Frequently asked questions – Softwood lumber

On July 27, 2023, the U.S. Department of Commerce issued anti-dumping and countervailing duty rates for companies subject to the fourth administrative reviews. These rates took effect when the U.S. Department of Commerce published the final results in the U.S. Federal Register on August 1^st, 2023.

*On August 31, 2023, the U.S. Department of Commerce amended the fourth administrative review anti-dumping duty rates due to ministerial errors.

For companies subject to the fourth administrative reviews, these duty rates apply retroactively to their exports made in 2021. In addition, these rates apply to new entries as a cash deposit rate going forward until these companies are subject to a future administrative review.

For companies not subject to the fourth administrative reviews, the most recent duty rate applicable to them will continue to apply.

For new companies with no history of exporting softwood lumber products to the United States, and which are not subject to any administrative reviews by the U.S. Department of Commerce, the "all others" combined duty rate of 20.23% from the initial investigation will be applied to them until they participate in a future administrative review or make a request for a new shipper review (See the "New Shipper review" section below).

The U.S. Department of Commerce conducts an annual review of its anti-dumping and countervailing duty orders. This administrative review process delivers updated duty rates to companies that are subject to the review. Generally, a company is subject to the review if there has been a specific request for a review of that company filed with the U.S. Department of Commerce. The administrative review will establish final duty assessment rates for shipments entered during the period of review and establish new estimated duty deposit rates going forward until the next annual administrative review is completed.

The applicable U.S. statute provides that requests for administrative review must be filed during the anniversary month of the publication of an anti-dumping or countervailing duty order. As the anniversary month for both orders is January, this is when the administrative review process begins each year.

First administrative reviews: The Period of Review for the countervailing first administrative review (AR1) was April 28, 2017 to December 31, 2018. The Period of Review for the anti-dumping first administrative review was June 30, 2017 to December 31, 2018.

Second administrative reviews: The Period of Review for both the countervailing and anti-dumping second administrative reviews (AR2) was January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019.

Third administrative reviews: The Period of Review for both the countervailing and anti-dumping third administrative reviews (AR3) was January 1, 2020 to December 31, 2020.

Fourth administrative reviews: The Period of Review for both the countervailing and anti-dumping fourth administrative reviews (AR4) is January 1, 2021 to December 31, 2021.

Fifth administrative reviews: The Period of Review for both the countervailing and anti-dumping fifth administrative reviews (AR5) is January 1, 2022 to December 31, 2022.

Sixth administrative reviews: The Period of Review for both the countervailing and anti-dumping sixth administrative reviews (AR6) is January 1, 2023 to December 31, 2023.

If you are subject to one or more of the anti-dumping and countervailing administrative reviews, please review the following:

If your company currently exports in-scope products to the United States, please refer to the question below, entitled "How will my company be affected by the administrative review process?"

If your company currently exports only out-of-scope products to the United States and therefore you do not pay anti-dumping or countervailing duty cash deposits on these products, this should not change as a result of your inclusion in the administrative review process. U.S. Customs and Border Protection applies duties solely to products within the scope of the duty orders. The scope of the duty orders is not expected to change as part of the administrative review process.

If you begin shipping in-scope merchandise in the future, but did not export in-scope merchandise during the period of the initial duty investigations (calendar year 2015 for the countervailing investigation and October 2015 through September 2016 for the anti-dumping investigation), your shipments will be subject to duties upon entry into the United States and you may wish to request a new shipper review at the appropriate time (please see "New Shipper Review" section below). You should consult U.S. counsel specializing in U.S. trade law to determine if that may be appropriate for your company's circumstances.

According to U.S. trade law, an administrative review request can be made by a number of parties: exporters and producers can request review of their own companies; importers can request review of the companies from which they purchased; and the Government of Canada can request reviews of specified exporters or producers. The petitioner may also request that the U.S. Department of Commerce conduct an administrative review of any or all exporters or producers who can be identified based on Customs data and other sources. If the petitioner makes a request, all companies named in that request would be subject to the administrative review. Separate requests are required for the anti-dumping and countervailing duty administrative reviews.

Not all companies that are subject to a review are necessarily individually examined, however. The U.S. Department of Commerce generally selects only a handful of respondents for individual examination. Individually examined companies (whether mandatory or voluntary respondents) will need to provide detailed information about their financial situation and operations during the respective anti-dumping and countervailing periods of review and will be provided with their own individual assessment and duty deposit rates at the conclusion of the administrative reviews. The remaining companies that are subject to the reviews (i.e. those not individually examined) will be given a new "non-selected rate" as a result of the reviews (also referred to as an "all others" rate). This new "non-selected rate" will be determined by an average of the final rates for the individually examined respondents.

The new individual or non-selected rates determined through the administrative reviews will establish the cash deposit rates on a going-forward basis and will establish assessment rates on past entries which occurred during the period of review. This means that if the final administrative review rates are higher than the cash deposit rates in place at the time the goods were entered, importers of record subject to the administrative reviews would be issued an invoice for the difference on shipments made during the period of review. Likewise, if the administrative review rates are lower than the cash deposit rates in place at the time the goods were entered, these importers of record would be entitled to a refund.

If no administrative review request is made for a company, the company's shipments that were entered during the period of review will be automatically liquidated at the cash deposit rate that was in effect at the time the entry was made. While this provides certainty to a company as to the amount of duties that will ultimately be owed, it also means that the company could not benefit from any legal victory (i.e. under NAFTA Chapter 19/CUSMA Chapter 10) with respect to those entries as duties would already have been disbursed to the U.S. Treasury. Furthermore, in the previous softwood lumber dispute, duties from entries that had been liquidated were not available as part of the settlement in the 2006 Softwood Lumber Agreement.

Retaining legal counsel is not legally required. However, due to the complexities of these reviews, as well as their associated costs and risks, the Government of Canada strongly recommends that companies that are individually examined retain U.S. counsel who specialize in U.S. trade law.

In general, administrative reviews tend to take about a year and a half to complete. The deadline for the issuance of preliminary results is 245 days after the last day of the anniversary month of the duty order. However, this can be extended to 365 days at the U.S. Department of Commerce's discretion. The deadline for the final results is generally 120 days after the preliminary results, but this deadline can be extended to 180 days, again at the U.S. Department of Commerce's discretion. If the U.S. does not extend the time for issuing preliminary results, they may extend the time for issuing final results from 120 days to 300 days.

The U.S. Department of Commerce treats each administrative review as its own proceeding. However, the U.S. Department of Commerce typically resolves issues by reaching the same conclusion in subsequent administrative reviews, unless new facts or arguments are presented that justify a change in course. Thus, the current and previous administrative review results are likely to be used as guidance for how the U.S. Department of Commerce will proceed in future administrative reviews.

No, as long as the products meet the description below. In response to a request filed by Canada on December 30, 2020, the U.S. Department of Commerce issued a scope ruling on March 12, 2021 determining that certain cedar shakes and shingles (CSS) are not covered by the scope of the softwood lumber duty orders. The decision took effect on April 28, 2021, when Commerce issued instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to exempt certain CSS from the softwood lumber duty orders. U.S. CBP will refund any duties previously collected on these products.

The description of cedar shakes and shingles found to be outside the scope of the U.S. duty orders is:

Rectangular products made of Western Red Cedar, Alaskan Yellow Cedar, or Eastern White Cedar with a nominal length ranging from 15 to 24 inches and a minimum nominal width of 3 inches, and are tapered along the length of the product, such that one end (known as the "butt end") of the product has a thickness ranging from 5/16 to 1 inch, and the other end of the product tapers to an edge with a thickness of 1/16 inch or less.

As part of the countervailing administrative review, the U.S. Department of Commerce will investigate provincial, territorial and federal assistance programs which U.S. industry alleges have benefited Canadian companies. For non-recurring programs, such as grants, the Government of Canada, as well as each implicated province and territory involved in the administrative review, will be required to respond to a questionnaire regarding assistance provided over a 10-year period to respondents selected by the U.S. Department of Commerce. In the case of recurring programs, such as stumpage, the Canadian and provincial governments, as well as selected respondents, will be required to provide information for the period of review.

Yes. For shipments entered after the date on which the countervailing duty and anti-dumping duty orders were published (January 3, 2018), any refunds due at liquidation will include interest. Likewise, any invoices that may be due following the final rates from an administrative review would also include interest. Over- or under-payments on cash deposits prior to the date on which the orders were published are not subject to interest.

The applicable interest rate is set by U.S. statute, and is derived from the U.S. federal short-term rate. Interest is calculated from the date of deposit through to the date of liquidation.

The purpose of these bonds is to secure payment of potential additional amounts due in the event that the company does not pay what it owes. Bonds relating to particular entries would not typically be cancelled until liquidation of those entries. As long as the liquidation of an entry remains suspended, U.S. Customs and Border Protection will not release the bond applicable to that entry. In the event of legal challenges contesting the final results of an administrative review, liquidation may be suspended until the conclusion of legal proceedings.

There is some unpredictability in what U.S. Customs and Border Protection will require from individual companies in terms of continuous bonds. The best way for individual companies to get specific information is to contact their customs brokers.

For both the anti-dumping and countervailing first administrative reviews, the U.S. Department of Commerce selected Canfor, Resolute and West Fraser as mandatory respondents. For the countervailing first administrative review, the U.S. Department of Commerce also selected J.D. Irving, Ltd. as a voluntary respondent.

When the duty assessment rates determined through the final results of an administrative review are lower than the cash deposit rates a company has paid, a refund for entries made during the periods of review would generally be issued shortly after liquidation (that is, upon disbursement of these duties to the U.S. Treasury). For the first administrative review, however, since the final results were appealed and an interested party requested suspension of liquidation as part of that appeal, liquidation should be suspended until the end of the appeal process. Consequently, the United States would not be expected to issue any refunds until the appeal process is complete.

The anti-dumping and countervailing rates from the first administrative reviews took effect when the U.S. Department of Commerce published the final results in the U.S. Federal Register.

Final results for the anti-dumping administrative review were published on November 30, 2020, and the final results for the countervailing administrative review were published on December 1, 2020.

For companies included in the second administrative reviews, the cash deposit rates from the final results of the first administrative reviews were in effect for approximately one year from the date of publication in the U.S. Federal Register. The first administrative review cash deposit rates were then superseded by the final results of the second administrative reviews, which took effect on December 2, 2021.

For companies included in the first administrative reviews, but not in the second administrative reviews, the final rates from the first administrative reviews will continue to apply until these companies are included in a future administrative review, at which point the rates will be superseded by the results of that particular administrative review.

On March 19, 2020, the U.S. Department of Commerce announced it would proceed with the automatic liquidation of anti-dumping duty cash deposits that entered the United States during the period of review, from 06/30/2017 to 12/31/2018 for companies that did not participate in the first administrative review. On March 23, 2020, Commerce issued similar instructions stating that it would proceed with the automatic liquidation of countervailing duty cash deposits collected on certain softwood lumber products from Canada that entered the United States during the period of review, from 04/28/2017 to 12/31/2018 for companies that did not participate in the first administrative review. Therefore, companies that were not subject to either the anti-dumping or countervailing first administrative review should have had their entries liquidated (i.e. disbursed to the U.S. Treasury), at the cash deposit rate that was in effect at the time the entry was made.

Companies that were subject to the anti-dumping or countervailing first administrative reviews and made a request for suspension of liquidation in the context of legal challenges will be exempted from the automatic liquidation of cash deposits for entries during the period of review, at least until the conclusion of legal challenges under CUSMA Chapter 10 to the results of the reviews.

In the countervailing second administrative review, the U.S. Department of Commerce selected Canfor, Resolute and West Fraser as mandatory respondents, and J.D. Irving, Ltd. as a voluntary respondent. In the anti-dumping second administrative review, only Canfor and West Fraser were selected as mandatory respondents.

In 2019, at the time of import into to United States for the second administrative reviews (AR2), most companies were subject to the "all others" combined rate of 20.23% from the initial investigation (The 8.99% rate from the first administrative reviews only came into effect in December 2020). This means that, overall, companies subject to the AR2 combined rate of 17.91% are entitled to a net refund rather than a net invoice for the difference paid in cash deposits.

However, since the final results were appealed and interested parties requested suspension of liquidation as part of that appeal, liquidation for those parties should be suspended until the end of the appeal process. Consequently, the United States would not be expected to issue any refunds for these parties until the appeal process is complete.

The U.S. Department of Commerce issued the final results of the second administrative reviews on November 24, 2021. The new duty assessment rates for both the anti-dumping and countervailing administrative reviews took effect upon publication in the U.S. Federal Register on December 2, 2021.

For companies subject to the third administrative reviews, the cash deposit rates from the final results of the second administrative reviews were in effect for approximately 8 months, until they were superseded by the final results of the third administrative reviews, which took effect on August 9, 2022.

For companies covered by the second administrative reviews, but not the third administrative reviews, the final rates from the second administrative reviews will continue to apply until these companies are covered by a future administrative review, at which point the rates will be superseded by the results of that particular administrative review.

On April 20, 2020, the U.S. Department of Commerce announced it would proceed with the automatic liquidation of countervailing duty cash deposits collected on certain softwood lumber products from Canada that entered the United States during the period of review, from 01/01/2019 to 12/31/2019 for companies that did not participate in the second administrative review. On May 19, 2020, Commerce issued similar instructions stating that it would proceed with the automatic liquidation of anti-dumping duty cash deposits from the same period for companies that did not participate in the second administrative review. Therefore, companies that were not subject to either the anti-dumping or countervailing second administrative review should have had their entries liquidated (i.e. disbursed to the U.S. Treasury), at the cash deposit rate that was in effect at the time the entry was made.

Companies that were subject to the anti-dumping or countervailing second administrative reviews and made a request for suspension of liquidation in the context of legal challenges will be exempted from the automatic liquidation of cash deposits for entries during the period of review, at least until the conclusion of legal challenges under CUSMA Chapter 10 to the results of the reviews.

In the countervailing third administrative review, the U.S. Department of Commerce selected Canfor, Resolute and West Fraser as mandatory respondents, and J.D. Irving, Ltd. as a voluntary respondent.

In the anti-dumping third administrative review, only Canfor and West Fraser were selected as mandatory respondents.

During 2020, at the time of import into the United States for the third administrative reviews (AR3), most companies were subject to the "all others" combined cash deposit rate of 20.23% from the initial investigation until the 8.99% "non-selected" rate from the first administrative reviews came into effect in December 2020. This means that, overall, companies subject to the third administrative review combined "non-selected" rate of 8.59% are entitled to a net refund rather than a net invoice for the difference paid in cash deposits.

However, if an interested party (including the petitioner) challenges the final results through a CUSMA panel or U.S. courts, the liquidation of these entries and any refund may be suspended until the conclusion of these challenges.

The U.S. Department of Commerce issued the final results of the third administrative reviews on August 3, 2022. The new duty assessment rates for both the anti-dumping and countervailing administrative reviews took effect when Commerce published the results in the U.S. Federal Register on August 9, 2022.

For companies covered by the fourth administrative reviews, the cash deposit rates from the final results of the third administrative reviews were in effect for approximately one year, until they were superseded by the final results from the fourth administrative reviews, which took effect on August 1^st, 2023.

For companies covered by the third administrative reviews, but not the fourth administrative reviews, the final rates from the third administrative reviews will continue to apply until these companies are included in a future administrative review, at which point the rates will be superseded by the results of that particular administrative review.

On April 8, 2021, the U.S. Department of Commerce announced it would proceed with the automatic liquidation of countervailing duty cash deposits collected on certain softwood lumber products from Canada that entered the United States during the period of review, from 01/01/2020 to 12/31/2020 for companies that did not participate in the third administrative review. Similarly, on April 16, 2021, the U.S. Department of Commerce issued instructions to automatically liquidate anti-dumping duty cash deposits collected on certain softwood lumber products from Canada that entered the United States during the period of review, from 01/01/2020 to 12/31/2020 for companies that did not participate in the third administrative review. Therefore, for the moment, only companies that were not subject to the third administrative reviews will have their entries liquidated (i.e. duties disbursed to the U.S. Treasury), at the cash deposit rate that was in effect at the time the entry was made.

Companies that were subject to the anti-dumping or countervailing third administrative reviews and made a request for suspension of liquidation in the context of legal challenges will be exempted from the automatic liquidation of cash deposits for entries during the period of review, at least until the conclusion of legal challenges under CUSMA Chapter 10 to the results of the reviews.

The U.S. Department of Commerce selected Canfor and West Fraser as mandatory respondents for both the anti-dumping and countervailing fourth administrative reviews.

The U.S. Department of Commerce selected J.D. Irving, Ltd. as a voluntary respondent for the countervailing fourth administrative review.

The companies that were not covered by the fourth administrative reviews will not receive the fourth administrative review (amended) combined rate of8.05%, but will continue to be subject to the most recent combined duty rate applicable to them.

During 2021, at the time of import into the United States for the fourth administrative reviews, most companies were subject to the "non-selected" combined cash deposit rate of 8.99% from the first administrative review until the 17.91% "non-selected" rate from the second administrative reviews came into effect in December 2021. This means that, overall, companies subject to the fourth administrative review (amended) combined "non-selected" rate of 8.05% are entitled to a net refund rather than a net invoice for the difference paid in cash deposits.

However, if an interested party (including the petitioner) challenges the final results through a CUSMA panel or U.S. courts, the liquidation of these entries and any refund may be suspended until the conclusion of these challenges.

The U.S. Department of Commerce issued the final results of the fourth administrative reviews on July 27, 2023. The new duty assessment rates took effect when Commerce published the results in the U.S. Federal Register on August 1^st, 2023. On August 31, 2023, the U.S. Department of Commerce amended the fourth administrative review anti-dumping duty rates due to ministerial errors. 

For companies covered by the fifth administrative reviews, the cash deposit rates from the final results of the fourth administrative reviews will be in effect until the final results from the fifth administrative reviews are issued, likely in August 2024.

For companies covered by the fourth administrative reviews, but not the fifth administrative reviews, the final rates from the fourth administrative reviews will continue to apply until these companies are included in a future administrative review, at which point the rates will be superseded by the results of that particular administrative review.

The deadline for companies interested in participating in the fifth administrative reviews was January 31, 2023.   

The U.S. Department of Commerce is the investigating authority responsible for conducting administrative reviews for the softwood lumber anti-dumping and countervailing duty orders. Specific procedural questions should be directed to the U.S. Department of Commerce.

Yes, with conditions. The U.S. Department of Commerce may allow the withdrawal of a company from the administrative review process, but only if all parties that requested a review for that company withdraw their request for review.

If the petitioner (i.e. the Coalition) has requested the review of a company, the petitioner would then need to withdraw their request in order for a company not to be captured by the administrative review process.

A withdrawal request must be submitted within 90 days of the publication of the U.S. Department of Commerce's Notice of Initiation. The Notice of Initiation was published on March 14, 2023. Companies wishing to withdraw their administrative review requests had to do so by June 12, 2023.

The U.S. Department of Commerce selected Canfor and West Fraser as mandatory respondents for both the anti-dumping and countervailing fifth administrative reviews on April 11 and April 19, respectively.

On September 22, the U.S. Department of Commerce selected Tolko and J.D. Irving, Ltd. as voluntary respondents for the countervailing fifth administrative review. The U.S. Department of Commerce has not yet selected voluntary respondents for the anti-dumping fifth administrative review.

The U.S. Department of Commerce selected Canfor and West Fraser as mandatory respondents for both the anti-dumping and countervailing fifth administrative reviews on April 11 and April 19, 2023, respectively. Shortly after, on May 2, 2023, Commerce sent the initial questionnaires to the selected companies and to governments.

The deadline for companies to request participation in the sixth administrative reviews was January 31, 2024.

The U.S. Department of Commerce is the investigating authority responsible for conducting administrative reviews for the anti-dumping and countervailing duty orders on softwood lumber products. Specific procedural questions should be directed to the U.S. Department of Commerce.

Yes, with conditions. The U.S. Department of Commerce may allow the withdrawal of a company from the administrative review process, but only if all parties that requested a review for that company withdraw their request for review.

If the petitioner (i.e. the Coalition) has requested the review of a company, the petitioner would need to withdraw their request in order for a company not to be captured by the administrative review process.

A withdrawal request must be submitted within 90 days of the publication of the U.S. Department of Commerce's Notice of Initiation. The Notice of Initiation was published on March 5, 2024. Companies wishing to withdraw their administrative review requests should do so by June 3, 2024.

Companies listed in the notice of initiation of the sixth administrative reviews (AR6) may choose to file a Notice of No Sales if they meet both of the following criteria:

• a) They had no U.S. sales, exports or entries during the period of review (2023); and,
• b) There are suspended U.S. entries in the company’s name that were made during the period of review (e.g. this could occur if a third party purchased and subsequently exported a company’s products).

Filing a Notice of No Sales is not mandatory. If a company meets the criteria above and does not file a Notice of No Sales, it is expected that the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) would include the company in its ongoing administrative reviews. Conversely, if a company chooses to file a Notice of No Sales, Commerce may conduct an evaluation of the company to determine whether or not to include it in the ongoing administrative reviews.

For companies that wish to file a Notice of No Sales, this should be done on ACCESS no later than April 4, 2024 at 4:59 pm (EST). If your company does not already have an ACCESS e-filer account, please refer to the question “How do I request an ACCESS account?” under the U.S. trade remedy proceedings section.

Companies with questions about whether to file a Notice of No Sales should consult U.S. legal counsel who specialize in U.S. trade law.

The U.S. Department of Commerce published its initiation notice on March 5, 2024. The U.S Department of Commerce is expected to select mandatory respondents in April or early May, and send initial questionnaires to the selected companies and to governments shortly thereafter.

The preliminary results are expected between October 2024 and late January 2025, and final results sometime between February and August 2025.

Estimated countervailing and anti-dumping duty payments are typically on deposit until the final duty assessment rates for a given period of review are established retroactively by the U.S. Department of Commerce in an administrative review. When Commerce's final results for an administrative review are issued, the final duties are assessed and they are then liquidated (i.e. disbursed to U.S. Treasury). Companies receive either a refund or invoice for additional duties owed if the final duty assessment is lower or higher than the cash deposit rate.

However, if the final results of an administrative review are appealed, for instance through a NAFTA/CUSMA dispute settlement panel or the U.S. courts, the liquidation of entries may be suspended upon request of a party until that legal challenge is resolved.

In the first administrative reviews, the countervailing and anti-dumping final results were challenged under Chapter 10 of CUSMA on December 10 and 20, 2020, respectively.

On February 4 and 26, 2021, the U.S. Department of Commerce issued customs instructions continuing the suspension of liquidation for the first administrative reviews, pending the completion of the ongoing CUSMA binational panel reviews.

In the second administrative reviews, both countervailing and anti-dumping final results were challenged under Chapter 10 of CUSMA on December 28, 2021.

On February 28 (corrected on March 2) and March 16, 2022, the U.S. Department of Commerce issued customs instructions continuing the suspension of liquidation for the second administrative reviews, pending the completion of the ongoing CUSMA binational panel reviews.

In the third administrative reviews, both the anti-dumping and countervailing final results were challenged under Chapter 10 of CUSMA on September 8, 2022. On September 28, 2022, and October 3, 2022, the U.S. Department of Commerce issued customs instructions continuing the suspension of liquidation for the third administrative reviews, pending the completion of the ongoing CUSMA binational panel reviews.

In the fourth administrative reviews, the countervailing final results were challenged under Chapter 10 of CUSMA on August 31, 2023 and the anti-dumping final results were challenged before the U.S. Court of International Trade (USCIT) on September 6, 2023.

When administrative review results are challenged, companies need to make a business decision about whether they prefer to have entries liquidated at the final administrative review rates or to have the liquidation of their deposits suspended until the end of any appeals proceedings.

There are pros and cons relating to each choice. For instance, if final rates are lower than the cash deposit rates, having entries liquidated could provide quicker access to a partial refund of duty deposits. Liquidation of entries also results in the release of customs bonds related to the shipments in question. However, companies could be foregoing a potentially larger refund if Canada is successful in its litigation or when challenges to the results are resolved via litigation or a negotiated agreement.

Companies should also be aware that other parties to this dispute, such as U.S. industry groups like the petitioner, could potentially request that duty liquidation be suspended for some or all Canadian companies. This request could supersede a decision by a Canadian company to have their entries liquidated.

The Department of Commerce (Commerce) and the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) must conduct sunset reviews no later than five years after an anti-dumping or countervailing duty order is issued. The Commerce review determines whether revoking the orders would be likely to lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping or subsidies. The USITC review determines whether revoking the orders would be likely to lead to a continuation or recurrence of material injury to the U.S. industry. If both the USITC and Commerce determinations are affirmative, the orders will remain in place. If either of their determinations is negative, the orders will be revoked.

Sunset reviews are initiated by Commerce and the USITC no later than 30 days prior to the five-year anniversary of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders. Commerce and the USITC initiated the softwood lumber sunset reviews on December 1, 2022.

Commerce published the results of its reviews of the anti-dumping and countervailing duty orders in early April 2023, finding that revocation of the orders would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and subsidization.

On December 28, 2023, the USITC published its final sunset review determination in the U.S. Federal Register. The USITC determined that the revocation of the anti-dumping and countervailing orders on softwood lumber products from Canada would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to the U.S. industry within a reasonably foreseeable time. In practical terms, this means that the United States will maintain the duty orders on Canadian softwood lumber products. The Government of Canada, in collaboration with stakeholders, launched a challenge of these results under Chapter 10 of CUSMA on January 29, 2024.

Since both the USITC and Commerce determinations are affirmative, the U.S. anti-dumping and countervailing duty orders will remain in place. As a result, U.S. anti-dumping and countervailing duties will continue to be applied to softwood lumber products from Canada. These results do not impact the duty rates applied to Canadian softwood lumber products.