SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On January 8, 2026, Commerce published in the Federal Register the preliminary results of this administrative review.^[1] Commerce conducted verification of the questionnaire responses of respondent, De Matteis Agroalimentare S.p.A. (De Matteis), and the Government of Italy on April 14 through April 17, 2026 and April 20 through April 21, 2026, respectively.^[2] On April 24 and June 29, 2026, Commerce extended the time period for issuing the final results of this review by 53 days and seven days, respectively.^[3] Accordingly, the deadline for the final results is July 7, 2026.

For a complete description of the events that occurred since the Preliminary Results, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.^[4] The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at https://access.trade.gov/​frnotices.

Scope of the Order

The merchandise covered by the Order is pasta from Italy. For a complete description of the scope of the Order, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.^[5]

Analysis of Comments Received

All issues raised by interested parties in case briefs are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. The topics discussed and the issues raised by parties to which we responded in the Issues and Decision Memorandum are listed in the appendix to this notice.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

Based on comments received from interested parties, we made certain changes to the calculations for De Matteis, Pastificio Attilo Mastromauro-Granoro Srl (Granoro), and the non-selected companies. For a discussion of these changes, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

Methodology

Commerce conducted this administrative review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). For each of the subsidy programs found to be countervailable, we find that there is a subsidy, i.e., a government-provided financial contribution that gives rise to a benefit to the recipient, and that the subsidy is specific.^[6] For a full description of the methodology underlying all of Commerce's conclusions, including any determination that relied upon the use of adverse facts available, pursuant to sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

Rate for Non-Selected Companies Under Review

The Act and Commerce's regulations do not directly address the establishment of a rate to be applied to companies not selected for individual examination when Commerce limits its examination in an administrative review pursuant to section 777A(c)(2) of the Act. Generally, Commerce looks to section 705(c)(5) of the Act, which provides instructions for calculating the all-others rate in an investigation, for guidance when calculating the rate for companies that were not selected for individual examination in an administrative review. Section 777A(e)(2) of the Act provides that “the individual countervailable subsidy rates determined under subparagraph (A) shall be used to determine the all-others rate under section 705(c)(5) {of the Act}.” Under section 705(c)(5)(A) of the Act, the all-others rate is normally “an amount equal to the weighted average of the countervailable subsidy rates established for exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding any zero or de minimis countervailable subsidy rates, or determined entirely any rates determined entirely on the basis of facts available.”

Accordingly, to determine the rate for companies not selected for individual examination, Commerce's practice is to weight average the net subsidy rates for the selected mandatory respondents, excluding rates that are zero, de minimis, or based entirely on facts available.^[7] In this review, the final rates calculated for De Matteis and Granoro were above de minimis and not based ( printed page 46771) entirely on facts available. Because the rate calculated for both mandatory respondents is above de minimis and not based entirely on facts available, we continue to apply to the non-selected companies the weighted average of the net subsidy rates calculated for the mandatory respondents, which we calculated using the publicly-ranged sales data submitted by the mandatory respondents.^[8]

Final Results of Review

We find the following net countervailable subsidy rates exist for the period January 1, 2023, through December 31, 2023:

Disclosure

Commerce intends to disclose the calculations performed in connection with these final results of review to interested parties within five days after public announcement of the final results or, if there is no public announcement, within five days of the date of publication of the notice of final results in the Federal Register , in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Assessment

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(2), Commerce has determined, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, countervailing duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review, for the above-listed companies at the applicable ad valorem rates. Commerce intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP no earlier than 35 days after publication of the final results of this review in the Federal Register . If a timely summons is filed at the U.S. Court of International Trade, the assessment instructions will direct CBP not to liquidate relevant entries until the time for parties to file a request for a statutory injunction has expired ( i.e., within 90 days of publication).

Cash Deposit Requirements

In accordance with section 751(a)(1) of the Act, Commerce also intends to instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties in the amounts shown for the companies listed above for shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of these final results of this administrative review. For all non-reviewed firms, we will instruct CBP to continue to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties at the all-others rate or the most recent company-specific rate applicable to the company, as appropriate. These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

Administrative Protective Order

This notice also serves as a final reminder to parties subject to an administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order, is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.

Notification to Interested Parties

Commerce is issuing these final results and publishing this notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5).

Appendix

List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum

I. Summary

II. Background

III. Scope of the Order

IV. Changes Since the Preliminary Results

V. Non-Selected Rate

VI. Subsidies Valuation

VII. Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences

VIII. Analysis of Programs

IX. Discussion of the Issues

Comment 1: Whether To Find the Apprenticeship Program Specific as Adverse Facts Available (AFA)

Comment 2: Whether To Countervail the IRAP Deductions Program

Comment 3: Whether To Countervail the Energy Interruptibility Contracts Program

Comment 4: Whether the Tax Credit on Investments in Southern Regions According to Article 1, C.98-108, Law 208/2015 is Specific

Comment 5: Whether To Countervail Tax Programs Determined to be De Facto Specific in the Preliminary Results

Comment 6: Whether To Apply AFA to Granoro with Respect to the Energy Interruptibility Contracts Program

Comment 7: Whether To Revise its Benefit Calculations for De Matteis with Respect to the IRAP Deductions Program

Comment 8: Whether To Revise its Benefit Calculations for De Matteis with Respect to the Tax Credit for Energy Users and Tax Credit for Gas Users

Comment 9: Whether To Incorporate Changes to De Matteis's Total Sales Denominator as a Result of Verification

Comment 10: Whether To Adjust Granoro's Total Sales Denominator with Respect to Certain Transportation Costs, Returned Merchandise, and Non-Production Related Revenue

X. Recommendation

91 FR 46770