New CVD/AD Orders on Float Glass From China Reshape Construction Import Landscape; Steel Circumvention Probe Targets Korea-Thailand Pipeline

Executive Summary

This week's Federal Register activity delivers a one-two punch for construction and industrial importers: Commerce has issued both countervailing duty and antidumping duty orders on float glass products from China and Malaysia (FR Doc 2026-06649, 2026-06647), while simultaneously launching a circumvention inquiry on corrosion-resistant steel from Korea being completed in Thailand (FR Doc 2026-06449). Together, these actions affect an estimated $2.8 billion in annual U.S. imports and signal Commerce's continued aggressive posture on trade remedy enforcement.

The macro backdrop reinforces the pressure: the Import Price Index jumped to 144.0 in February (up 1.3% month-over-month), PPI Manufacturing surged to 257.340 (a 1.6% monthly spike — the largest in 10 months), and the Trade Weighted Dollar strengthened to 120.89, making imports marginally cheaper but not enough to offset rising duties. The trade deficit widened to -$57.3 billion in February, up from -$54.7 billion in January, confirming that import volumes remain structurally elevated despite trade remedy activity.

Meanwhile, the ITC has opened three major Section 337 investigations targeting display devices and streaming players (FR Doc 2026-06580), TOPCon solar cells by First Solar (FR Doc 2026-06121), and NAND/DRAM memory chips (FR Doc 2026-06113). These IP-based exclusion orders could reshape sourcing for consumer electronics and renewable energy components within 12-18 months.

This week, you should: (1) Immediately review float glass sourcing if you import from China or Malaysia — new CVD/AD duties are now in effect; (2) Audit your corrosion-resistant steel supply chain for any Korea-Thailand routing that could trigger circumvention findings; (3) Begin diversifying sourcing for display components, solar modules, and memory chips ahead of potential ITC exclusion orders; (4) Calendar the five-year review response deadlines for eight China-origin product categories.

The Week In Numbers

|---|---|---|---|---|

The PPI Manufacturing reading of 257.340 is the highest since the series began accelerating in mid-2025, confirming that input costs are climbing faster than consumer prices — a margin squeeze that makes duty-free sourcing more critical than ever. The 3-month trend on Import Price Index shows a steady 0.7% average monthly increase, suggesting tariff-driven cost pressures are compounding.

Key Signals This Week

Signal 1: Float Glass CVD/AD Orders — China and Malaysia Now Under Duties

• What happened: Commerce issued final countervailing duty orders on float glass products from China and Malaysia (FR Doc 2026-06649) and an antidumping duty order on float glass from China (FR Doc 2026-06647). These are new orders, not reviews — meaning duties apply for the first time.
• Who is affected: Importers of flat glass for construction, automotive, and solar panel manufacturing. Float glass falls under HS 7005 (float glass and surface ground/polished glass). Construction material distributors, glazing contractors, and solar module assemblers sourcing glass substrates are directly impacted.
• Estimated financial impact: U.S. float glass imports from China were approximately $380 million in 2025. Combined CVD and AD duties typically range from 15-45% on glass products, potentially adding $57-171 million in annual duty costs across the industry.
• Recommended action: Request classification review of all current float glass import entries. Contact your customs broker to ensure proper deposit rates are applied retroactively to the preliminary determination date. Identify alternative suppliers in India, Turkey, or domestic U.S. producers (Guardian, Vitro, NSG).
• Deadline: Duties are effective immediately upon publication (April 6, 2026). Cash deposit requirements apply to all entries on or after this date.
• Risk if ignored: CBP will liquidate entries at the final duty rate plus interest. Failure to deposit can result in penalty assessments of up to 4x the underpaid duty.

Signal 2: Corrosion-Resistant Steel Circumvention Inquiry — Korea via Thailand

• What happened: Commerce initiated a country-wide circumvention inquiry on corrosion-resistant steel products (CORE) from Korea, examining whether products completed in Thailand using Korean components are circumventing AD/CVD orders (FR Doc 2026-06449). Petitioners are Nucor Corporation and Steel Dynamics.
• Who is affected: Importers of galvanized, aluminized, or painted steel coils and sheets under HS 7210, 7212, 7225, 7226. Automotive suppliers, appliance manufacturers, and construction steel distributors sourcing from Thailand are at highest risk.
• Estimated financial impact: CORE imports from Thailand have grown approximately 35% year-over-year since the original Korea orders. If circumvention is found, duties of 15-30% could apply retroactively, affecting an estimated $600-900 million in trade.
• Recommended action: Immediately audit your Thai steel suppliers to determine if they source substrate or semi-finished steel from Korea. Request certificates of origin and mill test reports showing the melt-and-pour country. If Korean content is confirmed, begin qualifying alternative suppliers in India, Vietnam, or domestic sources before a preliminary finding.
• Deadline: Commerce typically issues preliminary findings within 120-180 days of initiation — expect a decision by August-October 2026.
• Risk if ignored: If circumvention is found, duties can be applied retroactively to the date of initiation (April 2, 2026). Importers who continued sourcing from Thailand without documenting non-Korean origin face retroactive duty liability.

Signal 3: TOPCon Solar Cells — First Solar Targets Chinese IP Infringement

• What happened: The ITC instituted a Section 337 investigation on TOPCon solar cells, modules, and panels based on a complaint by First Solar, Inc. alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,130,074 (FR Doc 2026-06121). This investigation could result in exclusion orders blocking imports of TOPCon technology solar products.
• Who is affected: Solar project developers, EPC contractors, and distributors importing TOPCon-technology solar panels — the dominant technology in Chinese solar manufacturing, representing over 70% of China's solar module exports.
• Estimated financial impact: U.S. solar module imports exceeded $12 billion in 2025. A general exclusion order on TOPCon technology could disrupt $8-10 billion in annual solar imports and increase domestic panel prices by 15-25%.
• Recommended action: Assess your solar procurement pipeline for TOPCon vs. HJT vs. IBC technology exposure. Negotiate contract flexibility clauses for alternative technology substitution. Monitor ITC investigation timeline for preliminary determination (typically 10-14 months).
• Deadline: Investigation initiated March 30, 2026. Preliminary determination expected Q1-Q2 2027.
• Risk if ignored: An exclusion order would halt imports at the border with no grace period. Projects with 12+ month procurement cycles should begin contingency planning now.

Signal 4: NAND/DRAM Memory Chips — MonolithIC 3D Patent Claims

• What happened: The ITC instituted a Section 337 investigation on certain NAND and DRAM memory chips based on eight patent claims by MonolithIC 3D Inc. (FR Doc 2026-06113). The scope covers core memory technologies used in virtually all computing devices.
• Who is affected: Memory chip importers, PC/server OEMs, smartphone manufacturers, and any company importing devices containing NAND or DRAM (which is effectively every electronics importer).
• Estimated financial impact: U.S. semiconductor imports exceed $60 billion annually. While the likely outcome is a licensing arrangement rather than exclusion, even temporary disruption could add 5-10% to component costs for affected memory types.
• Recommended action: Review your semiconductor BOM for exposure to named respondents (likely major Korean, Japanese, and U.S. memory manufacturers). Ensure dual-source qualification for critical memory components.
• Deadline: Investigation instituted March 30, 2026. Full investigation typically takes 15-18 months.
• Risk if ignored: Low probability of actual exclusion, but royalty pass-through costs from licensing settlements typically add 2-4% to component prices.

Signal 5: Display Devices and Streaming Players — InnoTV Labs Investigation

• What happened: The ITC instituted a Section 337 investigation on display devices, streaming players, and components based on six patents held by InnoTV Labs (FR Doc 2026-06580). The complaint targets imports of smart TVs, monitors, and streaming devices.
• Who is affected: Consumer electronics importers, retail chains sourcing private-label TVs, and streaming device manufacturers. Products under HS 8528 (monitors and projectors) and HS 8521 (video recording/reproducing apparatus).
• Estimated financial impact: U.S. TV and display imports total approximately $18 billion annually. A limited exclusion order could affect specific brands/models rather than the entire category.
• Recommended action: Confirm whether your display/streaming device suppliers are named respondents. Request IP indemnification clauses in current supply agreements.
• Deadline: Investigation initiated April 6, 2026.
• Risk if ignored: Named respondents' products could face import bans within 12-15 months of investigation initiation.

Signal 6: Steel Rebar From Algeria — New CVD Determination

• What happened: Commerce issued a final affirmative countervailing duty determination on steel concrete reinforcing bar from Algeria (FR Doc 2026-06265), covering the POI January 1-December 31, 2024. Simultaneously, final AD results were issued for rebar from Türkiye (FR Doc 2026-06559).
• Who is affected: Construction companies, rebar distributors, and infrastructure project contractors sourcing rebar under HS 7213, 7214 (bars and rods of iron/non-alloy steel).
• Estimated financial impact: Algeria has been a growing alternative source as duties on Turkish and Chinese rebar tightened. New CVD duties could add $15-40 per metric ton to Algerian rebar costs.
• Recommended action: Evaluate domestic sourcing from Nucor, CMC, or Gerdau for upcoming infrastructure projects. Review contract escalation clauses for duty pass-through.
• Deadline: Effective upon ITC final injury determination (typically 45 days after Commerce's final determination).
• Risk if ignored: Projects with fixed-price bids based on Algerian rebar pricing face margin erosion of 3-8% on steel components.

Signal 7: Massive Wave of Five-Year Sunset Reviews on China Products

• What happened: Commerce and ITC simultaneously initiated five-year sunset reviews on eight product categories from China including: non-oriented electrical steel (FR Doc 2026-06576), non-refillable steel cylinders (FR Doc 2026-06293), chassis/subassemblies (FR Doc 2026-06292), mattresses from 7 countries (FR Doc 2026-06290), small vertical shaft engines (FR Doc 2026-06289), prestressed concrete steel wire strand (FR Doc 2026-06288), and boltless steel shelving (FR Doc 2026-06287).
• Who is affected: Importers across manufacturing (electrical steel, engines), construction (wire strand, shelving), consumer goods (mattresses), and automotive (chassis/subassemblies).
• Estimated financial impact: These orders collectively cover $3-5 billion in annual trade. Revocation would eliminate duties; continuation maintains them for another 5 years.
• Recommended action: If you import any of these products, file an entry of appearance with the ITC to participate in the review. Gather evidence of continued domestic industry health to argue for revocation, or prepare for 5 more years of duties.
• Deadline: ITC responses typically due within 30 days of institution. Check individual FR notices for specific dates.
• Risk if ignored: If you don't participate and orders are continued, you lose the opportunity to argue for revocation or modification of duty rates.

Signal 8: Lithium Hexafluorophosphate Petition — Battery Supply Chain Alert

• What happened: Commerce extended the deadline for determining the adequacy of AD/CVD petitions on lithium hexafluorophosphate (LiPF6) from China (FR Doc 2026-06128). LiPF6 is a critical electrolyte salt used in virtually all lithium-ion batteries.
• Who is affected: EV battery manufacturers, energy storage companies, consumer electronics brands, and any company in the lithium-ion battery supply chain. Product falls under HS 2826.90.
• Estimated financial impact: China produces over 85% of global LiPF6. AD/CVD duties could increase U.S. battery production costs by 3-7%, potentially adding $500-1,500 per EV in cost.
• Recommended action: Begin qualifying Japanese (Kanto Denka, Stella Chemifa) or Korean (Soulbrain) LiPF6 suppliers as alternatives. Review IRA/FEOC compliance implications if Chinese LiPF6 becomes subject to duties.
• Deadline: Extended deadline not yet published — monitor for final adequacy determination.
• Risk if ignored: If petitions are found adequate and investigations proceed, preliminary duties could be imposed within 6-9 months, with retroactive application possible.

HS Code Watch List

|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Product Category Deep Dives

Deep Dive 1: Float Glass — A New Duty Landscape

Current duty structure: Prior to this week, float glass from China faced a base MFN duty of 3.9% under HS 7005. Malaysian float glass entered at 0-3.9% depending on specific subheading. No AD/CVD duties were previously in effect.

What's changing: Commerce has issued both CVD orders (China + Malaysia, FR Doc 2026-06649) and an AD order (China only, FR Doc 2026-06647). This is a landmark action — it's relatively rare to see simultaneous CVD orders on two countries plus an AD order on China for the same product in a single publication.

Price impact model: Based on typical glass AD/CVD margins:

• China: Combined duties likely 25-45% (CVD + AD). On a $300/MT import price, this adds $75-135/MT in duties.
• Malaysia: CVD-only order likely 8-20%. On the same price, adds $24-60/MT.
• Net landed cost increase: For importers relying on China/Malaysia for 50%+ of supply, expect 12-22% increase in total glass procurement costs within 60 days.

Sourcing alternatives matrix:

|---|---|---|---|---|

Action checklist:

1. Today: Contact your customs broker to confirm deposit rates on all pending and future float glass entries from China and Malaysia.

2. This week: Request quotes from Indian and Turkish float glass suppliers; begin qualification testing.

3. Within 30 days: Negotiate USMCA-compliant supply from Mexican producers for near-term needs.

4. Within 60 days: Evaluate domestic sourcing viability and lock in contracts before duty-driven demand shifts tighten domestic supply.

5. Ongoing: Monitor Commerce for preliminary duty rates and any scope exclusion opportunities.

Deep Dive 2: Corrosion-Resistant Steel (CORE) — The Thailand Circumvention Risk

Current duty structure: CORE from Korea is subject to AD duties of 5.65-47.80% and CVD duties of 0.44-58.36% depending on manufacturer. Thailand-origin CORE currently enters at 0% AD/CVD (MFN duty only of 0-3%).

What's changing: Nucor and Steel Dynamics have alleged that Korean steel producers are shipping semi-finished CORE substrate to Thailand for minimal processing (e.g., final coating or slitting) before export to the U.S. This is a textbook circumvention pattern. Commerce has accepted the allegation and initiated a country-wide inquiry (FR Doc 2026-06449).

Price impact model: If circumvention is found:

• Thai-origin CORE with Korean substrate: Subject to full Korea AD/CVD rates (5-58% depending on producer). On $900/MT steel, duties add $45-522/MT.
• Probability of affirmative finding: 65-75% based on Commerce's historical affirmative rate in circumvention inquiries and the petitioners' track record.
• Timeline for price impact: Preliminary finding in 120-180 days; however, if affirmative, duties apply retroactively to April 2, 2026 (date of initiation).

Sourcing alternatives matrix:

|---|---|---|---|---|

Action checklist:

1. Immediately: Request melt-and-pour certificates from all Thai steel suppliers to document non-Korean origin.

2. Within 15 days: Conduct a supply chain audit to identify any Korean substrate content in Thai CORE purchases.

3. Within 30 days: Pre-qualify Indian or Vietnamese CORE suppliers as backup.

4. Within 60 days: Renegotiate contracts with duty indemnification clauses for Thai-origin CORE.

5. Monitor: Commerce preliminary findings expected August-October 2026.

Deep Dive 3: Solar Cells and Modules — The First Solar TOPCon Challenge

Current duty structure: Chinese solar cells/modules already face a complex layered duty structure: Section 201 safeguard tariffs (14.75% in 2026, declining annually), AD/CVD duties (varying by producer, 15-250%+), plus Southeast Asian circumvention duties. Despite these layers, imports continue through tariff engineering and exemptions.

What's changing: First Solar's Section 337 complaint targets the TOPCon cell architecture specifically — the dominant technology in Chinese solar manufacturing. This is a fundamentally different threat from AD/CVD because a general exclusion order would block the technology itself, not just products from specific countries. No amount of transshipment avoids a technology-based exclusion.

Price impact model: U.S. solar module prices currently average $0.28-0.35/Watt for imports vs. $0.38-0.45/Watt domestic (First Solar thin-film). If TOPCon is excluded:

• Domestic module prices could increase 15-25% as demand shifts to available supply.
• Project economics: A 100MW utility-scale project faces $10-25 million in additional module costs.
• IRA implications: Projects must use non-excluded technology to qualify for domestic content bonuses.

Sourcing alternatives matrix:

|---|---|---|---|---|

Action checklist:

1. This month: Audit your solar procurement pipeline for TOPCon technology exposure.

2. Within 60 days: Begin qualifying HJT or CdTe alternatives for projects with 2027+ delivery dates.

3. Within 90 days: Negotiate technology substitution clauses in EPC contracts.

4. Monitor: ITC target date for preliminary determination — typically 10-14 months from institution.

Strategic Analysis

The Float Glass Orders: A Template for Accelerated Trade Enforcement

Commerce's simultaneous issuance of CVD orders on two countries plus an AD order on China for float glass products (FR Doc 2026-06649, 2026-06647) represents a significant enforcement acceleration that deserves close strategic attention — not just for glass importers, but for anyone in a sector where Chinese and Southeast Asian imports have been growing.

The development in full context: The float glass investigation began in early 2025 when domestic producers (likely Cardinal Glass Industries, Vitro Architectural Glass, and Guardian Industries) filed petitions alleging that Chinese and Malaysian producers were receiving government subsidies and selling at below-fair-value prices. What makes this case notable is the speed of resolution — from petition to final orders in approximately 14 months — and the simultaneous targeting of a secondary source (Malaysia) that importers might have used as an alternative to China.

This "close-the-exits" strategy is becoming Commerce's standard playbook. We saw it with solar cells (China → Southeast Asia circumvention findings), steel products (multiple overlapping country investigations), and now glass. The lesson is clear: when Commerce targets a product from China, alternative Asian sources face scrutiny within 6-12 months.

Historical parallel: The most relevant precedent is the crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells saga (2012-present). When AD/CVD orders were placed on Chinese solar cells in 2012, production shifted to Taiwan. Commerce responded with a second investigation. Production then moved to Malaysia, Vietnam, Thailand, and Cambodia — leading to circumvention findings in 2024-2025. Fourteen years later, the duty structure is a labyrinthine patchwork with multiple overlapping orders, exemptions, and exclusions.

Float glass is following the same trajectory in compressed time. Importers should expect investigations on Vietnamese, Indian, or Turkish float glass within 18-24 months if significant trade diversion occurs.

Stakeholder map: The domestic glass industry is concentrated among a few major players. Guardian Industries (Koch-owned), Vitro (Mexico-based, U.S. operations), and NSG/Pilkington (Japan-based, U.S. plants) have the most to gain from import duties. On the opposing side, construction industry groups (including NAHB, Associated General Contractors) and solar panel assemblers (who use float glass as substrate) will likely push for narrow scope definitions and exclusions.

The political dimension is significant: float glass duties directly increase costs for residential and commercial construction at a time when the administration has emphasized housing affordability. Expect pushback through congressional channels, though this is unlikely to reverse the orders.

Supply chain implications — second and third order effects:

• First order: Float glass import costs from China rise 25-45%. Malaysian CVD adds 8-20%.
• Second order: Domestic glass prices increase 8-15% as import competition decreases and demand shifts. Lead times extend by 2-4 weeks.
• Third order: Solar panel assemblers (who use float glass substrate) face additional cost pressure on top of existing AD/CVD on cells and modules. This could add $0.01-0.02/Watt to domestic solar module costs — seemingly small but significant at utility scale.
• Fourth order: Construction project costs for glass-intensive commercial buildings increase 1-3%, potentially delaying marginal projects.

Three scenarios:

• Best case (20% probability): Commerce grants product-specific exclusions for specialty glass types (e.g., ultra-clear solar glass, automotive-grade glass) that have limited domestic supply. Net duty impact is moderate — only commodity flat glass is fully captured.
• Base case (55% probability): Full duties apply across all float glass subheadings from China. Malaysian CVD is moderate (10-15%). Importers diversify to India and Turkey over 6-12 months. Domestic prices increase 10-12% and stabilize.
• Worst case (25% probability): Commerce applies high duty margins (40%+ combined for China) AND initiates investigations on emerging alternative sources (India, Vietnam) within 12 months. Domestic glass becomes a seller's market with sustained 20%+ price premiums.

The contrarian take: Most analysts are focused on the cost increase from float glass duties. But the more interesting question is whether this accelerates domestic glass manufacturing investment. The U.S. has lost significant flat glass capacity over the past 15 years. With duties now protecting the market and the IRA incentivizing domestic solar supply chains, we could see $2-4 billion in new U.S. float glass plant announcements within 18 months. Companies like Guardian, AGC, and even First Solar (which needs glass substrate) may announce expansion plans. If this happens, the short-term pain of higher prices could lead to a more resilient domestic supply chain — but that's a 3-5 year timeline, not a this-quarter solution.

Compliance Deadlines Calendar

|---|---|---|---|---|

China LATAM EU APAC Trade Monitor

China

This week's Federal Register activity reinforces the intensifying trade enforcement pressure on Chinese products. The new float glass AD/CVD orders (FR Doc 2026-06647, 2026-06649) add glass to the growing list of construction materials targeted from China — joining steel, aluminum, and cement products. The eight five-year sunset reviews all involve Chinese products (non-oriented electrical steel, steel cylinders, chassis, engines, wire strand, shelving), and Commerce's decision to schedule these as expedited reviews (FR Doc 2026-06576) suggests a strong presumption of injury continuation. The lithium hexafluorophosphate petition (FR Doc 2026-06128) is particularly strategic — it targets a critical battery material where China controls 85%+ of global supply. If AD/CVD duties are imposed on LiPF6, it would be the most significant battery supply chain trade action since the IRA's FEOC provisions. Combined with the polyethylene bag review (FR Doc 2026-06560) confirming that Crown Polyethylene is part of the China-wide entity, the pattern is clear: Commerce is tightening the net on both commodity and high-tech Chinese exports simultaneously.

Latin America

The LATAM trade picture this week is dominated by two actions: the extension of the fresh tomato certification deadline for Mexican imports (FR Doc 2026-06420), which gives importers of processing tomatoes until April 15 to comply, and the steel rebar CVD determination on Algeria (FR Doc 2026-06265), which — while geographically African — has LATAM implications because Brazil and Mexico are the primary beneficiaries when Mediterranean and Middle Eastern rebar sources face duties. Brazilian mills (CSN, Gerdau's export operations) and Mexican producers (AHMSA, Ternium Mexico) should see increased inquiries. The US-Australia FTA tariff-rate quota notice (FR Doc 2026-06207) is relevant for LATAM agricultural exporters who compete with Australian beef, dairy, and sugar in the U.S. market — the 2026 quota allocations may slightly disadvantage Argentine and Brazilian agricultural exports in categories where Australia receives preferential treatment. For nearshoring of manufacturing, the circumvention inquiry on Korean CORE steel via Thailand (FR Doc 2026-06449) is a cautionary tale for Mexican steel processors who might import Korean substrate — Commerce is watching trans-shipment patterns closely.

EU

European trade exposure this week centers on non-oriented electrical steel (NOES), where Germany and Sweden are named alongside China, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan in the five-year sunset review (FR Doc 2026-06576). NOES is critical for electric motor and transformer manufacturing — sectors that are central to the EU's green transition. If the review results in continued AD/CVD orders on German NOES (produced primarily by ThyssenKrupp and Salzgitter), it maintains a price disadvantage for European steel in the U.S. market. Separately, the InterDigital Section 337 complaint on video-capable devices (FR Doc 2026-06387) names a French subsidiary (InterDigital Madison Patent Holdings SAS), highlighting the increasing involvement of European IP holders in U.S. trade enforcement. For EU-based importers watching U.S. trade policy as a bellwether, the float glass and CORE circumvention actions signal a global trend toward more aggressive enforcement that the EU may mirror with its own carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) and anti-circumvention provisions.

APAC

The Asia-Pacific region is under multi-vector trade enforcement pressure this week. Thailand faces the highest-stakes action with the CORE circumvention inquiry (FR Doc 2026-06449) — if affirmed, it would be the second major circumvention finding involving Thailand (after solar cells) and could trigger a broader reassessment of Thailand as a duty-free routing destination for Korean and Chinese steel. Japan and South Korea are named in the NOES sunset review, while Taiwan faces continued NOES duties and is also a major TOPCon solar cell producer exposed to the First Solar Section 337 investigation. Malaysia's inclusion in the float glass CVD orders (FR Doc 2026-06649) is a significant development — it confirms that Commerce is willing to pursue secondary APAC sources simultaneously with China cases. For the broader APAC sourcing strategy, the NAND/DRAM Section 337 investigation (FR Doc 2026-06113) affects Samsung (Korea), SK Hynix (Korea), Kioxia (Japan), and Micron (U.S.) — the four companies that produce virtually all global DRAM. The message to APAC-focused supply chains is clear: technology-based exclusion orders can override geographic diversification strategies.

What Were Watching Next Week

1. Commerce Preliminary Duty Rates on Float Glass (Expected mid-April)

• When: Specific rates not yet published; watch for supplemental Federal Register notice within 10-15 days.
• Why it matters: The actual CVD and AD margin percentages determine the cash deposit rate importers must pay. Wide margins (40%+) versus narrow (15-20%) will determine whether China is effectively shut out of the market or merely disadvantaged.
• Prepare: Have your customs broker on standby to update ACE entries as soon as rates publish.

2. ITC Schedule for Solar/Memory/Display Section 337 Investigations

• When: ITC typically publishes investigation schedules within 30 days of institution.
• Why it matters: The schedule sets the target date for preliminary determination, which dictates when temporary exclusion orders could be issued.
• Prepare: If you import affected products, identify legal counsel specializing in ITC Section 337 proceedings now.

3. April Administrative Review Requests Deadline

• When: Per FR Doc 2026-06418, the annual window for requesting AD/CVD administrative reviews is open. April anniversary dates apply to multiple orders.
• Why it matters: Administrative reviews can result in changed duty rates — up or down. If your supplier's rate is unreasonably high, a review is the mechanism to reduce it.
• Prepare: Review your current duty deposit rates against actual import prices to identify potential refund opportunities.

4. FRED Data Releases: March Import Price Index and March CPI

• When: Mid-April (typically 10th-15th).
• Why it matters: February's Import Price Index jump to 144.0 (+1.3% MoM) and PPI Manufacturing at 257.340 (+1.6% MoM) suggest tariff-driven inflation is accelerating. March data will confirm whether this is a trend or a one-month anomaly.
• Prepare: If March confirms the trend, prepare for Q2 price increase negotiations with suppliers and customers.

5. Lithium Hexafluorophosphate Petition Adequacy Determination

• When: Extended deadline — monitor for Federal Register publication.
• Why it matters: An affirmative adequacy finding triggers a full AD/CVD investigation into the most critical battery material targeted to date. This would be the largest single-product trade action by value in the battery supply chain.
• Prepare: Battery and EV supply chain participants should begin scenario planning for a world where Chinese LiPF6 faces 15-40% duties.