Statement of reasons—Expiry review determination: Aluminum extrusions (AE 2024 ER)

Decision

Ottawa, May 9, 2025

On April 24, 2025, pursuant to paragraph 76.03(7)(a) of the Special Import Measures Act, the Canada Border Services Agency determined that the expiry of the Canadian International Trade Tribunal’s order made on January 13, 2020, in expiry review RR-2018-008:

• is likely to result in the continuation or resumption of dumping of such goods originating in or exported from China and
• is likely to result in the continuation or resumption of subsidizing of such goods originating in or exported from China

Executive summary

[1] On November 25, 2024, the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (CITT), pursuant to subsection 76.03(1) of the Special Import Measures Act (SIMA), initiated an expiry review of its order made on January 13, 2020, in expiry review RR-2018-008, continuing, without amendment, its order made on March 17, 2014, in expiry review RR-2013-003, continuing, without amendment its findings made on March 17, 2009, in inquiry NQ-2008-003, as amended by its determination made on February 10, 2011, in inquiry NQ-2008-003R, concerning the dumping and subsidizing of aluminum extrusions originating in or exported from China (subject goods).

[2] As a result of the CITT’s notice of expiry review, the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), on November 26, 2024, initiated an expiry review investigation to determine, pursuant to paragraph 76.03(7)(a) of SIMA, whether the expiry of the order is likely to result in the continuation or resumption of dumping and subsidizing of the subject goods.

[3] The CBSA received ten responses to the Canadian Producer Expiry Review Questionnaire (ERQ) from: Almag Aluminum Inc.(Almag),^{Footnote 1} APEL Extrusions Limited (APEL),^{Footnote 2} Apex Aluminum Extrusions Ltd. (Apex),^{Footnote 3} Can Art Aluminum Extrusion Canada Inc. (Can Art),^{Footnote 4} Dajcor Aluminum Ltd. (Dajcor),^{Footnote 5} Extrudex Aluminum Corp. (Extrudex),^{Footnote 6} Extrudex Aluminium (Québec) Inc. (Extrudex Québec),^{Footnote 7} Hydro Extrusion Canada, Inc. (Hydro),^{Footnote 8} Metra Aluminium Inc. (Metra)^{Footnote 9} and Spectra Aluminum Products Ltd./Spectra Anodizing Inc. (Spectra)^{Footnote 10} (these ten producers are collectively referred to “the domestic extruders”).

[4] The CBSA received three responses to the Importer ERQ from: Copper Core Limited (Copper Core),^{Footnote 11} HFI Pyrotechnics Inc. (HFI)^{Footnote 12} and Marwood Ltd. (Marwood).^{Footnote 13} These responses did not express an opinion on the likelihood of continued or resumed dumping and subsidizing of the subject goods.

[5] The CBSA received one response to the Exporter/Foreign Producer ERQ from Guangdong Luoxiang Aluminium Co., Ltd. (Guangdong Luoxiang).^{Footnote 14} The response did not express an opinion on the likelihood of continued or resumed dumping and subsidizing of the subject goods.

[6] The CBSA did not receive a response to the Subsidy ERQ from the Government of China (GOC), nor a case brief or a reply submission.

[7] In addition to responding to the Canadian Producer ERQ, the domestic extruders provided the CBSA with additional information prior to the close of the administrative record^{Footnote 15} and a case brief.^{Footnote 16} The domestic extruders’ case brief included arguments supporting their position that the expiry of the order is likely to result in the continuation or resumption of dumping and/or subsidizing of the subject goods in Canada.

[8] No other case briefs or reply submissions were submitted to the CBSA from any interested parties.

[9] The analysis of information on the administrative record indicates a likelihood of continued or resumed dumping into Canada of aluminum extrusions from China should the CITT’s order expire. This analysis relied upon the following factors:

• Anti-dumping measures imposed by other authorities on aluminum extrusions from China
• China’s significant excess capacity
• China’s export orientation

[10] The analysis of information on the administrative record indicates a likelihood of continued or resumed subsidizing into Canada of aluminum extrusions from China should the CITT’s order expire. This analysis relied upon the following factors:

• Countervailing measures imposed by other authorities on aluminum extrusions from China
• Continued availability of subsidy programs for aluminum extrusions exporters/producers in China

[11] For the foregoing factors, the CBSA, having considered the relevant information on the administrative record, determined on April 24, 2025 pursuant to paragraph 76.03(7)(a) of SIMA, that the expiry of the order in respect of aluminum extrusions is likely to result in the continuation or resumption of dumping and subsidizing of the goods from China.

Background

[12] On August 18, 2008, following a complaint filed by Almag Aluminum Inc., Apel Extrusions, Can Art Aluminum Extrusion Inc., Metra Aluminum Inc., Signature Aluminum Canada Inc. (formerly Bon L Canada Inc.), Spectra Aluminum Products Ltd. and Spectra Anodizing Inc., the CBSA initiated investigations pursuant to subsection 31(1) of SIMA, respecting the dumping and subsidizing of aluminum extrusions from China.

[13] On February 16, 2009, pursuant to paragraph 41(1)(a) of SIMA, the CBSA made final determinations of dumping and subsidizing with respect to aluminum extrusions from China.

[14] On March 17, 2009, pursuant to subsection 43(1) of SIMA, the CITT found in inquiry NQ-2008-003 that the dumping and subsidizing of aluminum extrusions from China had caused injury to the domestic industry.

[15] On February 10, 2011, in inquiry NQ-2008-003R, the CITT determined that MAAX Bath Inc. was entitled to the product exclusions that it had requested, at the time of the original inquiry, for certain aluminum extrusions used in the assembly of shower enclosures.

[16] On February 20, 2012, the CBSA concluded a re-investigation to update the normal values, export prices and amounts of subsidy of aluminum extrusions from China.

[17] On October 3, 2013, following the initiation of an expiry review of the CITT’s findings of injury, the CBSA determined that the expiry of the findings was likely to result in the continuation or resumption of dumping and subsidizing of aluminum extrusions from China. On March 17, 2014, in expiry review RR-2013-003, the CITT continued its findings on aluminum extrusions from China.

[18] On August 2, 2019, following the initiation of an expiry review of the CITT’s order, the CBSA determined that the expiry of the order was likely to result in the continuation or resumption of dumping and subsidizing of aluminum extrusions from China. On January 13, 2020, in expiry review RR-2018-008, the CITT continued its order on aluminum extrusions from China.

[19] On March 3, 2022, the CBSA concluded a normal value review and the cooperative exporter was issued normal values and an amount of subsidy.

[20] On November 25, 2024, pursuant to subsection 76.03(1) of SIMA, the CITT initiated an expiry review of its order made in expiry review RR-2018-008.

[21] On November 26, 2024, pursuant to paragraph 76.03(7)(a) of SIMA, the CBSA initiated an expiry review investigation to determine whether the expiry of the order is likely to result in continued or resumed dumping and/or subsidizing of the subject goods.

Product definition

[22] The goods subject to this expiry review investigation are defined as:

Classification of imports

[24] The subject goods are normally imported into Canada under the following tariff classification numbers:

1. 7604.10.00.30
2. 7604.10.00.40
3. 7604.21.00.10
4. 7604.21.00.90
5. 7604.29.00.11
6. 7604.29.00.19
7. 7604.29.00.21
8. 7604.29.00.29
9. 7604.29.00.30
10. 7608.10.00.10
11. 7608.10.00.90
12. 7608.20.00.00
13. 7610.10.00.10
14. 7610.10.00.20
15. 7610.10.00.30
16. 7610.90.10.00
17. 7610.90.90.10
18. 7610.90.90.20
19. 7610.90.90.30
20. 7610.90.90.90

[25] These tariff classification numbers may also include non-subject goods, and subject goods may also fall under additional tariff classification numbers.

Classes of goods

[26] In its findings,^{Footnote 18} the CITT had separated the aluminum extrusions into two classes of goods: standard-shaped aluminum extrusions and custom-shaped aluminum extrusions.

[27] The information gathered by the CBSA in terms of statistical data and other research did not reveal any differentiation within the industry regarding the two classes of goods, with news articles and analyses consistently referring to aluminum extrusions as a whole.

[28] Therefore, unless stated otherwise, the analysis respecting the likelihood of continued or resumed dumping and subsidizing applies to both classes of goods as defined by the CITT.

Period of review

[29] The period of review (POR) for the CBSA’s expiry review investigation is from January 1, 2021 to September 30, 2024.

Canadian industry

[30] The Canadian industry for aluminum extrusions is comprised of the producers listed in Table 1.

[31] Each producer who forms part of the domestic extruders provided a response to the ERQ. The vast majority of the domestic extruders produce both standard-shaped aluminum extrusions and custom-shaped aluminum extrusions, and account for over 90% of the domestic production of like goods.^{Footnote 21}

[32] The other producers, namely, Kaiser Aluminum Corporation, Kawneer Co. Canada Ltd., Kromet International Inc. and Signature Aluminum Canada Inc. did not participate in this expiry review investigation. As such, no information on their production and sales was available to the CBSA.

Canadian market

[33] The apparent Canadian market for aluminum extrusions over the POR^{Footnote 22} is presented in volume and share in Table 2 and in volume and unit value in Table 3. Although the sales of the other producers are not contained in the tables, the CBSA is the opinion that the domestic extruders’ data is representative when analyzing the trends in terms of sales, share and unit prices of the Canadian producers.

[34] As shown in Table 2, the domestic extruders’ share of the apparent Canadian market, as a percentage of total volume of sales, fluctuated over the POR accounting for approximately two thirds of the apparent Canadian market for aluminum extrusions. In the period of January to September 2024, as compared to the year 2023, imports from China, United States and All Other Countries have increasingly captured a greater share of the total apparent Canadian market to the detriment of the domestic extruders.

[35] As shown in Table 3, the domestic extruders’ unit selling price peaked in 2022 and has subsequently continued to decrease in 2023 and in the period of January to September 2024. During the POR, the average unit prices from China and All Other Countries have remained significantly lower than the average unit prices of the domestic extruders.

Enforcement data

[36] In the enforcement of the CITT’s order during the POR, as detailed in Table 4, the total amount of anti-dumping and countervailing duties assessed on subject goods from China was $15,791,047.^{Footnote 23}

Parties to the proceedings

[37] On November 26, 2024, the CBSA sent a notice of initiation of the expiry review investigation and ERQs to the known Canadian producers, importers and exporters/foreign producers. The CBSA also sent a Subsidy ERQ to the GOC.

[38] The ERQs requested information relevant to the CBSA’s consideration of the expiry review factors, as listed in subsection 37.2(1) of the Special Import Measures Regulations (SIMR).

[39] The CBSA received responses to the Canadian Producer ERQ from Almag, APEL, Apex, Can Art, Dajcor, Extrudex, Extrudex Québec, Hydro, Metra and Spectra. Additional documents were also filed on behalf of the domestic extruders prior to the closing of the administrative record.

[40] The CBSA received responses to the Importer ERQ from Copper Core, HFI and Marwood as well as a response to the Exporter/Foreign Producer ERQ from Guangdong Luoxiang.

[41] The GOC did not respond to the Subsidy ERQ.

[42] Counsel, on behalf of the domestic extruders, filed a case brief and argued that the expiry of the order is likely to result in the continuation or resumption of dumping and/or subsidizing of the subject goods in Canada.

[43] No other interested party, including the GOC, provided a case brief or reply submission.

Information considered by the CBSA

Administrative Record

[44] The information considered by the CBSA for purposes of this expiry review investigation is contained in the administrative record. The administrative record includes the information on the CBSA’s exhibit listing, which is comprised of the CBSA exhibits and information submitted by interested parties, including information which the interested parties feel is relevant to the decision as to whether dumping and subsidizing are likely to continue or resume absent the CITT order. This information may consist of expert analysts’ reports, excerpts from trade magazines and newspapers, orders and findings issued by authorities of Canada or of a country other than Canada, documents from international trade organizations such as the World Trade Organization (WTO) and responses to the ERQs submitted by Canadian producers, importers, exporters and governments.

[45] For purposes of an expiry review investigation, the CBSA sets a date after which no new information submitted by interested parties will be placed on the administrative record or considered as part of the CBSA’s expiry review investigation. This is referred to as the “closing of the record date” and is set to allow participants time to prepare their case briefs and reply submissions based on the information that is on the administrative record as of the closing of the record date. For this expiry review investigation, the administrative record closed on January 15, 2025.

Position of the parties: Dumping

Consideration and analysis: Dumping

[65] In making a determination under paragraph 76.03(7)(a) of SIMA as to whether the expiry of the order is likely to result in the continuation or resumption of dumping of the goods from China, the CBSA may consider factors identified in subsection 37.2(1) of the SIMR, as well as any other factors relevant in the circumstances.

[66] Prior to addressing the likely of continued or resumed dumping, the CBSA underlines that it is conducting this expiry review investigation on the basis that the conditions of section 20 of SIMA continue to exist in the aluminum extrusions sector in China. Section 20 inquiries are conducted in investigations and re-investigations.

Conditions of section 20 of SIMA in the aluminum extrusions sector in China

[67] In its last proceeding^{Footnote 43} on aluminum extrusions from China, with respect to the dumping portion of the re-investigation, the CBSA was of the opinion that the domestic prices of aluminum extrusions in China were still being substantially determined by the GOC and the aluminum extrusions sector in China was still operating under conditions where the prices were not substantially the same as they would be if they were determined in a competitive market. As the conditions of section 20 of SIMA were found to exist, the normal values for the exporters that provided a complete and reliable submission were determined using an alternate methodology under a ministerial specification, pursuant to subsection 29(1) of SIMA.

[68] The normal values determined for these cooperative exporters were based on the monthly average settlement price of aluminum as reported on the London Metal Exchange (LME), plus added to these LME prices were amounts for the i) conversion costs of the aluminum into a finished aluminum extrusion product, ii) administrative, selling and all other costs and iii) profit (the LME methodology).

[69] There are presently fourteen cooperative exporters who have been issued normal values as per the LME methodology.^{Footnote 44}

[70] Guided by these aforementioned factors, and having considered the information on the administrative record, the following is a summary of the CBSA’s analysis conducted in this expiry review investigation with respect to dumping:

• Anti-dumping measures imposed by other authorities on aluminum extrusions from China
• China’s significant excess capacity and
• China’s export orientation

Anti-dumping measures imposed by other authorities on aluminum extrusions from China

[71] The information on the administrative record indicates the presence of anti-dumping measures in other jurisdictions against aluminum extrusions from China, namely in Australia,^{Footnote 45} in the United States,^{Footnote 46} in the European Union^{Footnote 47} and in the United Kingdom.^{Footnote 48}

[72] Since 2010, Australia has conducted two sunset reviews and made affirmative final dumping rulings on aluminum extrusions from China. In August 2024, the Australian Anti-dumping Commission announced that the anti-dumping measures on aluminum extrusions from China will expire on October 28, 2025 and applications for a sunset review by stakeholders is to be submitted by October 15, 2024.^{Footnote 49}

[73] Since 2011, the United States has conducted two sunset reviews on the anti-dumping duty order on aluminum extrusions from China. In both instances, the US Department of Commerce (DOC) determined that revoking the order would likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping.^{Footnote 50}

[74] These anti-dumping measures in jurisdictions other than Canada against China demonstrate a historical pattern by Chinese exporters in continuing to export aluminum extrusions at dumped prices. Furthermore, these anti-dumping measures also demonstrate a propensity by Chinese exporters to dump aluminum extrusions into markets.

[75] While on the subject of anti-dumping measures, the CBSA notes that in July 2024, the Department of Foreign Trade of Thailand initiated an anti-dumping investigation into aluminum extrusions from China.^{Footnote 51} Furthermore, the CBSA underlines that although the US International Trade Commission determined in October 2024 that the US industry had not been materially injured or threatened with material injury by aluminum extrusions,^{Footnote 52} the US DOC had nevertheless made affirmative final determinations of dumping against the multiple countries which included China.^{Footnote 53}

China’s significant excess capacity

[76] As indicated earlier, the CBSA received only one response to its Exporter/Foreign Producer ERQ. As a result, the CBSA relied on its own research and on other information on the administrative record to obtain a snapshot of the capacity, production and utilization rates of aluminum extrusions in China.

[77] While the data pertaining to these three variables may be limited, the CBSA is nevertheless able to draw inferences from the available data.

[78] In terms of total capacity for aluminum extrusions in China, information on the administrative record estimates that it is greater than 30 million MT, with one source indicating 34.32 million MT in 2021^{Footnote 54} and another, indicating 31.07 million MT in 2023.^{Footnote 55}

[79] Furthermore, the CBSA notes that the individual capacity alone of over 30 aluminum extruders in China^{Footnote 56} is greater that the total volume of the Canadian market in 2023, which was 197,568 MT.

[80] In terms of production, information on the administrative record indicates that the output in China for aluminium extrusions in 2022 was 21.5 million MT and estimated at 22.47 million MT in 2023^{Footnote 57} and 23.5 million MT in 2024.^{Footnote 58}

[81] As to the utilization rates, AZ Global, a research house, indicated that China's mid-stream aluminium processing sector, which includes aluminum extruders, operate at rates typically below 65% and as low as 40%.^{Footnote 59} Another research house, Shanghai Metals Market (SMM), indicated that the average operating rate of aluminum extruders in December 2021 was at 50.5% and at 36.5% in December 2022, with large enterprises operating at 37.8%, mid-sized companies at 35.8% and small firms at 20.5%.^{Footnote 60} In the last week of March 2024 and in the first week of April 2024, the SMM reported that the operating rate of aluminium extrusions was at 62.3%.^{Footnote 61}

[82] Based on the data above, in 2023, with a capacity of 31.07 million MT and an estimated production of 22.47 million MT or of 23.15 million MT,^{Footnote 62} depending on the source, it can be seen that the available excess capacity for aluminium extrusions is either 8.6 million MT or 7.92 million MT, which could easily fulfill the needs of the entire volume of the Canadian market of 197,568 MT in 2023.

[83] The CBSA underlines that even if only a small amount of the excess capacity would be directed to Canada, it would dwarf the domestic extruders in regard to their sales in the Canadian market.

China’s export orientation

[84] In taking a closer look at producers and exporters in China, information on the administrative record corroborates their export orientation, which includes as destinations the United States and Canada.^{Footnote 63}

[85] In 2023, China’s exports of aluminum extrusions totalled 990,800 MT, an increase of 42,800 MT year-on-year.^{Footnote 64} The CBSA notes that from January to June 2024, exports of aluminum extrusions totalled 520,100 MT, an increase of 11.61% year-on-year.^{Footnote 65}

[86] In response to the Exporter/Foreign Producer ERQ, Guangdong Luoxiang indicated that it expected an increase in export sales by 3-5% on average from 2025 to 2029.^{Footnote 66}

[87] This increasing export trend for aluminum extrusions was also witnessed in Canada. In 2013, imports into Canada from China totalled 5,798 MT, and reached 8,396 MT in the period of January to September 2024.^{Footnote 67}

[88] While there may be strong incentives to seek additional export sales of aluminum extrusions, the imposition of anti-dumping measures by other jurisdictions demonstrate the restricted access to other export markets that Chinese exporters will continue to face in the near future, which would make the Canadian market very attractive if the CITT order expires.

Determination regarding likelihood of continued or resumed dumping

[89] Based on the information on the administrative record in respect of: anti-dumping measures imposed by other authorities on aluminum extrusions from China, China’s significant excess capacity and China’s export orientation, the CBSA has determined that the expiry of the order is likely to result in the continuation or resumption of dumping of aluminum extrusions from China.

Position of the parties: Subsidizing

Consideration and analysis: Subsidizing

[101] In making a determination under paragraph 76.03(7)(a) of SIMA as to whether the expiry of the order is likely to result in the continuation or resumption of subsidizing of the goods from China, the CBSA may consider factors identified in subsection 37.2(1) of the SIMR, as well as any other factors relevant in the circumstances.

[102] Guided by these aforementioned factors, and having considered the information on the administrative record, the following is a summary of the CBSA’s analysis conducted in this expiry review investigation with respect to subsidizing:

• Countervailing measures imposed by other authorities on aluminum extrusions from China and
• Continued availability of subsidy programs for aluminum extrusions exporters/producers in China

Countervailing measures imposed by other authorities on aluminum extrusions from China

[103] The information on the administrative record indicates the presence of countervailing measures in other jurisdictions against aluminum extrusions from China, namely in Australia^{Footnote 77} and in the United States.^{Footnote 78}

[104] Since 2010, Australia has conducted two sunset reviews and made affirmative final subsidizing rulings on aluminum extrusions from China. In August 2024, the Australian Anti-dumping Commission announced that the countervailing measures on aluminum extrusions from China will expire on October 28, 2025 and applications for a sunset review by stakeholders is to be submitted by October 15, 2024.^{Footnote 79}

[105] Since 2011, the United States has conducted two sunset reviews on the countervailing duty order on aluminum extrusions from China. In both instances, the US DOC determined that revoking the order would likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of subsidizing.^{Footnote 80}

[106] These countervailing measures in jurisdictions other than Canada against China demonstrate a historical pattern by Chinese exporters in continuing to export aluminum extrusions at subsidized prices into markets. Furthermore, these countervailing measures also demonstrate China’s propensity to export subsidized aluminum extrusions into markets.

[107] While on the subject of countervailing measures, the CBSA underlines that although the US International Trade Commission determined in October 2024 that the US industry had not been materially injured or threatened with material injury by aluminum extrusions,^{Footnote 81} the US DOC had nevertheless made affirmative final determinations of subsidizing against the multiple countries which included China.

Continued availability of subsidy programs for aluminum extrusions exporters/producers in China

[108] As indicated earlier, the GOC did not respond to the Subsidy ERQ. As a result, the CBSA relied on information on the administrative record and from the original investigation, the re-investigation and a normal value review on aluminum extrusions.

[109] As per China’s latest subsidy notification to the WTO, the domestic extruders identified 13 subsidies at the central government level and 40 additional subsidies from sub-central government levels which likely apply to Chinese producers of aluminum extrusions. Although China’s subsidy notification is presumed to be incomplete,^{Footnote 82} it nevertheless indicates that support programs are available or benefit the producers in China of aluminum extrusions.

[110] In its original investigation, the CBSA’s final determinations indicated that 56 subsidy programs were investigated, 15 of which were determined to have conferred benefits to the cooperative exporters.^{Footnote 83}

[111] At the conclusion of the re-investigation on February 20, 2012, the CBSA determined amounts of subsidy for the cooperative exporters.^{Footnote 84} The listing of the subsidy programs which conferred benefits were contained in the protected ruling letters issued to the cooperative exporters.

[112] On March 3, 2022, at the conclusion of the normal value review, the CBSA determined an amount of subsidy for the cooperative exporter.^{Footnote 85} The listing of the subsidy programs which conferred benefits were contained in the protected ruling letter issued to the cooperative exporter.^{Footnote 86}

[113] The results for the cooperative exporters in these proceedings demonstrate that subsidy programs continue to be available to Chinese exporters of aluminum extrusions.

Determination regarding likelihood of continued or resumed subsidizing

[114] Based on the information on the administrative record in respect of: countervailing measures imposed by other authorities on aluminum extrusions from China and continued availability of subsidy programs for aluminum extrusions exporters/producers in China, the CBSA has determined that the expiry of the order is likely to result in the continuation or resumption of subsidizing of aluminum extrusions from China.

Conclusion

[115] For the purpose of making determinations in this expiry review investigation, the CBSA conducted its analysis within the scope of the factors found under subsection 37.2(1) of the SIMR and considered any other factors relevant in the circumstances. Based on the foregoing analysis of pertinent factors and consideration of information on the administrative record, on April 24, 2025, the CBSA made a determination pursuant to paragraph 76.03(7)(a) of SIMA that the expiry of the order made by the CITT on January 13, 2020, in expiry review RR-2018-008 in respect of aluminum extrusions originating in or exported from China:

1. is likely to result in the continuation or resumption of dumping of the goods from China and
2. is likely to result in the continuation or resumption of subsidizing of the goods from China

Future action

[116] The CITT has now initiated its expiry review to determine whether the continued or resumed dumping and subsidizing are likely to result in injury. The CITT’s expiry review schedule indicates that it will make its decision by October 1, 2025.

[117] If the CITT determines that the expiry of the order with respect to the goods is likely to result in injury, the order will be continued in respect of those goods, with or without amendment. If this is the case, the CBSA will continue to levy anti-dumping and/or countervailing duties on dumped and/or subsidized importations of the subject goods.

[118] If the CITT determines that the expiry of the order with respect to the goods is not likely to result in injury, the order will expire in respect of those goods. Anti-dumping and/or countervailing duties would then no longer be levied on importations of the subject goods, and any anti-dumping and/or countervailing duties paid in respect of goods that were released after the date that the order was scheduled to expire will be returned to the importer.

Contact us

[119] For further information, please contact the SIMA Registry listed below:

Email: simaregistry-depotlmsi@cbsa-asfc.gc.ca