• ASPA begins engaging Commerce on self-initiation: Spring 2017
• Commerce self-initiates only new case since 1991: November 2017
• ASPA begins researching petitions: February 2023
• Months required to research, prepare, and file petitions: 8
• Processors’ data collected for petitions: 25
• Boats’ data collected to support petitions: > 800
• ASPA files petitions: October 2023
• Number of petitions: 6 at Commerce, 1 at ITC
• Petition length: 9,185 pages
• Weight of one complete printed petition copy, unbound: 91 pounds

ASPA begins engaging Commerce on self-initiation: Spring 2017

Commerce self-initiates only new case since 1991: November 2017

ASPA begins researching petitions: February 2023

Months required to research, prepare, and file petitions: Eight

Processors’ data collected for petitions: 25

Boats’ data collected to support petitions: > 800

ASPA files petitions: October 2023

Number of petitions: six at Commerce, one at ITC

Petition length: 9,185 pages

Weight of one complete printed petition copy, unbound: 91 pounds

The duties that are about to be imposed on shrimp imports from Ecuador, India, Indonesia, and Vietnam resulted from petitions filed by ASPA. This post explains how those petitions came to be.

In 2017, the Trump Administration entered office promising to use an old tool to help domestic industries for the first time in decades: The Commerce Department would initiate its own unfair import investigations without requiring domestic industries to file petitions.

ASPA pounced. In the spring of 2017, ASPA confidentially started providing data and holding meetings with Commerce. In the end, Commerce decided to initiate only one new AD/CVD investigation during Trump’s first term, a case on imports of aluminum sheet.

With the new administration in 2021, ASPA saw the writing on the wall. Commerce was not going to self-initiate this case. Efforts to publicly pressure Commerce to do so would just alienate friends at Commerce and tipoff importers. The industry had to stand up for itself and file its own petitions if it wanted to get relief from imports.

ASPA repeatedly reached out to other industry members to see if any would join the effort and help share the cost. When none did, ASPA led the effort on its own. Today’s post explains the work ASPA put into researching, preparing, and filing those petitions, which led to this week’s win for the domestic industry.

“As we celebrate this week’s victory, it is important to understand the path that led us here,” said Trey Pearson, the President of ASPA. “ASPA was the only group willing and able to put in the work to prepare and file these petitions. We are so grateful to those that helped us make these cases possible, and we look forward to working with them again in the future.”

This is the second in a series of “Shrimp Duties Updates” from ASPA to keep members of our industry informed about the facts and figures underlying ASPA’s shrimp case. These updates will be available on ASPA’s website and you can sign up to receive them. Stay tuned for tomorrow’s Shrimp Duties Update!