PTMEG Antidumping Duties: Preliminary Rates

Preliminary PTMEG antidumping duties on imports from China, Korea, Taiwan, and Vietnam introduce cash deposit rates ranging from 7.46% to 213.44%. Importers and customs brokers must now validate producer and exporter relationships, assess scope exposure, and prepare for significant changes in landed cost and entry compliance.

What the Preliminary PTMEG Determinations Change

Suspension of liquidation and cash deposits

The U.S. Department of Commerce issued preliminary affirmative less-than-fair-value determinations covering polytetramethylene ether glycol, commonly known as PTMEG, from China, Korea, Taiwan, and Vietnam. PTMEG is identified by CAS registry number 25190-06-1 and is widely used as an industrial input, including in the production of elastomers, polyurethane materials, and spandex fibers.

Upon Federal Register publication scheduled for November 10, 2026, U.S. Customs and Border Protection will generally suspend liquidation of subject entries and require antidumping cash deposits at the applicable preliminary rates. Suspension of liquidation means the entries remain open while the investigation proceeds. The deposited amount is security rather than necessarily the importer’s final antidumping duty liability.

The applicable rate can depend on the country of origin, producer, exporter, and whether a company qualified for an individually calculated or separate rate. Importers should not assume that the commercial supplier shown on an invoice determines the correct rate. Commerce instructions and the underlying producer-exporter relationship generally control.

The period of investigation differs by country. For China and Vietnam, the period runs from October 1, 2025 through March 31, 2026. For Korea and Taiwan, it runs from April 1, 2025 through March 31, 2026. These periods were used to evaluate pricing behavior and calculate the preliminary margins. They do not limit the prospective cash deposit requirement, which begins with covered entries on or after the effective publication date.

Preliminary PTMEG Cash Deposit Rates by Country

Rates range from 7.46% to 213.44%

The preliminary PTMEG cash deposit rates vary substantially across the four countries and among named companies. This variation makes precise supplier identification essential before entry filing, purchase order approval, or landed cost forecasting.

China presents the greatest immediate cost exposure. The 213.44% China-wide rate was calculated using total facts available with adverse inferences. No examined company qualified for a separate rate, and no company-specific producer-exporter combination rates were established. Subject merchandise from China will therefore generally face the China-wide rate unless later instructions establish a different treatment.

For Korea, Korea PTG received a 25.32% preliminary margin, while BASF Company Ltd. received 49.79% based on adverse facts available. The Korean all-others rate is 25.32%.

For Taiwan, Dairen Chemical Corporation received 7.46%. Formosa Asahi Spandex received 26.42% based on adverse facts available, and the all-others rate is 7.46%.

For Vietnam, Hyosung Dong Nai Company Limited received a 36.55% producer-exporter combination rate. The Vietnam-wide entity also received 36.55%. Even where the numerical rates match, importers should still report the correct company relationship because combination-rate eligibility can affect treatment in later phases.

Scope and Supplier Verification Require Close Review

Product descriptions control over shorthand classifications

An importer should determine whether its merchandise is within the PTMEG scope before relying on a preliminary cash deposit rate. Product names, internal material codes, invoice descriptions, and tariff classifications can assist the analysis, but they do not replace the written scope language.

The scope analysis should consider chemical identity, physical characteristics, composition, processing, and any stated inclusions or exclusions. CAS number 25190-06-1 is an important reference point, although an importer should not treat a CAS number alone as the complete legal test. Commerce made no preliminary scope modifications, but scope issues can continue to develop during the investigation.

Importers should assemble technical records that support their conclusions, including specifications, safety data sheets, product literature, laboratory information, production descriptions, and supplier certifications. Customs brokers need sufficiently specific commercial documentation to transmit accurate entry data, but the importer remains responsible for supporting its scope position.

Producer and exporter combinations matter

Trade compliance teams should confirm both the actual producer and the exporter for every shipment. The seller, manufacturer, invoicing party, and exporter may be different companies. Related-party transactions and trading-company arrangements can create additional uncertainty.

For Vietnam in particular, a separate-rate result may apply only to an eligible producer-exporter combination. A shipment involving the same producer but a different exporter may not qualify for the named rate. For China, the absence of separate rates at the preliminary stage makes company identification no less important, since sourcing records will be needed if treatment changes later.

A defensible process should connect supplier master data, purchase orders, invoices, manufacturing declarations, entry records, and cash deposit calculations. Rate assignment based only on a supplier name typed into an invoice creates avoidable compliance and financial risk.

Managing Cash Flow, Entry Risk, and Drawback

Preliminary deposits can materially change landed cost

PTMEG importers should incorporate the new cash deposit requirements into landed cost models immediately. A preliminary antidumping rate applies to the entered value of subject merchandise and can create a major working-capital burden. At 213.44%, the required deposit can exceed twice the entered value before ordinary customs duties, merchandise processing fees, freight, and other costs are considered.

Commercial teams should revisit pricing commitments, supplier contracts, Incoterms, reimbursement provisions, and change-in-law clauses. They should also determine whether purchase agreements identify the importer of record and allocate responsibility for antidumping duties. Antidumping reimbursement arrangements can have separate compliance consequences, so contract language should receive qualified review.

The preliminary rate is not necessarily the final assessment rate. Commerce may revise margins in its final determinations, and the U.S. International Trade Commission must complete its final injury analysis before an antidumping duty order can be issued. Korea, Taiwan, and Vietnam received postponements of their final determinations, with provisional measures extended accordingly. Importers should therefore monitor deadlines without treating the preliminary rates as fixed long-term outcomes.

Antidumping deposits are not eligible for drawback

Antidumping duties and related cash deposits are not eligible for duty drawback. Exporting or destroying merchandise does not permit recovery of those antidumping amounts through a drawback claim.

Ordinary customs duties paid on the same entries may still be drawback-eligible when all statutory and operational requirements are satisfied. Importers should separate antidumping deposits from potentially recoverable ordinary duties in their accounting and drawback data. This distinction helps prevent ineligible amounts from entering a claim while preserving legitimate recovery opportunities.

Customs brokers and importers should also retain entry summaries, deposit records, liquidation data, export evidence, bills of material, and inventory records. Clear duty-type segmentation is especially important when entries contain multiple products or when only part of an entry is subject to the PTMEG investigation.

Frequently Asked Questions

When do the preliminary PTMEG cash deposit requirements begin?

The requirements are expected to begin with subject entries entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after the Federal Register publication date of November 10, 2026. CBP instructions generally determine the operational treatment of entries.

Is the preliminary margin the importer’s final duty liability?

Not necessarily. The cash deposit secures potential liability while the proceeding continues. Final determinations, the injury phase, any resulting order, and later administrative reviews can affect the ultimate antidumping duty assessment.

Can an importer use the all-others rate if its supplier is not listed?

An all-others rate may apply in Korea or Taiwan when the shipment does not involve a specifically named company and otherwise qualifies for that treatment. China and Vietnam use different entity and combination-rate frameworks, so importers should not apply an all-others concept uniformly across countries.

Are PTMEG antidumping duties eligible for duty drawback?

No. Antidumping duties and cash deposits are not drawback-eligible. Ordinary customs duties paid on the same imported merchandise may remain eligible if the transaction and supporting records satisfy the applicable drawback requirements.

What records should importers obtain from PTMEG suppliers?

Importers should generally collect producer identity, exporter identity, technical specifications, CAS information, product literature, manufacturing declarations, invoices, purchase orders, and country-of-origin support. These records should be reconciled with entry data and the applicable cash deposit rate.

How Stable Software Can Help

Preserve eligible duty recovery without including AD deposits

Antidumping cash deposits are excluded from drawback, but ordinary customs duties on qualifying PTMEG entries may still represent a valid recovery opportunity. Stable Software’s DrawbackAI helps U.S. customs brokers provide white-labeled duty drawback software to importer clients while filing claims under the broker’s own filer code.

Stable Software charges a flat software license and never takes a percentage of the importer’s refund. This model allows brokers to retain control of the client relationship and build a scalable drawback service without sharing recovered duties. Brokers evaluating PTMEG entry activity can use a disciplined drawback process to separate ineligible antidumping amounts from potentially recoverable ordinary customs duties.

Resources