United States keeps anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties on uncoated steel wire mesh from Mexico, effective Sept. 23, 2026.<\/p>\n
The U.S. Department of Commerce has kept its extra duties on plain steel wire mesh from Mexico, with effect from Sept. 23, 2026.<\/p>\n
Commerce published the continuation notice in the Federal Register on Oct. 26, 20261<\/a><\/sup>. It covers both orders on the goods: an anti-dumping duty order and a countervailing duty order1<\/a><\/sup>.<\/p>\n In short, nothing changes at the border for a shipment of this mesh from Mexico. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) will keep collecting the same duty deposits as before, at the rates in force on the day the goods enter1<\/a><\/sup>.<\/p>\n The notice from Commerce’s International Trade Administration orders the continuation of both duty orders on standard steel welded wire mesh from Mexico<\/strong>1<\/a><\/sup>. The decision follows the first five-year review of the orders, often called a sunset review.<\/p>\n Two duties are involved. An anti-dumping duty is an extra import tax on goods sold in the United States below their normal price. A countervailing duty is an extra import tax that cancels out government subsidies paid to the foreign maker.<\/p>\n Commerce first published the orders in 2021. The countervailing duty order appeared on April 12, 2021, and the anti-dumping duty order on Aug. 9, 20211<\/a><\/sup>. A correction to the anti-dumping order followed on Aug. 16, 20211<\/a><\/sup>.<\/p>\n The continuation notice is dated Oct. 19, 20261<\/a><\/sup>. It was signed by Scot Fullerton, Commerce’s acting deputy assistant secretary for anti-dumping and countervailing duty operations1<\/a><\/sup>.<\/p>\n U.S. law sets a time limit on these duties. Commerce must revoke an anti-dumping or countervailing duty order after five years, unless two agencies find a reason to keep it2<\/a><\/sup>.<\/p>\n Commerce must find that ending the order would likely bring back dumping or subsidies2<\/a><\/sup>. The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC), an independent federal agency that judges harm to U.S. industry, must find that ending it would likely bring back material injury<\/strong>, meaning serious harm to U.S. producers2<\/a><\/sup>. Both findings are needed, and both were made in this case.<\/p>\n The rule comes from the Uruguay Round Agreements Act2<\/a><\/sup>. The review itself rests on section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 19301<\/a><\/sup>.<\/p>\n The review began on March 2, 2026. On that day the USITC opened its review and Commerce started its own1<\/a><\/sup>. The steps then ran in this order:<\/p>\n Because the Mexican side did not respond, Commerce ran a 120-day expedited review<\/strong> for each order3<\/a><\/sup>. An expedited review is a shorter review based on the facts already on file. The USITC also used the faster path. It generally holds no hearing in expedited reviews2<\/a><\/sup>.<\/p>\n Commerce does not set new duties in a sunset review. It tells the USITC how large the dumping and subsidies would likely be if the orders ended1<\/a><\/sup>. These figures are forecasts for the review, not new deposit rates.<\/p>\nWhat did Commerce decide on Mexican wire mesh?<\/h2>\n
Why does a sunset review decide the duties’ future?<\/h2>\n
How did the wire mesh review unfold?<\/h2>\n
\n
What rates did Commerce say would return?<\/h2>\n
Likely subsidy rates if the duties ended, %<\/h4>\n