Absolutely. That would be one of the key situations that the anti-circumvention legislation is intended to address.
There are two key types of circumvention. The first would be a modification to a product that falls outside the existing scope of a trade remedy measure. This could be a modification that doesn't change the essential characteristics of the product or how it's ultimately used, but it does change it enough that it falls outside the scope of the measure. For example, we've had situations where the chemical composition of a steel product was changed by the addition of boron or of different chemical compounds, and we've also seen situations, for example, where a 4-inch steel pipe is made to be a 4.1-inch pipe such that it falls outside the scope of the measure. These would constitute changes to a product to make that product fall outside the scope of the measure.
The second type would be a change in origin. As I've previously alluded to, if an input good or an unfinished good is shipped to a third country and finished there, that may change the origin of the good such that it's no longer considered to originate in the subject country but deemed to be coming from a third country. Ultimately, the substantial proportion of the manufacturing of that good would still take place in the subject country. In these instances as well, based on certain criteria, if we find that the substantial proportion of the production is taking place in the subject country, we'd still be able to consider that a subject to the measure.