Shengping Imp and Exp Co., Ltd. (Shengping); Xuzhou Longyuan Wood Industry Co., Ltd. (Longyuan); and Fengxian Weiheng Wood Co., Ltd. (Weiheng) (Longyuan Group)

[219] Longyuan Group consists of three affiliated companies that produce and export decorative plywood. Longyuan and Weiheng are the producers, while Shengping is an export trading company. All of Longyuan Group's production operations are located at the same address in Xuzhou City, China.

[220] Longyuan Group provided responses to the Subsidy RFI^{Footnote 61} and SRFIs^{Footnote 62}, including Verification Questionnaire SRFIs. For purposes of the final determination, Longyuan Group was found to have benefited from the following subsidy program during the subsidy POI:

1. Program 24: Reduced Corporate Tax Rate Program

[221] The above subsidy program was considered to be specific and therefore actionable. This determination was made from the analysis of the information available on the administrative record.

[222] For purposes of the final determination, the amount of subsidy for Longyuan Group is 0.62%. This amount is insignificant, and as such, the subsidy investigation in respect of the goods of this exporter was terminated pursuant to paragraph 41(1)(a) of SIMA.

Zhejiang Dehua TB Import & Export Co., Ltd and Dehua TB New Decoration Material Co., Ltd. (Dehua Group)

[223] The Dehua Group is a producer and exporter of subject goods to Canada. Some of the subject goods exported to Canada by Dehua Group during the subsidy POI were produced by an unrelated producer.

[224] Dehua Group provided responses to the Subsidy RFI^{Footnote 63} and SRFIs^{Footnote 64}, including Verification Questionnaire SRFIs. The unrelated supplier did not provide a response to the Subsidy RFI.

[225] For purposes of the final determination, Dehua Group was found to have benefited, during the subsidy POI, from the following eight subsidy programs that were not included in the CBSA's original list of alleged subsidies under investigation:

1. Program 15: Corporate Income Tax Reduction For New High Tech Enterprises
2. Program 26: Foreign Economic and Trade Development Support Funds
3. Program 27: Deqing County Cultivate the Talents Award
4. Program 28: Internet Security Software Subsidy
5. Program 29: Personnel Training Fee
6. Program 30: Outsourcing Service of Foreign Trade Award
7. Program 31: Employee Recruitment Subsidy
8. Program 32: Market Development Subsidy
9. Program 36: Export Award

[226] The above subsidy programs were considered to be specific and therefore actionable. This determination was made from the analysis of the information available on the administrative record.

[227] For the portion of subject goods exported by Dehua Group for which the producer of the goods did not provide responses to the Subsidy RFI, the CBSA determined the amount of subsidy using the methodology for All other exporters—China described below.

[228] For purposes of the final determination, the amount of subsidy for Dehua Group is 17.37%, expressed as a percentage of the export price.

All other exporters—China

[229] For all other exporters of subject goods originating in or exported from China during the subsidy POI that did not provide a response to the Subsidy RFI or did not furnish sufficient information, the CBSA determined an amount of subsidy, pursuant to a Ministerial specification under subsection 30.4(2) of SIMA, which is based on a comparative analysis of facts available.

[230] In establishing the methodology for determining the amounts of subsidy, the CBSA analyzed all of the information on the administrative record, including the complaint filed by domestic industry, information submitted by cooperative exporters and publically available information.

[231] The CBSA decided that the information provided by exporters who provided sufficient information in response to the CBSA’s Subsidy RFI, as well as the information on the potentially actionable subsidy programs that were identified at initiation of the investigation was the best information on which to base the methodology for determining amounts of subsidy, as the amount of subsidy applied to each of these potentially actionable subsidy programs is based on the benefits actually received by the responding exporters. The information available supports that the potentially actionable subsidy programs may be available to exporters and producers of the subject goods in China.

[232] As a result, based on the analysis of the facts available presented above, the amounts of subsidy for all other exporters of subject goods in China were determined pursuant to a ministerial specification on the basis of the following methodology:

1. the highest amount of subsidy for each of the 20 programs, as found at the final determination, for the producers/exporters located in China for whom the CBSA has sufficient information to determine an amount of subsidy; plus
2. the highest amount of subsidy for the 20 programs listed in 1), applied to each of the remaining 17^{Footnote 65} potentially actionable subsidy programs for which sufficient information is not available or has not been provided at the final determination

[233] This methodology limits the advantage that an exporter may gain from not providing necessary information requested in a subsidy investigation as compared to an exporter that did provide the necessary information.

[234] Using the above methodology, the amount of subsidy for all other exporters in China is 3,484.74 Chinese Yuan per cubic meter (m3), which is equal to 127.36% of the total export price of the goods shipped to Canada from China by all other exporters during the subsidy POI.

Summary of results—subsidizing

[235] A summary of the results of the subsidy investigation respecting all subject goods released into Canada during the subsidy POI is as follows:

[236] Under paragraph 41(1)(a) of SIMA, the CBSA is required to terminate an investigation in respect of any goods of an exporter if the CBSA is satisfied that the goods have not been subsidized or the amount of subsidy on the goods of that exporter is insignificant.

[237] Pursuant to subsection 2(1) of SIMA, an amount of subsidy of less than 1% of the export price of the goods, for a developed country, is defined as insignificant. Therefore, the CBSA is required to terminate the subsidy investigation in respect of certain decorative plywood exported to Canada from China by Celtic, Evergreen, Huasheng, Linyi Jiahe, Jinniu, Jiangshan, Shandong Good Wood, and Shengping.

[238] The remaining goods under investigation have been subsidized and the amounts of subsidy determined for those goods, for a developed country, are greater than the threshold of 1% and are therefore not considered insignificant. As a result, the legislative requirement is satisfied for making a final determination of subsidy respecting certain decorative plywood from China.

[239] A summary of the results of the subsidy investigation respecting the subject goods released into Canada during the subsidy POI are presented in Appendix 1.

General representations

Dumping representations

Subsidy representations

Subsidy programs used by responding exporters

Based on the information available, for purposes of the final determination, the CBSA has found that these programs were used by the responding exporters in China. Based on the information available, these programs constitute a financial contribution provided by the GOC and confer benefits to companies and are specific.

Program 6: Design, Research and Development Grants

General information

A grant that provides financial aid for enterprises determined to have undertaken expenses in design or research and development.

The following grants that fall under this program were received by Pizhou Jiangshan Wood Co., Ltd. (Jiangshan):

1. Science and Technology Innovation Voucher of Jiangsu Province^{Footnote 140}
2. "Doctoral program" of Jiangsu Province^{Footnote 141}

Financial contribution

For the purposes of the final determination, this program constitutes a financial contribution pursuant to paragraph 2(1.6)(a) of SIMA from the government that involve a direct transfer of funds. This grant confers a direct benefit to the recipient and the benefit is equal to the amount of the grant provided.

Specificity

The available information indicates that this program does not appear to be generally available to all enterprises in China. As well, due to the lack of a response by the GOC, there is not sufficient information on the record to determine that the subsidy is not specific pursuant to the criteria set out in subsection 2(7.1) of SIMA. Therefore, guided by the principles of subsection 2(7.2) or subsection 2(7.3) of SIMA and basing its opinion on the best information available, the CBSA has taken the position that the subsidy derived from this program is likely to be specific.

Program 7: Export Development and Performance Grants

General information

Companies in China receive such grants provided by the GOC to assist in the development of export markets or to recognize export performance.

During the course of the investigation the following export grant was received by Linyi Evergreen Wood Co., Ltd. (Evergreen):

1. Export Development and Performance Grants - Exhibition Subsidy—Vietnam Exhibition & CARB-EPA TSCA VI Certification^{Footnote 142}

Financial contribution

For the purposes of the final determination, this program constitutes a financial contribution, pursuant to paragraph 2(1.6)(a) of SIMA, from the government that involves a direct transfer of funds. This grant confers a direct benefit to the recipient and the benefit is equal to the amount of the grant provided.

Specificity

The available information indicates that this program does not appear to be generally available to all enterprises in China. As well, due to the lack of a response by the GOC, there is not sufficient information on the record to determine that the subsidy is not specific pursuant to the criteria set out in subsection 2(7.1) of SIMA. Therefore, guided by the principles of subsection 2(7.2) or subsection 2(7.3) of SIMA and basing its opinion on the best information available, the CBSA has taken the position that the subsidy derived from this program is likely to be specific.

Program 9: Reductions in Land Use and/or Rental Fees

General information

This program provides for the reduction in land use fees and rental rates for certain number of years. Examples of this program in action include: a document titled '[2003] No. 8 Preferential Supply of Land', in order to offset costs for industrial companies in the Ninghai Economic Development Zone; or similar initiatives in the Tianjin Binhai New Area and the Tianjin Economic and Technological Development Area.

Financial contribution

For the purposes of the final determination, this program constitutes a financial contribution pursuant to paragraph 2(1.6)(b) of SIMA. That is, amounts that would otherwise be owing and due to the government are reduced and/or exempted that confer a benefit to the recipient equal to the amount of the reduction/exemption.

Specificity

The available information indicates that this program does not appear to be generally available to all enterprises in China. As well, due to the lack of a response by the GOC, there is not sufficient information on the record to determine that the subsidy is not specific pursuant to the criteria set out in subsection 2(7.1) of SIMA. Therefore, guided by the principles of subsection 2(7.2) or subsection 2(7.3) of SIMA and basing its opinion on the best information available, the CBSA has taken the position that the subsidy derived from this program is likely to be specific.

Program 10: Grant - Patent Assistance/Award

General information

This program is a grant for patents. Based on the information available to the CBSA, this program was provided in several provinces, such as Guangdong, Shanghai and Jiangsu.

For example, the GOC document associated with this program for Guangdong province may include: "Administrative Measures of Patent Award of Guangdong Province". In Guangdong province, this program was administered by the Intellectual Property Office of Guangdong, the Bureau of Personnel of Guangdong Province and municipal level authorities. The program was established to support improvement in technology innovation and to promote intellectual property.

In addition, the GOC document associated with this program for Shanghai may include: "The administrative measures regarding the financial support/subsidy for Patents by Shanghai". In Jiangsu province, this program was administrated by Jiangsu Intellectual Property Office.

Financial contribution

For the purposes of the final determination, this program constitutes a Financial Contribution, pursuant to paragraph 2(1.6)(a) of SIMA, from the government that involves a direct transfer of funds. This grant confers a direct benefit to the recipient and the benefit is equal to the amount of the grant provided.

Specificity

The available information indicates that this program does not appear to be generally available to all enterprises in China. As well, due to the lack of a response by the GOC, there is not sufficient information on the record to determine that the subsidy is not specific pursuant to the criteria set out in subsection 2(7.1) of SIMA. Therefore, guided by the principles of subsection 2(7.2) or subsection 2(7.3) of SIMA and basing its opinion on the best information available, the CBSA has taken the position that the subsidy derived from this program is likely to be specific.

Program 15: Corporate Income Tax Reduction For New High Tech Enterprises

General information

Under Article 28.2 of the Enterprise Income Tax Law in China, companies designated as high- or new-technology enterprises are entitled to a reduced income tax rate of 10 percent instead of the normal national corporate tax rate of 25 percent. The granting authority responsible for this program is alleged to be the State Administration of Taxation and the program is administered by local tax authorities. In its notification of subsidy programs to the World Trade Organization, the GOC listed this program.

Financial contribution

For the purposes of the final determination, this program constitutes a financial contribution pursuant to paragraph 2(1.6)(b) of SIMA. That is, amounts that would otherwise be owing and due to the government are reduced and/or exempted, and confer a benefit to the recipient equal to the amount of the reduction/exemption.

Specificity

The available information indicates that this program does not appear to be generally available to all enterprises in China. As well, due to the lack of a response by the GOC, there is not sufficient information on the record to determine that the subsidy is not specific pursuant to the criteria set out in subsection 2(7.1) of SIMA. Therefore, guided by the principles of subsection 2(7.2) or subsection 2(7.3) of SIMA and basing its opinion on the best information available, the CBSA has taken the position that the subsidy derived from this program is likely to be specific.

Program 18: Preferential Tax Policies Related to Research and Investment

General information

Under this program, based on the 2008 corporate tax law, high- or new-technology enterprises may deduct 50 percent of their total R&D expenses from their taxable income. Eligible expenses include design costs, expenses for materials and fuel consumed through R&D activities, wages, salaries, and benefits for personnel engaged in R&D activities, depreciation expenses on instruments and equipment, and many other expenses.

Financial contribution

For the purposes of the final determination, this program constitutes a financial contribution pursuant to paragraph 2(1.6)(b) of SIMA. That is, amounts that would otherwise be owing and due to the government are reduced and/or exempted, and confer a benefit to the recipient equal to the amount of the reduction/exemption.

Specificity

The available information indicates that this program does not appear to be generally available to all enterprises in China. As well, due to the lack of a response by the GOC, there is not sufficient information on the record to determine that the subsidy is not specific pursuant to the criteria set out in subsection 2(7.1) of SIMA. Therefore, guided by the principles of subsection 2(7.2) or subsection 2(7.3) of SIMA and basing its opinion on the best information available, the CBSA has taken the position that the subsidy derived from this program is likely to be specific.

Other subsidy programs used by responding exporters but not previously addressed

These additional programs were reported to have been received by some of the responding exporters that were not previously addressed in the CBSA's list of 23 programs under investigation at the initiation.

Program 24: Reduced Corporate Tax Rate Program

General information

This program was established under the Notice of the Ministry of Finance and the State Administration of Taxation on Further Expanding the Scope of Preferential Income Tax Policies for Small Low-Profit Enterprises (No. 77 [2018]). This program was established to reduce the rate of taxes paid by Small Low-Profit enterprises. Under this program, enterprises that qualify as small and low-profit can receive a 50% reduced rate of taxable income, with the applicable 20% income tax rate^{Footnote 143}.

Financial contribution

On the basis of the available information, this program constitutes a financial contribution pursuant to paragraph 2(1.6)(b) of SIMA. That is, amounts that would otherwise be owing and due to the government are reduced and/or exempted, and confer a benefit to the recipient equal to the amount of the reduction/exemption.

Specificity

The available information indicates that this program does not appear to be generally available to all enterprises in China. As well, due to the lack of a response by the GOC, there is not sufficient information on the record to determine that the subsidy is not specific pursuant to the criteria set out in subsection 2(7.1) of SIMA. Therefore, guided by the principles of subsection 2(7.2) or subsection 2(7.3) of SIMA and basing its opinion on the best information available, the CBSA has taken the position that the subsidy derived from this program is likely to be specific.

Program 25: Job Security Assistance

General information

This program appears to be a grant provided by the GOC to provide assistance to exporters in order to ensure job security of their employees.

Financial contribution

On the basis of the available information, this program constitutes a financial contribution pursuant to paragraph 2(1.6)(a) of SIMA as a direct transfer of funds from the government confers a benefit to the recipient equal to the amount of the grant.

Specificity

The available information indicates that this program does not appear to be generally available to all enterprises in China. As well, due to the lack of a response by the GOC, there is not sufficient information on the record to determine that the subsidy is not specific pursuant to the criteria set out in subsection 2(7.1) of SIMA. Therefore, guided by the principles of subsection 2(7.2) or subsection 2(7.3) of SIMA and basing its opinion on the best information available, the CBSA has taken the position that the subsidy derived from this program is likely to be specific.

Program 26: Foreign Economic And Trade Development Support Funds

General information

This grant appears to be provided to exporters to encourage foreign trade and provide support in the development of foreign trade.

Financial contribution

On the basis of the available information, this program constitutes a financial contribution pursuant to paragraph 2(1.6)(a) of SIMA as a direct transfer of funds from the government confers a benefit to the recipient equal to the amount of the grant.

Specificity

The available information indicates that this program does not appear to be generally available to all enterprises in China. As well, due to the lack of a response by the GOC, there is not sufficient information on the record to determine that the subsidy is not specific pursuant to the criteria set out in subsection 2(7.1) of SIMA. Therefore, guided by the principles of subsection 2(7.2) or subsection 2(7.3) of SIMA and basing its opinion on the best information available, the CBSA has taken the position that the subsidy derived from this program is likely to be specific.

Program 27: Dequing County Cultivate The Talents Award

General information

This program appears to be provided to exporters in order to provide support and promote talent within companies.

Financial contribution

On the basis of the available information, this program constitutes a financial contribution pursuant to paragraph 2(1.6)(a) of SIMA as a direct transfer of funds from the government confers a benefit to the recipient equal to the amount of the grant.

Specificity

The available information indicates that this program does not appear to be generally available to all enterprises in China. As well, due to the lack of a response by the GOC, there is not sufficient information on the record to determine that the subsidy is not specific pursuant to the criteria set out in subsection 2(7.1) of SIMA. Therefore, guided by the principles of subsection 2(7.2) or subsection 2(7.3) of SIMA and basing its opinion on the best information available, the CBSA has taken the position that the subsidy derived from this program is likely to be specific.

Program 28: Internet Security Software Subsidy

General information

This program appears to be provided to exporters in order to support the internet security system within companies.

Financial contribution

On the basis of the available information, this program constitutes a financial contribution pursuant to paragraph 2(1.6)(a) of SIMA as a direct transfer of funds from the government confers a benefit to the recipient equal to the amount of the grant.

Specificity

The available information indicates that this program does not appear to be generally available to all enterprises in China. As well, due to the lack of a response by the GOC, there is not sufficient information on the record to determine that the subsidy is not specific pursuant to the criteria set out in subsection 2(7.1) of SIMA. Therefore, guided by the principles of subsection 2(7.2) or subsection 2(7.3) of SIMA and basing its opinion on the best information available, the CBSA has taken the position that the subsidy derived from this program is likely to be specific.

Program 29: Personnel Training Fee

General information

This program appears to be provided to exporters in order to support the training of personnel within companies.

Financial contribution

On the basis of the available information, this program constitutes a financial contribution pursuant to paragraph 2(1.6)(a) of SIMA as a direct transfer of funds from the government confers a benefit to the recipient equal to the amount of the grant.

Specificity

The available information indicates that this program does not appear to be generally available to all enterprises in China. As well, due to the lack of a response by the GOC, there is not sufficient information on the record to determine that the subsidy is not specific pursuant to the criteria set out in subsection 2(7.1) of SIMA. Therefore, guided by the principles of subsection 2(7.2) or subsection 2(7.3) of SIMA and basing its opinion on the best information available, the CBSA has taken the position that the subsidy derived from this program is likely to be specific.

Program 30: Outsourcing Service Of Foreign Trade Awards

General information

This program appears to be provided to exporters to award foreign trade outsourcing service.

Financial contribution

On the basis of the available information, this program constitutes a financial contribution pursuant to paragraph 2(1.6)(a) of SIMA as a direct transfer of funds from the government confers a benefit to the recipient equal to the amount of the grant.

Specificity

The available information indicates that this program does not appear to be generally available to all enterprises in China. As well, due to the lack of a response by the GOC, there is not sufficient information on the record to determine that the subsidy is not specific pursuant to the criteria set out in subsection 2(7.1) of SIMA. Therefore, guided by the principles of subsection 2(7.2) or subsection 2(7.3) of SIMA and basing its opinion on the best information available, the CBSA has taken the position that the subsidy derived from this program is likely to be specific.

Program 31: Employee Recruitment Subsidy

General information

This program appears to be provided to exporters to support the recruitment of new employees.

Financial contribution

On the basis of the available information, this program constitutes a financial contribution pursuant to paragraph 2(1.6)(a) of SIMA as a direct transfer of funds from the government confers a benefit to the recipient equal to the amount of the grant.

Specificity

The available information indicates that this program does not appear to be generally available to all enterprises in China. As well, due to the lack of a response by the GOC, there is not sufficient information on the record to determine that the subsidy is not specific pursuant to the criteria set out in subsection 2(7.1) of SIMA. Therefore, guided by the principles of subsection 2(7.2) or subsection 2(7.3) of SIMA and basing its opinion on the best information available, the CBSA has taken the position that the subsidy derived from this program is likely to be specific.

Program 32: Market Development Subsidy

General information

This program appears to be provided to exporters to support the company's market development.

Financial contribution

On the basis of the available information, this program constitutes a financial contribution pursuant to paragraph 2(1.6)(a) of SIMA as a direct transfer of funds from the government confers a benefit to the recipient equal to the amount of the grant.

Specificity

The available information indicates that this program does not appear to be generally available to all enterprises in China. As well, due to the lack of a response by the GOC, there is not sufficient information on the record to determine that the subsidy is not specific pursuant to the criteria set out in subsection 2(7.1) of SIMA. Therefore, guided by the principles of subsection 2(7.2) or subsection 2(7.3) of SIMA and basing its opinion on the best information available, the CBSA has taken the position that the subsidy derived from this program is likely to be specific.

Program 33: Unemployment Insurance Subsidy

General information

This program appears to be provided to exporters to support the company's unemployment insurance payments.

Financial contribution

On the basis of the available information, this program constitutes a financial contribution pursuant to paragraph 2(1.6)(a) of SIMA as a direct transfer of funds from the government confers a benefit to the recipient equal to the amount of the grant.

Specificity

The available information indicates that this program does not appear to be generally available to all enterprises in China. As well, due to the lack of a response by the GOC, there is not sufficient information on the record to determine that the subsidy is not specific pursuant to the criteria set out in subsection 2(7.1) of SIMA. Therefore, guided by the principles of subsection 2(7.2) or subsection 2(7.3) of SIMA and basing its opinion on the best information available, the CBSA has taken the position that the subsidy derived from this program is likely to be specific.

Program 34: Job Stabilization Subsidy Of Unemployment Insurance

General information

This program appears to be provided to exporters to support job stabilization and unemployment insurance payments within the company.

Financial contribution

On the basis of the available information, this program constitutes a financial contribution pursuant to paragraph 2(1.6)(a) of SIMA as a direct transfer of funds from the government confers a benefit to the recipient equal to the amount of the grant.

Specificity

The available information indicates that this program does not appear to be generally available to all enterprises in China. As well, due to the lack of a response by the GOC, there is not sufficient information on the record to determine that the subsidy is not specific pursuant to the criteria set out in subsection 2(7.1) of SIMA. Therefore, guided by the principles of subsection 2(7.2) or subsection 2(7.3) of SIMA and basing its opinion on the best information available, the CBSA has taken the position that the subsidy derived from this program is likely to be specific.

Program 35: Social Security Fund For Social Security Of Junan County

General information

This program appears to be provided to the exporters in Junan County to support social security funds within the company.

Financial contribution

On the basis of the available information, this program constitutes a financial contribution pursuant to paragraph 2(1.6)(a) of SIMA as a direct transfer of funds from the government confers a benefit to the recipient equal to the amount of the grant.

Specificity

The available information indicates that this program does not appear to be generally available to all enterprises in China. As well, due to the lack of a response by the GOC, there is not sufficient information on the record to determine that the subsidy is not specific pursuant to the criteria set out in subsection 2(7.1) of SIMA. Therefore, guided by the principles of subsection 2(7.2) or subsection 2(7.3) of SIMA and basing its opinion on the best information available, the CBSA has taken the position that the subsidy derived from this program is likely to be specific.

Program 36: Export Award

General information

This program appears to be provided to encourage exports.

Financial contribution

On the basis of the available information, this program constitutes a financial contribution pursuant to paragraph 2(1.6)(a) of SIMA as a direct transfer of funds from the government confers a benefit to the recipient equal to the amount of the grant.

Specificity

The available information indicates that this program does not appear to be generally available to all enterprises in China. As well, due to the lack of a response by the GOC, there is not sufficient information on the record to determine that the subsidy is not specific pursuant to the criteria set out in subsection 2(7.1) of SIMA. Therefore, guided by the principles of subsection 2(7.2) or subsection 2(7.3) of SIMA and basing its opinion on the best information available, the CBSA has taken the position that the subsidy derived from this program is likely to be specific.

Program 37: Export Development and Performance Grant - Central Foreign Trade and Economic Development Fund Subsidy in 2019—Turkey Exhibition

General information

This program appears to be provided to encourage exports.

Financial contribution

On the basis of the available information, this program constitutes a financial contribution pursuant to paragraph 2(1.6)(a) of SIMA as a direct transfer of funds from the government confers a benefit to the recipient equal to the amount of the grant.

Specificity

The available information indicates that this program does not appear to be generally available to all enterprises in China. As well, due to the lack of a response by the GOC, there is not sufficient information on the record to determine that the subsidy is not specific pursuant to the criteria set out in subsection 2(7.1) of SIMA. Therefore, guided by the principles of subsection 2(7.2) or subsection 2(7.3) of SIMA and basing its opinion on the best information available, the CBSA has taken the position that the subsidy derived from this program is likely to be specific.

Other potentially actionable subsidy programs identified by the CBSA that were not used by the responding exporters

Based on the information available, for purposes of the final determination, the CBSA has found that these programs were not used by the participating exporters in China. As the GOC did not respond to the Subsidy RFI, the CBSA’s ability to conduct its analysis of additional programs for the final determination was limited. However, based on the information available from the complaint, responses from participating exporters and CBSA’s own research, these programs may constitute financial contributions provided by the GOC, confer benefit to producers and appear to be specific.