News

FEBRUARY 2016

4 February 2016: In rulings on two preliminary references, C & Clark International Ltd v The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (C-659/13) and Puma SE v Hauptzollamt Nürnberg (C-34/14), the European Court of Justice allowed traders Puma and Clarks to successfully claim illegality of AD duties on imports of footwear from China and Vietnam. However, the ECJ did not facilitate the recovery by lifting the time limits.

Following the ECJ’s annulment of AD duties on footwear from China and Vietnam in Brosmann Footwear (HK) and Others v Council (C-249/10 P) and Zhejiang Aokang Shos v Council, 247/10 P), it became clear that the EU’s failure to analyze MET claims filed by non-sampled Chinese exporters violated the Basic AD Regulation. However, the judgments in those cases were effective only against the complainants, which left most EU traders and importers without the recourse to recover the illegal AD duties paid. Both Puma and Clark sought to rely on Brosmann to recover the paid AD duties in national proceedings before local customs authorities. Those proceedings had been stayed, pending a preliminary reference response from the ECJ on whether both traders could continue with their challenge.

Given that the substantive issue had already been resolved in Brosmann, the main issue in the preliminary reference was whether Puma and Clark’s claims of invalidity were admissible, given that – as importers/traders that had been involved in the underlying AD proceeding – both companies arguably could have directly challenged the AD duties in an action for annulment in EU courts, but neither company has done that.

The ECJ found that both companies could challenge the duties indirectly through a preliminary reference, because they were not “undoubtedly entitled” to request a direct annulment. The ECJ differentiated their situation from other types of importers and traders that had, in prior cases, been found to be “directly and individually” concerned by the regulation in question.
Addressing the substantive issues, the ECJ followed Brosmann and again found the EU institutions violated article 2(7)(b) of the EU Basic AD Regulation (MET claims), and also article 9(5) (individual treatment). The court rejected other claims of invalidity.

The ECJ made three other important legal findings. First, the ECJ refused to analyze EU law in view of the WTO agreements and judged the AD duties only by their compliance with the Basic AD Regulation, and not with international law. Secondly, the ECJ clarified that in cases where EU law is invalidated with respect to only some applicants, national courts are not allowed to extend that invalidity to other parties that had not challenged these laws directly before EU courts. Third, the court did not agree that invalidation of the regulation based on which AD duties had been collected amounted to an unforeseen event or “force majeure”, which would allow the national authorities to lift the three-year limit on filing claims for recovery of duties unjustly paid, specified in article 236 of the Customs Code.
Opinion in Joined Cases C‑659/13 and C‑34/14

JANUARY 2016

29 January 2016: EC imposes provisional AD duties on HFP rebar from China. The investigation was launched, at the request of EUROFER, in April 2015. In December 2015, the Commission ordered registration of imports. Although AD margins were between 51.5-66%, the injury margins were much smaller and thus duties of only 9 and 13% were imposed.
Commission Regulation (EU) 2016/113

29 January 2016: EC withdraws price undertaking for Trina Solar, granted in the context of AD/AS measures imposed on imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components from China. Pending an ongoing expiry review, regular AD/AS duties will apply.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/115

29 January 2016: EC launches an expiry review to determine whether to extend AD duties on okoumé plywood from China. AD duties, ranging from 6.5% to 66.7%, have been in place since 2005.
Notice 2016/C 34/06

29 January 2016: EU publishes a notice of impending expiry of AD duties on imports of hand pallet trucks and their essential parts from China and Thailand. The duties will expire on 14 October 2016, unless a request for an expiry review is timely filed.
Notice 2016/C 34/07

DECEMBER 2013

20 December 2013: EU terminates AD duties on imports of synthetic fibre ropes from India. Duties were first imposed in 1998 and – in 2004 – extended for another five years. Following the second expiry review, the duties were extended in 2010 for another three years. In March 2013, the EU published a notice of impending expiry, requesting the EU industry to file a duly substantiated request within three months. Apparently, no such request was filed, and accordingly, on 23 December 2013, the duties will expire.
Notice 2013/C 373/11

20 December 2013: EU extends AD duties to imports of certain open mesh fabrics of glass fibres from India and Indonesia. In August 2011, the EU imposed AD duties ranging from 48.4% to 62.9% on imports of open mesh fabrics of glass fibres from China. In July 2012, those duties were extended to imports from Malaysia, as the EU found that Chinese imports were transshipped to the EU via Malaysia to avoid AD duties. In April 2013, at the request of four EU producers (Saint-Gobain Adfors CZ s.r.o., Tolnatext Fonalfeldolgozó és Műszakiszövet-gyártó Bt., Valmieras stikla šķiedra AS and Vitrulan Technical Textiles GmbH), the EU initiated another anti-circumvention investigation, this time on imports from India and Indonesia, to determine whether imports from China were being transshipped through these countries to avoid AD duties. As required by law, the EU examined whether (1) there was a change in the pattern of trade between China, India and Indonesia, and the EU; (2) there was sufficient due cause or economic justification for this change except for imposition of AD duties on imports from China; (3) there was evidence of injury; and (4) there was evidence of dumping. The EU found that imports from China significantly dropped after the imposition of a provisional AD duty in February 2011, while imports from India and Indonesia to the EU substantially increased during the same period. At the same time, exports of the product from China to India and Indonesia dramatically increased. Only one Indian producer, and no Indonesian producers, cooperated in the investigation. The EU also found the remaining elements met, i.e., that change in trade patterns had no other justification but avoidance of duties, that imports were sold at dumped prices causing injury to EU producers. As a result, the EU established that Chinese imports of open mesh fabrics of glass fibres from China are being transshipped through India and Indonesia, and extended the AD duty applicable to imports from China (62.9 %) to all imports from India and Indonesia, except for the only Indian cooperating exporter, Montex Glass Fibre Industries Pvt.Ltd., which was found to be a legitimate Indian producer and was thus exempted from the duties.
Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1371/2013

19 December 2013: EU initiates an anti-subsidy (AS) investigation into imports of polyester staple fibres from China, India and Vietnam. The investigation is initiated in response to a complaint filed by the European Man-made Fibres Association (CIRFS), an association of EU producers. The investigation covers synthetic staple fibres of polyesters, not carded, combed or otherwise processed for spinning, currently falling within CN code 5503 20 00. The complaint alleges that exporters in these countries benefiting from subsidies and export their products to the EU causing injury to the EU industry. For China, the complainants allege the following subsidy programs:

  • government provision of input products for less than adequate remuneration,
  • government entrustment and direction of private suppliers,
  • pref­erential lending to the PSF industry by state-owned banks and government entrustment and direction of private banks,
  • development grants and interest subsidies for the textile sector,
  • the ‘Go Global’ Special Fund,
  • the Trade Promotion Fund for Agriculture, Light Industry and Textile Products,
  • income tax exemptions on foreign (Investment) Enterprises and on dividend income between qualified resident enterprises,
  • income tax reductions for recognised high and new technology enterprises, in special economic zones, and for export-oriented enterprises,
  • tax credits of up to 40 % of the purchase value of domestically produced equipment,
  • tariffs and/or value-added tax exemptions on imported equipment and on purchases of domestically manufactured equipment,
  • government provision of land-use rights, electricity, and water, and
  • a number of regional programs in Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Guangdong, and Shanghai provinces.

For India, the complainants allege the following subsidy programs:

  • duty exemptions under the Duty Entitlement Passbook Scheme, the Advance Authorization Scheme, the Export Promotion Capital Goods Scheme, the Focus Market Scheme and the Focus Product Scheme, and the Duty Drawback Scheme,
  • tax and duty exemptions and reductions in Export Oriented Units and the Special Economic Zones, the Export Credit Scheme, the Income Tax Exemption Scheme, the Incremental Exports Incentivisation Scheme, the Duty free import authorisation scheme, the Market development assistance scheme and loan guarantees, and
  • a number of regional schemes in the states of Gujarat, West Bengal and Maharashtra.

For Vietnam, the complainants allege the following subsidy programs:

  • government provision of goods and services to the PSF industry for less than adequate remuneration (direct and through state-owned enterprises, as well as for domestic investment),
  • import and export tax, duty and rent exemptions and reimbursements (Dinh Vu Industrial Zone, Hi-tech parks, industrial zones and parks, for raw materials and supplies, for foreign investment
  • preferential loans, grants and guarantees (direct, through government-owned banks and through entrustment and direction of private banks (Dinh Vu Industrial Zone, to PSF industry, Hi-tech parks, industrial zones and parks, and for foreign or domestic investment),
  • government provision of land for less than adequate remuneration, and exemptions or reductions from land and water rents and taxes (e.g., for domestic investment,
  • interest rate subsidies and supports (e.g. Hi-tech parks, industrial zones and parks),
  • export credit support (e.g. Hi-tech parks, industrial zones and parks, or for domestic investment),
  • income tax incentives, including accelerated depreciation (e.g. for foreign investment).

The Complaint alleges that imports from the covered countries have increased which had a negative impact on EU industry, including price depression, declining market share of the EU industry, which led to substantial adverse effects on the overall performance and financial situation of the industry. The investigation will last up to 13 months, with a final decision expected in January 2015. Provisional AS duties may be imposed within 9 months, i.e., by end of September 2014.
Notice 2013/C 372/12

19 December 2013: EU initiates a partial interim review of AD measures on imports of filament glass fibre products from China. The purpose of the review, initiated at the request of the European Glass Fibre Producers Association, is to determine whether the circumstances on the basis of which the measures were imposed have permanently changed so that the currently existing measures no longer offset the effects of injurious dumping. In particular, the applicant alleged that two of the main EU producers have consolidated, another EU producer ceased its production, and that measures have not removed the injury suffered by the EU industry in view of the continuing price depression exerted by Chinese imports, which had negative effects on the EU industry. The review will last 15 months.
Notice 2013/C 371/07

19 December 2013: EU initiates an expiry review of AD duties on imports of welded tubes and pipes of iron or non-alloy steel from Belarus, China, Russia and Ukraine and terminates AD duties on imports of welded tubes and pipes of iron or non-alloy steel from Thailand. Duties on imports from the first four countries were first imposed in December 2008. Duties on imports from Thailand were first imposed in September 2002 and continued – following an expiry review – in December 2008. The purpose of the expiry review, initiated at the request of the Defence Committee of the welded steel tubes industry of the EU, an ad hoc coalition of EU producers, is to determine whether duties on imports from Belarus, China, Russia and Ukraine should be continued for another five years. The review will last 15 months, and the final decision is due in March 2015. As no duly substantiated request was filed for Thailand, duties on these imports were allowed to lapse.
Notice 2013/C 372/10 (expiry review for Belarus, China, Russia and Ukraine)
Notice 2013/C 372/11 (expiry of duties for Thailand)

18 December 2013: EU initiates an anti-circumvention investigation into imports of open mesh fabrics of glass fibres from China. The purpose of the investigation, initiated at the request of four EU producers: Saint-Gobain Adfors CZ s.r.o., Tolnatext Fonalfeldolgozo, Valmieras ‘Stikla Skiedra’ AS and Vitrulan Technical Textiles GmbH, is to determine whether AD measures imposed in 2011 are being circumvented by imports of a slightly modified product. According to data submitted, exporters are circumventing AD duties imposed on open mesh fabrics of glass fiber classified in CN codes ex 7019 51 00 and ex 7019 59 00, by exporting to the EU a product that is slightly modified through increased proportion of glass fibre rovings in the open mesh, so that they predominate by weight and result in the end product being classified in a different customs code (CN 7019 40 00) as woven glass fibre fabrics of rovings, thus avoiding the payment of AD duties. This allegation is confirmed by a change in trade patterns, showing a significant increase in EU imports of product covered by AD duties, and a significant increase of product not subject to duties, without sufficient due cause or economic justification. The investigation will last nine months.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 1356/2013

17 December 2013: EU extends AD duties on imports of peroxosulphates (persulphates) from China. Duties were first imposed in 2007. In October 2012, at the request of the only two EU producers: RheinPerChemie GmbH & Co. KG and United Initiators GmbH & Co. KG, the EU initiated an expiry review to determine whether AD duties should be continued for another five years. In the review, only one Chinese exporter – United Initiators (Shanghai) Co. Ltd – and no importers cooperated. As virtually all Chinese exports were carried out by the only Chinese exporter exempted from duties, the dumping analysis was performed based on external sources (allegations in the expiry review request, data from US proceeding, EUROSTAT and others). Based on 3rd country exports of the only cooperating producer (showing dumping in 3rd countries), pricing of Chinese imports, experience from previous revocation of duties in 2001 which had led to massive import increase, price attractiveness of the EU market, and spare Chinese capacity, the EU concluded that revocation of duties would lead to recurrence of dumping. While the EU did not find continued injury (high production, increased sales, price, market share and profit­s), it did find the likelihood of recurrence of injury, based on spare Chinese capacity, dumping on 3rd country markets, and attractiveness of the EU market to Chinese exporters. Accordingly, the EU extended the measures for another 5 years.
Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1343/2013

17 December 2013: EU repeals AD duties on imports of iron or steel ropes and cables from the Russian Federation. Duties were first imposed in 2001 and – following an expiry review in 2007 – prolonged for another five years. In October 2012, the EU initiated an expiry review to determine whether AD duties should be continued for another five years. In the review, only Severstal, the main Russian exporter, and its Italian subsidiary (related importer) cooperated representing exporting interests. No unrelated importers cooperated. Four EU producers were sampled. In the review, the EU established that the EU industry did not suffer material injury, because it managed to maintain its market share, prices slightly increased, stocks remained reasonable while production and consumption increased, and the industry remained profitable throughout the period considered, although profits were lower a few years before. Moreover, the EU also established that if the measures were to lapse, the industry would not suffer injury either, because the volume of imports was low, spare capacity of Russian exporters was limited, domestic Russian market was growing thus spare capacity could be directed to the domestic market, and prices of Russian exports to other 3rd markets were higher than to the EU. Accordingly, the EU terminated the duties.
Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1342/2013

NOVEMBER 2013

30 November 2013: EU initiates an expiry review and two partial interim reviews of AD duties on imports of citric acid from China. Duties were first imposed in December 2008 and included price undertakings for seven exporters. In September 2012, the Commission withdrew the undertaking for one of the Chinese exporters, Laiwu Taihe Biochemistry, due to its plans to export to the EU other products not covered by the measures, which would make oversight of the undertaking difficult. The request for continuation of duties, as well as for a partial interim review to recalculate the dumping margin for Laiwu Taihe Biochemistry was filed by the only two EU producers of citric acid: SA Citrique Belge and Jungbunzlauer Austria AG. At the same time, the EU decided to self-initiate another partial interim review to assess whether the undertakings should be amended on the account of changes in costs. The final decision in the proceedings is due in February 2015.
Notice 2013/C 351/06

29 November 2013: EU initiates an expiry review of AD duties on imports of monosodium glutamate from China and initiates a new AD investigation into imports of monosodium glutamate from Indonesia. Duties on imports from China have been in force since December 2008. Requests for their continuation, as well as for imposition of new duties on imports from Indonesia, were filed by Ajinomoto Foods Europe SAS, the only EU producer. The final decision in both proceedings is due in February 2015. Decision on provisional measures on imports from Indonesia is expected in August 2015.
Notice 2013/C 349/05 (expiry review for China)
Notice 2013/C 349/04 (new investigation for Indonesia)

27 November 2013: EU imposes preliminary AD duties on imports of solar glass from China. AD and AS investigations were opened in, respectively, February and April 2013 at the request of EU Pro Sun, an industry association. While dumping margins ranged from 31.9% to 86.1%, the measures were imposed at the injury margin, resulting in much lower duties. Accordingly, provisional duties range from 17.1% to 42.1%. The proceeding will continue until May 2014. A decision on provisional measures in the parallel AS investigation will be made in January 2014.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 1205/2013

26 November 2013: EU imposes definitive AD duties on imports of bioethanol from Argentina and Indonesia and terminates the parallel AS investigation. Parallel AD and AS investigations were opened in August and November 2012 at the request of the European Biodiesel Board. The Commission ordered registration of imports in January and April 2013, respectively. In May 2013, provisional AD duties were imposed ranging from 0 €/MT for Indonesian exporter PT Ciliandra Perkasa to 104.92 €/MT for Argentine exporter Aceitera General Deheza S.A. and non-cooperating Argentine exporters. No provisional AS duties had been imposed. In the final phase of the AD investigation, the EU maintained its definition of Union industry (excluding certain EU producers relying on Argentine imports) and its definition of the product concerned (declining claims for certain production exclusions based on different CAS numbers, different production processes and possible different uses). The EU also rejected claims for End-Use Relief. The EU reaffirmed its provisional findings that the home biodiesel markets of both Argentina and Indonesia were heavily regulated (mandatory blending at State-fixed prices ensuring high profitability, State-ownership in Indonesia, local-content requirement in Argentina) and used constructed normal value (NV) for dumping calculations. In its NV calculations, the EU rejected exporters’ cost structure due to raw material distortions (deferential export tax for soya in Argentina and palm oil for Indonesia) and adjusted these costs to reflect international prices. The investigation confirmed preliminary findings that the EU domestic industry suffered injury caused by dumped imports and that the Union interest did not prevent imposition of duties. Accordingly, the EU imposed definitive AD duties based on the injury margin for Argentina, and either dumping or injury margin for Indonesia. Simultaneously, the AS investigation has been terminated, as the EBB has withdrawn the request for this investigation.
Definitive AD Duties: Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1194/2013
Termination of AS Investigation: Commission Regulation (EU) No 1198/2013

9 November 2013: EU imposes definitive AD duties on imports of stainless steel wires from India. Parallel AS and AD investigations were opened in August 2012 at the request of EUROFER. Preliminary AD duties, imposed in May 2013, ranged from 12.9% for Raajratna, Metal Industries to 27.8% for non-participating exporters, while provisional AS duties from 0% to 4.3%. In September 2013, the EU imposed definitive AS duties. At the provisional phase of the AD investigation, the EU applied „facts available”, as it found that data submitted by exporters in AD questionnaire responses was not always reliable. In the final phase of the investigation, the EU expanded the sample by three additional companies, and revisited some accounting, cost-allocation and raw material purchase recording problems. As a result of subsequent clarifications, the EU accepted certain information previously rejected, and did not apply „facts available” to one exporter. Attempts to reconcile purchases of raw materials by other two exporters, though improved, were however still found unsatisfactory and „fast available” continued to apply. The investigation confirmed preliminary findings that the EU domestic industry suffered injury caused by dumped imports and that the Union interest did not prevent imposition of duties. Accordingly, the EU imposed definitive AD duties based on the dumping margins, as injury margins were higher. After subtraction of previously imposed AS duties, the EU imposed AD duties ranging from 0% for a newly sampled respondent, Marco Bars and Wires, to 12.5% for Raajratna Metal Industries and non-cooperating respondents.
Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1106/2013

7 November 2013: EU terminates AD investigation against imports of seamless pipes and tubes from China. The investigation, covering pipes and tubes with an external diameter above 406,4 mm, was initiated in February 2013. In September 2013, the complainants withdrew the complaint. There being no Union interest factors against termination, the EU closed the proceeding.
Commission Decision 2013/639/EU

1 November 2013: EU publishes a notice of impending expiry of AD duties on imports of wire rod from China. The duties will expire on 6 August 2014, unless a request for an expiry review is timely filed.
Commission Notice 2013/C 318/06

OCTOBER 2013

25 October 2013: EU terminates a partial interim review of AD measures on iron or steel fasteners from China, as extended to imports from Malaysia. The review was initiated in May 2013, at the request of a Malaysian exporter, Malaysian Precision Manufacturing SDN BHD, which claimed that it was a legitimate Malaysian producer and thus that duties on Chinese imports, as extended to imports consigned from Malaysia in 2011, should not apply to it. However, during the course of the investigation, the exporter was not able to provide the requested information and withdrew the request. Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1026/2013.

25 October 2013: EU initiates an expiry review of AD duties on imports of prepared or preserved citrus fruits (namely mandarins, etc.) from China. The duties were first imposed in 2008. The request was first filed by Federación Nacional de Asociaciones de Transformados Vegetales y Alimentos Procesados. The review will last 15 months. Commission Notice 2013/C 310/09.

16 October 2013: EU initiates expiry reviews of AD duties on imports of sulphanilic acid from India and China and AS duties on sulphanilic acid from India. The duties were first imposed in 2002, and subsequently extended in 2008. CUF — Químicos Industriais, the sole producer in the EU, requested the review. The review will last 15 months.
AS expiry review: Commission Notice 2013/C 300/04
AD expiry review: Commission Notice 2013/C 300/05

15 October 2013: EU initiates an expiry review of AD duties on imports of tube and pipe fittings of iron or steel from the Republic of Korea and Malaysia. The duties were first imposed in 2002, and subsequently extended in 2008. The request was filed by Defence Committee of the Steel Butt-Welding Fittings Industry of the European Union. The review will last 15 months. Commission Notice 2013/C 299/05.

11 October 2013: Following the European Court of Justice judgments in cases C-249/10P (Brosmann) and C-247/10P (Zhejiang Aokang Shoes Co. Ltd), the EU reopens the original AD investigation into imports of footwear with uppers of leather originating in the People’s Republic of China and Vietnam to comply with these judgments. All parties to the original proceeding can register within 15 days.
Commission Notice 2013/C 295/06

4 October 2013: EU publishes a notice of impending expiry of AD and AS duties on imports of biodiesel from the United States. The duties will expire on 11 July 2014, unless a request for an expiry review is timely filed.
Notice with respect to AS duties: Commission Notice 2013/C 289/06
Notice with respect to AD duties: Commission Notice 2013/C 289/07

SEPTEMBER 2013

25 September 2013: EU retroactively lowers AS duties on imports of polyethylene terephthalate from Pakistan. After the AS duties were first imposed in 2010, Novatex Ltd., a Pakistani exporter, challenged them in court and won. In its judgement in case T-556/10, issued in October 2012, the General Court agreed with Novatex that the failure by the EU to consider the revision of Novatex’ tax return when calculating its anti-subsidy margin resulted in illegalities of the duties. To comply with this judgement, the EU reopened this proceeding in May 2013. The result of this procedure was that the specific AS duties applicable to Novatex and, since Novatex was the only Pakistani exporter, to all imports from Pakistan, should be retroactively lowered from EUR 44,02 per tonne to EUR 35,39 per tonne.
Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 917/2013

19 September 2013: EU publishes notices of impending expiry of AD duties. AD duties on imports of candles, tapers and the like from China will expire on 15 May 2014, unless a request for an expiry review is timely filed. Likewise, AD duties on imports of PSC wires and strands from China will expire on 14 May 2014, unless a request for an expiry review is timely filed.
Notice of impending expiry 2013/C 270/09 (candles/tapers)
Notice of impending expiry 2013/C 270/10 (PSC wires and strands)

13 September 2013: EU General Court rejects challenges to Council decision to continue AD duties on polyester staple fibres from Korea and China. The challenge was brought in December 2008 by Huvis Corp., a South Korean exporter, and a number of Chinese exporters. Over the years, various measures against PSF imports had been in place from multiple countries, including Taiwan, India, South Korea, China, South Africa, Australia, Indonesia, Belarus and Thailand. However, in 2007, it seemed that the tide of protecting the EU PSF industry has shifted, when the Commission – investigating a new complaint against PSF imports from Taiwan and Malaysia – proposed not to impose them and to terminate the proceeding, because they would be against the Community interest. The Commission’s proposal was never adopted, as the complainants withdrew the complaint and the Commission – pursuant to Article 9(1) of the Basic Regulation – terminated the proceeding, concluding that Community interest did not warrant the continuation of the investigation. Shortly afterwards, the Commission self-initiated an interim review to see whether measures on other countries, including South Korea and China, were still warranted, on Community interest grounds. This review led to a seemingly inconsistent result, when the Council decided in 2008 that measures were, in fact, still needed and were in Community interest. It is the result of this interim review, which was challenged by the the Korean and Chinese exporters, who considered that continuation of the duties against them, while refusing to impose duties against their competitors from Taiwan and Malaysia just one year earlier, was discriminatory.
In cases T-536/08 Huvis Corp. v. Council and T-537/08 Cixi et al. v. Council, the General Court rejected these claims. The court concluded that the legal test was different for deciding whether Community interest required, on the one hand, continuation of a new AD investigation after the withdrawal of complaint (as was the case with Malaysian and Taiwanese imports), and, on the other, removal of duties that had already been in place (as was the case with Korean and Chinese imports). The Court also noted that the proceedings were separate and evaluated different time periods. Accordingly, the principle of non-discrimination did not require the same result in two different proceedings and dismissed both actions.
T-536/08 Huvis Corp. v. Council
T-537/08 Cixi et al. v. Council
Notices in the Official Journal

13 September 2013: Following an expiry review, EU extends AD duties on imports of prepared or preserved sweetcorn in kernels from Thailand for another five years. The duties were first imposed in 2007 and since then amended twice, including by revoking undertakings that had been previously granted to Thai exporters. In June 2012, following a request from the Association Euro­péenne des Transformateurs de Maïs Doux, the EU initiated an expiry review to see whether the duties should be maintained. In the review, the EU concluded that the EU industry – although improving – was still in a fragile state and that the presence of dumped imports prevented full recovery. Moreover, the EU concluded that due to high prices in the EU market, Thai exporters would be tempted to export to the EU market, if the duties were to be removed. Accordingly, the duties were extended for additional five years. An interesting factor in the case was that the Commission needed to tailor its injury and dumping analysis to account for existence of two distinct markets: the retailer market and own-brand market.
Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 875/2013

12 September 2013: EU extends the scope of AD duties on imports of molybdenum wire from China. In June 2010, the EU imposed definitive AD duties on imports of molybdenum wire, containing by weight at least 99,95 % of molybdenum, of which the maximum cross-sectional dimension exceeds 1,35 mm but does not exceed 4,0 mm. In November 2012, the EC received a complaint that Chinese exporters circumvented these measures by exporting molybdenum wire with a slighly lower molybdenum content than that envisioned in existing AD measures – 99.95%. Accordingly, in December 2012, the EU initiated an anti-circumvention investigation. As a result of this investigation, the EU concluded that AD measures on molybdenum wire, containing by weight 99.95% of molybdenum, are being circumvented by imports of molybdenum wire, containing by weight between 97% and 99.95% of molybdenum. The EU found that there was no economic advantage to lowering the molybdenum content and adding small amounts of other chemicals, usually lanthanum, except to circumventing the existing measures. Accordingly, the EU extended the existing AD duties to imports of molybdenum wire, containing by weight at least 97 % of molybdenum, of which the maximum cross-sectional dimension exceeds 1,35 mm but does not exceed 4,0 mm.
Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 871/2013

7 September 2013: EU imposes definitive AS duties on imports of stainless steel wires from India. Parallel AS and AD investigations were opened in August 2012 at the request of EUROFER. Preliminary AS duties, imposed in May 2013, ranged from 0% for Viraj Profiles to 4.3% for Raajratna Metal Industries and non-participating companies, while provisional AD duties, imposed the same day, ranged from 12.9% to 27.8%. In the AS investigation, the EU identified essentially 5 subsidy schemes: (i) the Duty Draw-back Scheme (which could take the form of the Duty Entitlement Passbook Scheme, the Duty Drawback Scheme, or the Advance Authorisation Scheme); (ii) Export Promotion Capital Goods Scheme; (iii) Export Credit Scheme; (iv) Focus Market Scheme; and (v) Special Economic Zones/Export Oriented Units Scheme. In the final phase of the investigation, the EU concluded that the Export Credit Scheme was not countervailable. The investigation confirmed preliminary findings that the EU domestic industry suffered injury caused by subsidized imports and that the Union interest did not prevent imposition of duties. Accordingly, the EU imposed definitive AS duties, ranging from 0% for Viraj Profiles and KEI Industries (found not to have used most of the subsidy programs) to 3.7% for Raajratna Metal Industries. The AD investigation continues for another 2 months.
Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 861/2013

APRIL 2013

26 April 2013: European Commission responds to Parliamentary Question re registration of imports of solar panels from China. The Netherlands’ Judith Merkies (S&D) inquired about plans to retroactively impose duties and their impact on EU user industries.
Question for written answer E-002027/13
Commission Answer

25 April 2013: European Commission responds to Parliamentary Question re circumvention of AD duties on imports of silicon metal from China. Poland’s Zbigniew Ziobro (EFD) and Jacek Włosowicz (EFD) inquired about the delay in Commission’s launch of an anti-circumvention investigation against circumventing imports from Taiwan and the circumvention’s impact Member States.
Question for written answer E-001663-13
Commission Answer

22 April 2013: European Commission responds to Parliamentary Question re possible AD investigation into imports of cod from Norway. Denmark’s Ole Christensen (S&D) inquired about Commission’s intentions regarding Norway’s exports of significant quantities of cod into the EU market.
Question for written answer E-002017/13
Commission answer

MARCH 2013

19 March 2013: European Commission responds to Parliamentary Question re EU’s AD duties on imports of certain prepared or preserved citrus fruits (namely mandarins) from China. Spain’s Eva Ortiz Vilella (PPE) inquired about possible retroactive application of reimposed duties following ECJ’s invalidation of previous measures, and about future plans.
Question for written answer P-001645/13
Commission’s answer

OCTOBER 2012

10 October 2012: EU initiates an expiry review of AD duties on imports of peroxosulphates (persulphates) from China. The duties were first imposed in 2007. The review will last 15 months. EU Commission Notice 2013/C 300/05

SEPTEMBER 2012

26 September 2012: EU initiates an anti-circumvention investigation into imports of bicycles from Indonesia, Malaysia, Sri Lanka and Tunisia and subjects such imports to registration. The purpose of the investigation is to determine whether these imports are, in fact, Chinese bikes transshipped through these countries to avoid EU dumping duties, first imposed on imports from China in 1993. The investigation will last for 9 months. The parallel anti-subsidy investigation into imports from China, began in April 2012, and an interim review analyzing the entire scheme of AD duties on bicycles from China and related exemptions, began in March 2012, will continue separately.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 875/2012

19 September 2012: EU imposes provisional duties, ranging from 13.2% to 57.8%, on imports of certain organic coated steel products from China. The investigation was launched in December 2011, following a complaint from Eurofer. In view of large number of EU producers and Chinese exporters, the EU selected six largest EU producers and – in light of problems with finding cooperating companies – only two Chinese exporters for the sample. Two companies filed for market economy treatment (MET) and both were rejected – consistent with EU’s practice – for government distortions in the pricing of steel (government ownership of steel mills, inclusion of steel mills in five-year plans, and export duties on coke, key raw material). Some company-specific reasons for denial of MET were invoked as well. In line with the ECJ’s Brosmann judgment, MET application from the non-sampled company was analyzed and verified. Two sampled companies requested, and obtained, IT. As the South Korean producer withdrew its cooperation, the EU used Canada as the analogue country. The EU found material injury, finding that all factors related to EU industry deteriorated, including, in the context of decreasing consumption (14%), market share increase increased 14%, while EU sales volume and market share decreased (13% and 3.9%, respectively). Considering that all dumping margins were higher than the level of injury, the EU imposed provisional measures at the injury level: 13.2%, 29.2% and 55.3% for the sampled producers, 42.5% for the cooperating producers not in the sample, and 57.8% for non-cooperating producers. The final determination is due in March 2013.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 845/2012

18 September 2012: EU imposes provisional duties, ranging from 13% to 35.4%, on imports of certain aluminium foils in rolls from China. The investigation was launched in December 2011, following a complaint from Eurométaux. In view of large number of EU producers and Chinese exporters, the EU selected four largest EU producers and three Chinese exporters for the sample. As only two unrelated importers cooperated, no sampling was necessary. As the distortion of the price of aluminium has been used in the past to deny MET to Chinese exporters, the EU paid „information visits” to the London Metals Exchange and the Shanghai Metals Markets. It appears that a key visit to the Shanghai Futures Exchange was cancelled by the SHFE. Two companies filed for market economy treatment (MET) and both were rejected – consistent with EU’s practice – for government distortions in the pricing of aluminium. Some company-specific reasons for denial of MET were invoked as well. In line with the ECJ’s Brosmann judgment, MET application from the non-sampled company was analyzed and verified. All sampled companies and one non-sampled obtained IT. The EU changed the analogue country from USA to Turkey, as only a Turkish company agreed to cooperate. The EU also found material injury, considering that while imports increased 125%, EU sales volume and market share decreased, stocks increased 15%, there was significant undercutting (10%), and cash flow and profitability of EU producers were seriously affected, with slight (around 5%) drops in production, sales volume and prices, and employees. In addition, the situation of the EU industry worsened in the ultimate year of the POI. Considering that all dumping margins were higher than the level of injury, the EU imposed provisional measures at the injury level: 13%, 15.5% and 16.3% for the sampled producers, 15.5% for the cooperating producers not in the sample, and 35.4% for non-cooperating producers. The final determination is due in March 2013.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 833/2012

15 September 2012: EU decides not to impose provisional AD duties on imports of white (elemental or yellow) phosphorus from Kazakhstan. The investigation was initiated on 17 December 2011 at the request of the sole EU producer, Thermphos International BV of the Netherlands. In the summer of 2012, the European Commission proposed imposing provisional AD duties in the amount of 12.2%. During an AD Advisory Committee meeting in July 2012, most EU Member States voted against the proposal, with only one in favor. Some of the doubts expressed throughout the proceeding included methodology for calculation of dumping, as well as the real purpose of the case: to increase the competitiveness of the EU producer, but not in the phosphorus market, but in the downstream market. It appears that the European Commission has accepted the opposition from the Member States and decided not to impose the duties.

8 September 2012: EU revokes a price undertaking for Laiwu Taihe („Laiwu”), a Chinese exporter of citric acid from China. AD duties on citric acid from China were imposed in 2008, with Laiwu obtaining the lowest duty: 6,6%. At the same time, Laiwe obtained an undertaking, i.e., its exports to the EU were free of any duties, as long as the conditions of the undertaking were met. In 2011, Laiwe informed the EU of its intention to start producing other products, not covered by the undertaking. The EU considered that this would lead to a risk of cross-compensation (when products covered by the undertaking and not covered were sold to the same customers), a risk which could be addressed only within the context of an interim review and not in the context of a revised undertaking. Accordingly, the EU withdrew Laiwu’s undertaking, subjecting its exports to the EU to its original AD rate of 6,6%.
Commission Decision 2012/501/EU.

6 September 2012: EU initiates an AD investigation into imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (i.e. cells and wafers) from China. The proceeding extends to crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules or panels and cells and wafers – of thickness not exceeding 400 μm – of the type used in crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules or panels. Excluded are (i) portable solar chargers of less than six cells that supply electricity to devices or charge batteries, (ii) thin film photovoltaic products, and (iii) crystalline silicon photovoltaic products perma­nently integrated into electrical goods that consume electricity generated by the integrated crystalline silicon photovoltaic cell(s), where the function of the electrical goods is other than power generation. The case was initiated at the request of SolarWorld AG and Sovello AG, as well as up to 20 other EU producers that requested their names to be kept confidential. The allegation of dumping in the complaint is based on a comparison of the normal value (due to China’s non-market economy status, established on the basis of constructed cost of manufacturing & SGA expenses in an analogue country, the United States of America) with the export price (at ex-works level) to the EU. The complainants also alleged that imports have increased overall in absolute terms and in terms of market share, having, among other consequences, a negative impact on the level of prices charged by the EU industry and the market share, resulting in substantial adverse effects on the financial situation of the EU industry. All interested parties have 15 days, i.e., until 21 September, to register. Other specific deadlines are set out in the notice of initiation.
European Commission Notice of Initiation 2012/C 269/04.

4 September 2012: Following a partial interim review, EU lowers AD duties on imports of certain seamless pipes and tubes from Ukraine for Ukrainian producer Interpipe. AD duties on imports from Croatia, Russia and Ukraine were first imposed in 2006. Interpipe obtained a duty of 25.1%. Following court litigation, its duty was decreased – in June 2012 – to 17.7%. Simultaneously with court litigation, Interpipe has requested a partial interim review to prove that dumping has decreased and thus duties should be lowered. This review was initiated in July 2011. In the review, the EU made certain changes in its dumping methodology as compared to the original investigation. Instead of aggregating all sales and production data to calculate one AD margin for Interpipe, it first calculated a dumping margin for each of the two Interpipe producers and only then combined those margins to calculate one, weighted-average dumping margin for Interpipe; and in view of the rise in energy prices in Ukraine, the EU did not make an energy cost adjustment. As a result of the review, the EU calculated a new, lower, AD margin for the Interpipe group of 13.8%.
Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 795/2012.

4 September 2012: Following an expiry review, EU extends AD duties on imports of lever arm mechanisms from China for additional five years. EU first imposed AD duties – in the amount of 27.1% and 47.4% – in 2006. In 2011, following a request from three EU producers, an expiry review was initiated. In the review, two EU producers (in Italy and Slovakia) were sampled. No importers or exporters participated. The EU found unreliable all sources of data regarding export price and has not made a dumping calculation. Instead, the EU focused on the likelihood of continuation of dumping. The EU based its normal value calculation on EU prices, and the export price on prices from China to third countries (invoices were submitted as evidence to substantiate the request for the review). The comparison showed a dumping margin over 30%. Based on facts available, the EU found that if the measures were repealed, imports would increase (relying, inter alia, on very large production capacity, additional spare capacity, high EU prices and large EU consumption, over 50% of world demand, and attempts to circumvent the duties by customs misclassification). Consumption decreased 12%. As for imports, market share of subject imports decreased from 51% to 7%-15% (still accounting for 85% to 95% of all imports), imports prices increased 18%, but still resulted in undercutting of about 20%. Although the situation of the EU industry improved (production constant, capacity increased 3%, utilization dropped 2%, EU sales fell 4% resulting in increase in market share by 9%, exports increased by 114%, employment dropped 22% but resulted in increase in productivity 30% and waged by 33%, stocks dropped 17%, and EU prices and profitability increased 4%), the EU found this was mainly due to AD duties. In short, the EU found should the AD be removed, injury would resume, and hence extended the duties for another five years.
Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 796/2012.

3 September 2012: EU amends the EU Basic AD Regulation to implement the WTO Fasteners ruling. In December of 2010, the WTO found, in DS397 European Communities – Definitive Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Iron and Steel Fasteners from China, that Article 9(5) of the EU Basic AD Regulation, which presumed that exporting producers operating in non-market economy countries (mainly, China) were not entitled to individual treatment („IT”) and thus the burden was on them to demonstrate that they satisfied the criteria of the IT test, violated the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement. Accordingly, now the EU amended the EU Basic AD Regulation to implement this ruling, noting that separate legal entities applying for IT may nevertheless be subject to the residual rate, depending on circumstances, which include structural or corporate links between the companies and the State or between the companies, control or material influence by the State in respect of pricing and output, or the economic structure of the supplying country.
Regulation (EU) No 765/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:237:0001:0002:EN:PDF

AUGUST 2012

29 August 2012: EU initiates an AD investigation into imports of biodiesel from Argentina and Indonesia, following a complaint from the European Biodiesel Board filed in July 2012. The dumping charge is compounded by an allegation that the domestic prices of the key raw material used in the production of biodiesel are distorted through a system of differentiated export taxes, which led the complainants to calculate dumping by comparing export prices not to domestic prices, but to constructed normal value (adjusted manufacturing costs, SG&A and profit). The Complainants allege that the volume and prices of imports have had, among other consequences, a negative impact on prices charged and the market share of EU industry, resulting in substantial adverse effects on the overall performance and the financial situation of EU industry. The investigation will last 15 months.
Commission Notice 2012/C 260/04. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:260:0008:0016:EN:PDF

24 August 2012: EU subjects imports of bioethanol from the US to registration. In November 2011, the EU initiated a joint anti-subsidy (AS) and anti-dumping (AD) investigation into imports of bioethanol from the US. In the course of the investigation, the EU decided not to impose provisional measures. In case of the AS investigation, this was, inter alia, because the main subsidy scheme had ceased. However, given the evidence that the US might reinstate that scheme retroactively, the EU decided that it would have been entitled to adopt – and eventually collect – provisional AS duties in the present investigation. Thus, the EU has decided to agree with the Complainants’ repeated requests to require registration of imports, so if the subsidy scheme is reinstated and duties are adopted, they may be adopted retroactively.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 771/2012 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:229:0020:0022:EN:PDF

21 August 2012: In anticipation of Russia’s WTO Accession tomorrow, EU terminates the steel agreement with Russia.
Notice

10 August 2012: EU initiates an anti-subsidy (AS) and anti-dumping (AD) investigation into imports of stainless steel wires from India. Both investigation were initiated in response to a complaint filed by EUROFER in June 2012. For subsidization, the complaint alleged that Indian exporters benefit from a number of central and regional schemes, including:

  • duty entitlement passbook scheme,
  • advance authorization scheme,
  • schemes conferring benefits to industries located in special economic zones/export oriented units,
  • export promotion capital goods scheme,
  • pre-shipment and post-shipment export financing,
  • loan guarantees from the Government of India,
  • exemption of export credit from interest taxes,
  • duty-free replenishment certificate scheme/duty-free imports authorization scheme,
  • duty drawback scheme,
  • income tax incentive for research and development,
  • focus product scheme and regional subsidies by the state of Maharashtra (inter alia, sales tax/trade tax incentive, electricity duty exemption, octroi refund, special capital incentive) and by the state of Gujarat (industrial incentive schemes).

In cases of both subsidization and dumping, Complaint showed that volume and prices of imports have had, among other, a negative impact on the quantities sold, prices charged and market share held by the EU industry, resulting in substantial adverse effects. The AS investigation will last up to 13 months, while the AD investigation will last up to 15 months. In both cases, provisional duties may be imposed within 9 months, i.e., by 9 May 2013.
AS: Commission Notice 2012/C 240/06 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:240:0006:0014:EN:PDF
AD: Commission Notice 2012/C 240/07 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:240:0015:0022:EN:PDF

9 August 2012: EU initiates a partial interim review of CVD duties on imports of certain stainless steel bars and rods from India to review subsidization of Viraj Profiles Vpl. Ltd („Viraj”). The original duties, ranging from 3.3% to 4.3%, were imposed in 2011. In the original investigation, the EU found that Viraj made use of an “export oriented units scheme” (EOUS), receiving countervailable subsidies in the form of import duty exemptions for raw materials and sales tax reimbursement for goods procured locally, thus obtaining a CVD duty of 4.3%. As Viraj requested a review of the level of subsidization, alleging India reduced the benefits under EOUS, which in turn reduced Viraj’s subsidy amount, the EU initiated the instant review. The review will last up to 15 months.
Commission Notice 2012/C 239/02 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:239:0002:0004:EN:PDF

JULY 2012

31 July 2012: EU imposes provisional AD duties on imports of certain tube and pipe fittings of iron or steel from Russia and Turkey. The EU initiated the investigation in November 2011. As no Russian exporter cooperated in the investigation, the EU calculated the normal value for Russia based on facts available, i.e., normal value of cooperating Turkish exporters that purchased the main raw material, i.e., steel pipes and tubes, from Russia. In addition, the dumping calculation was conducted only for elbows, as they had the most reliable export price data (as other CN codes contained a wide variety of products, making EUROSTAT data unreliable for product-type comparisons). As a result, the EU imposed a provisional AD duty of 23.8% for all Russian exporters. For Turkey, the EU imposed provisional AD duties of 2.9%, 9.6%, and 12.1% for the three cooperating exporters, respectively, SARDOĞAN Endüstri ve Ticaret, RSA Tesisat Malzemeleri San ve Ticaret AȘ, and UNIFIT Boru Baglanti Elemanlari Ltd Sti, and a residual AD duty of 16.7% for all other Turkish companies. For injury, the EU sampled 3 out of the 22 EU producers constituting EU industry. EU industry decreased production, capacity utilization and sales, while prices, profitability, return on investment and cash flow showed a „very negative picture” dropping to substantial losses. The provisional duties will continue until the end of the investigation, which is scheduled for 31 January 2013.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 699/2012. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:203:0037:0051:EN:PDF.

31 July 2012: Following a new exporter review, EU exempts a Malaysian exporter from AD duties on imports of certain iron or steel fasteners from Malaysia. In 2009, the EU imposed duties on imports from China with a residual duty of 85%, which in July 2011 was extended – through an anti-circumvention investigation – to imports from Malaysia. Eight Malaysian exporters that proved they had not been circumventing AD duties on imports from China were exempted from the extended measures. In November 2011, following a request from Andfast Malaysia Sdn. Bhd. (‘Andfast’), another Malaysian producer, the EU initiated the instant new exporter review, temporarily lifting the residual duty with respect to Andfast, but subjecting its imports to registration. In the review, the EU confirmed that Andfast was not related to any of the Chinese or Malaysian exporters or producers subject to AD duties and had not exported fasteners to the EU during the original investigation period (from 1 January 2008 to 30 September 2010). As result, the EU exempted Andfast from the AD duties and terminated registration.
Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 693/2012 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:203:0023:0025:EN:PDF.

24 July 2012: EU extends AD duties to imports of certain open mesh fabrics of glass fibres from Malaysia. In August 2011, the EU imposed AD duties ranging from 48.4% to 62.9% on imports of open mesh fabrics of glass fibres from China. In November 2011, following a complaint by four EU producers (Saint-Gobain Adfors CZ s.r.o., Tolnatext Fonalfeldolgozó és Műszakiszövet-gyártó Bt., Valmieras stikla šķiedra AS and Vitrulan Technical Textiles GmbH), the EU initiated an anti-circumvention investigation on imports of the product from Malaysia. The purpose of the investigation was to determine whether imports from China were being transshipped through Malaysia to avoid the AD duty. As required by law, the EU examined whether (1) there was a change in the pattern of trade between China, Malaysia and the EU; (2) there was sufficient due cause or economic justification for this change except for imposition of AD duties on imports from China; (3) there was evidence of injury; and (4) there was evidence of dumping. The EU found that imports from China significantly dropped after the imposition of a provisional duty in February 2011, while imports from Malaysia to the EU substantially increased during the same period. At the same time, exports of the product from China to Malaysia dramatically increased. Although initially, three Malaysian companies cooperated in the investigation, they ceased cooperating during the on-site verifications and the EU decided to apply facts available. In consequence, the EU also found the remaining elements met. As a result, the EU established that Chinese imports of certain open mesh fabrics of glass fibres from China are being transshipped through Malaysia, and extended the AD duty applicable to imports from China (62.9 %) to imports from Malaysia.
Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 672/2012.

18 July 2012: EU initiates a new exporter review for Lealea Enterprise Co., Ltd., a Taiwanese producer of PET. AD duties on imports of polyethylene terephthalate from Taiwan were first imposed in November 2000, together with AD duties on PET imports from India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Korea, and Thailand. In a parallel case, countervailing duties were also imposed on PET imports from India, Malaysia and Thailand (CVD case against PET imports from Indonesia, Korea and Taiwan was terminated). In 2007, the AD duties were extended for additional five years. For Taiwan, the residual rate was 143%, with two exporters, Far Eastern Textile Ltd. and Shinkong Synthetic Fibers Corp., obtaining individual rates of, respectively, 36.3% and 67%. In February 2012, the EU initiated another expiry review of AD duties on imports of PET from India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Taiwan, and Thailand, while duties on Korea were allowed to lapse. As Lealea Enterprise Co. had not been involved in the original investigation, its imports were subject to the high residual rate. Accordingly, it has asked for a new exporter review to obtain its own, lower, rate. Pending the conclusion of the review, its imports are not subject to the residual duty, but are subject to registration, so that duties eventually calculated may be levied retroactively. The review will last up to 9 months.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 653/2012 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:188:0008:0010:EN:PDF

13 July 2012: Following an interim review, EU amends AD duties on imports of tartaric acid from China, for two Chinese exporters: Changmao Biochemical Engineering Co. Ltd, Changzhou, and Ninghai Organic Chemical Factory, Ninghai. AD duties were first imposed in 2006. The review was initiated in July 2011 at the request of Italian producers Distillerie Bonollo SpA, Industria Chimica Valenzana SpA, Distillerie Mazzari SpA, Caviro Distillerie SRL and Comercial Quimica Sarasa SL, alleging that the level of duties in force did not reflect the actual dumping. Specifically, the petitioners alleged that both Chinese exporters should be denied market economy treatment (MET). The EU agreed and denied MET to both companies, because the price of a basic raw material, benzene, was distorted in China, having found it 19% to 51% lower than world prices. In addition, distortions were also found in the price of the intermediate raw material, maleic anhydride. Moreover, with respect to one exporter, land use right prices were depressed and assets for the purpose of guaranteeing a loan from a State-owned bank had been overvalued. Having used Argentina as an analogue country, EU increased individual dumping margins for both exporting producers from 10.1% to 13.1% and 4.7% to 8.3%. Finally, an undertaking offer made by one Chinese producer was dismissed because, inter alia, tartaric acid’s price is volatile. That exporter also sold other chemicals to the same EU clients, so risk of cross-compensation, difficult to monitor, existed.
Council Implementing Regulation(EU) No 626/2012. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:182:0001:0005:EN:PDF.

13 July 2012: EU repeals AD duties against imports of certain plastic sacks and bags from China and Thailand. An expiry review was initiated in September 2011 to determine whether to continue the duties for additional five years. However, EU eventually terminated the review due to lack of cooperation from EU producers and repealed the duties. A concurrent partial interim review for Greenwood Houseware (Zhuhai) Ltd, a Chinese exporter hoping to obtain a lower AD rate, was also terminated as redundant.
Council Implementing Regulation(EU) No 627/2012. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:182:0006:0009:EN:PDF.

6 July 2012: EU initiates an anti-circumvention investigation into imports of silicon from Taiwan. The EU will determine whether imports from Taiwan seek to circumvent anti-dumping measures on imports from China. As is often done in anti-circumvention investigations, the EU simultaneously subjected imports from Taiwan to registration to faciliate – in case circumvention is found – retroactive application of AD duties. The investigation will last up to 9 months.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 596/2012. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:176:0050:0053:EN:PDF

4 July 2012: Following an expiry review, EU decides to prolong AD duties on certain seamless pipes and tubes, of iron or
steel from Russia and Ukraine
for another five years, while allowing duties on imports from Croatia to lapse. The review with respect to imports from Croatia, Russia and Ukraine was initiated in June 2011. One Ukrainian and one Croatian exporter participated in the proceeding. One Russian exporter appears to have withdrawn from the review, without filing an AD questionnaire response and the Commission considered them not cooperating. Although all three countries were found to be dumping, the EU considered that – in light of closed production, low inventories and plans to sell the factory – the only Croatian exporter was unlikely to dump in the future. Accordingly, duties with respect to Croatia were terminated. As for Russia and Ukraine, although the EU found no injury, it considered that huge spare capacity in both countries would be used to flood the EU market once AD duties were removed, lowering the prices and causing injury. Accordingly, duties were maintained for Russia and Ukraine.
Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 585/2012. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:174:0005:0020:EN:PDF

3 July 2012: EU publishes a notice of impending expiry of AD duties. EU’s AD duties on imports of coke of coal in pieces
with a diameter of more than 80 mm (coke 80 +) from China
will expire on 19 March 2013, unless a request for an expiry review is timely filed. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:195:0018:0018:EN:PDF

JUNE 2012

30 June 2012: EU repeals the steel quotas on imports of Russian long and flat steel products in anticipation of Russia’s WTO accession. The repeal will become effective on the date of Russia’s accession.
Regulation (EU) No 529/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council

29 June 2012: EU subjects to registration imports of certain prepared or preserved citrus fruits (namely mandarins, etc.) from China. Following the invalidation of AD duties by the European Court of Justice on 22 March 2012 in Case C-338/10, imports of citrus fruits from China are no longer subject to AD duties. On 19 June 2012, the EU reopened the AD investigation to remedy the shortcomings identified by the ECJ and to reimpose the duties. As the ECJ judgment did not affect the original injury finding, there is a high likelihood that duties will be reimposed. However, as (i) the reopened investigation may take months to complete, (ii) currently there are no duties on imports and (iii) EU producers fear a surge of imports, they have requested registration of imports to allow the EU to reimpose the eventual duties retroactively to the date of import.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 572/2012. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:169:0050:0052:EN:PDF

29 June 2012: EU adds a new exporter of ceramic tiles from China to list of exporters benefiting from 30.6% AD rate applicable to cooperating exporters not included in the sample. Following a new exporter review, the EU concluded that Onna Ceramic Industries (China) Co. Ltd has satisfied all the requirements for this rate. Imports of ceramic tiles from China are subject to AD duties since September 2011.
Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 567/2012. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:169:0011:0012:EN:PDF

28 June 2012: EU terminates AD investigation into imports of certain concentrated soy protein products from China. The investigation was initiated in April 2011 at the request of Solae Europe S.A. No preliminary duties had been imposed due to questions about causation. In the end, the EU found that although the EU industry suffered some injury, this injury was not serious enough to justify imposition of duties. In particular, the EU found that many injury indicators (such as production, capacity utilisation, EU sales, market share, employment and productivity) improved in the latter part of the POI, while other injury factors showed mixed trends. In addition, the EU found causation problems, including lack of correlation between imports and injury, and impact of other factors on injury, such as contraction in demand (probably partly caused by the economic crisis) and volatility of the soy bean market. Accordingly, the investigation was terminated.
Commission Decision 2012/343/EU. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:168:0038:0054:EN:PDF

28 June 2012: EU terminates – without amending AD and CVD measures – partial interim reviews of AD and CVD duties on imports of certain polyethylene terephthalate (PET) from an Indian exporter Dhunseri Petrochem & Tea Limited Imports („DPTLI”). Imports of PET from India have been subject to AD & CVD duties since 2000 and, since 2005, exports by DPTLI were subject to an undertaking (both AD and CVD). At DPTLI’s request, in April 2011 the EU initiated partial interim reviews of both AD and CVD duties applicable to this company. The grounds for CVD review were that DPTLI terminated its export oriented unit (EOU) status, which – in the original investigation – accounted for bulk of the subsidy rate. The grounds for AD review were that due to lower production costs, the AD margin would be substantially lower. Although the EU found both claims sufficiently credible to initiate both reviews, both reviews found that that changes were not „of lasting nature.” Specifically, in the CVD review, the EU found that although the EOU subsidy has ceased, the status of other subsidy programs keeps changing. As for the AD review, the reviewed revealed that production costs are likely to further drop due to capacity expansion. In the end, DPTLI withdrew the request for the AD review and both reviews were terminated without amending the measures.
CVD: Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 559/2012. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:168:0006:0013:EN:PDF
AD: Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 560/2012. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:168:0014:0016:EN:PDF

28 June 2012: EU exempts from AD duties imports of steel ropes and cables from Korean exporter Seil Wire & Cable. Imports of steel ropes and cables from Korea had been subject to AD duties as a result of a 2009/2010 anti-circumvention investigation when the EU found that AD duties on steel ropes and cables from China, imposed in 2005, were being circumvented by shipments through Korea. Following the anti-circumvention investigation, AD duties on imports of steel ropes and cables from China were extended to imports from Korea, unless the Korean exporters proved they did not circumvent, in which case they were exempted from the duties. Seil Wire & Cable, a Korean exporter, did not participate in the original anti-circumvention investigation as they did not export at the time. In 2011, they requested a new exporter review. This review has now been concluded and the EU found that all the conditions for exempting Seil Wire & Cable from the AD duties have been met.
Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 558/2012. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:168:0003:0005:EN:PDF

26 June 2012: EU initiates an AD anti-circumvention investigation of imports of gas-fuelled, non-refillable pocket flint lighters from Vietnam, to determine whether they circumvent AD duties on imports from China. The EU also subjected such imports from Vietnam to registration.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 548/2012. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:165:0037:0040:EN:PDF

26 June 2012: Following an interim review, EU terminates AD duties on furfuraldehyde from China. The review was initiated ex oficio in July 2011. No Chinese exporters or EU producers participated. The EU concluded that following an increase in prices in the EU market, significant growth in demand in China, and fact that most of furfuraldehyde imported into the EU was under the inward processing relief scheme with the end product being exported out of the EU, the duties were no longer needed to protect the EU industry.
Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 541/2012. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:165:0004:0011:EN:PDF

26 June 2012: EU implements the European Court of Justice’s Interpipe ruling. In Interpipe, the ECJ found that the European Commission had incorrectly calculated the dumping margin on exports by Interpipe of certain seamless pipes and tubes from Ukraine by making certain improper adjustments to the export price (commissions for sales through a related trading company). Following the judgment, the EU now recalculated the AD margin for Interpipe, lowering it to 17.7%.
Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2012. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:165:0001:0003:EN:PDF

26 June 2012: EU publishes notice of impending expiry of AD duties. EU’s AD duties on imports of ferro-silicon from China, Egypt, Kazakhstan and Russia will expire on 1 March 2013, unless a request for an expiry review is timely filed.
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:186:0008:0008:EN:PDF

June 2012: The Swedish National Board of Trade publishes its study: „Global Value Chains in EU Anti-Dumping Practice: The Economic Impact of Anti-Dumping Duties on Intermediate Goods and the ‚Union Interest Test'”.
http://www.kommers.se/Documents/dokumentarkiv/publikationer/2012/rapporter/report-global-value-cains-in-eu-anti-dumping-practice.pdf

22 June 2012: EU’s AD duties on imports of saddles from China expire today.
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:180:0014:0014:EN:PDF

21 June 2012: EU publishes notice of impending expiry of AD duties. EU’s AD duties on imports of certain manganese dioxides from South Africa will expire on 14 March 2013, unless a request for an expiry review is timely filed.
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:180:0015:0015:EN:PDF

19 June 2012: EU initiates expiry review of AD duties on imports of certain prepared or preserved sweetcorn in kernels from Thailand. The duties were first imposed in 2007. The review will last 15 months. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:175:0022:0030:EN:PDF

19 June 2012: Following the invalidation by the European Court of Justice of EU’s duties on imports of certain prepared or preserved citrus fruits (namely mandarins, etc.) from China, EU reopens the proceeding in order to select an analogue country and determine normal value.
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:175:0019:0021:EN:PDF

17 June 2012: EU’s AD duties on imports of ammonium nitrate from Ukraine expire today.
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:171:0025:0025:EN:PDF

15 June 2012: WTO issues dispute panel report on China’s AD and CVD duties on imports of steel products from the US (DS414: China — Countervailing and Anti-Dumping Duties on Grain Oriented Flat-rolled Electrical Steel from the United States)
http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news12_e/414r_e.htm

12 June 2012: EU initiates partial interim review of imports of AD duties on ironing boards from Ukraine. The purpose of the review is to determine whether – in light of changed channel of distribution – the duties should be lowered for one of the exporters, Eurogold Industries.
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:166:0003:0005:EN:PDF

6 June 2012: EU initiates its first „Fasteners review”. Following its loss in the WTO, the EU – pursuant to Council Regu­lation 1515/2001 – allowed Chinese exporters of fasteners to request a review if they believed that the improper way the EU investigated applications for individual treatment discouraged them from requesting it. This is the first review initiated to implement the WTO ruling.
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:160:0019:0021:EN:PDF

5 June 2012: EU terminates AD investigation into imports of tartaric acid from China, as the complainants withdrew the complaint. The case had been directed against one exporter: Hangzhou Bioking Biochemical Engineering Co. Ltd.
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:144:0043:0043:EN:PDF

MAY 2012

24 May 2012: EU terminates anti-subsidy proceeding against imports of certain stainless steel fasteners and parts thereof from India. The EU found that the level of subsidization for the largest Indian exporter was too small (de minimis), and the market share of the remaining subsidized Indian exports was too small to satisfy the causation requirement. Accordingly, the investigation was terminated.
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:134:0031:0036:EN:PDF

24 May 2012: EU’s General Court dismisses a challenge by RAK, an UAE exporter, to Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 857/2010 imposing a definitive countervailing duty and collecting definitely the provisional duty imposed on imports of certain polyethylene terephthalate originating in Iran, Pakistan and the United Arab Emirates.
Case T-555/10, JBF RAK LLC v. Council, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:200:0013:0014:EN:PDF

24 May 2012: EU initiates an AD anti-circumvention investigation of imports of certain open mesh fabrics of glass fibres from Taiwan and Thailand, to determine whether they circumvent AD duties on imports from China, also subjecting them to registration. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:134:0012:0015:EN:PDF

22 May 2012: EU terminates AD investigation into imports of certain woven and/or stitched glass fibre fabrics from China, because the complaint has been withdrawn. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:131:0007:0008:EN:PDF

11 May 2012: EU publishes result of a partial interim review of AD duties on imports of sodium cyclamate from China. In the review, the EU analyzed the level of dumping for one of the Chinese exporters, Golden Time Enterprise (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd and – having concluded that the company no longer qualified for MET – increased its specific AD duty rate. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:124:0001:0010:EN:PDF

10 May 2012: The European Commission hosts a conference to present and discuss the modernisation initiative of Trade Defence instruments (TDI). http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=797

9 May 2012: EU publishes notice of impending expiry of AD duties. EU’s AD duties on imports of dihydromyrcenol from India will expire on 27 January 2013, unless a request for an expiry review is timely filed. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:135:0020:0020:EN:PDF

8 May 2012: EU’s General Court annuls – with respect to the applicant Dow Chemical – AD duties on imports of ethanolamines from the United States. Case T-158/10, Dow Chemical v Council. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:184:0009:0009:EN:PDF

7 May 2012: EU terminates AD investigation into imports of certain seamless pipes and tubes of iron or steel, excluding of stainless steel, originating in Belarus, as the complaint has been withdrawn. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:121:0036:0037:EN:PDF

1 May 2012: EU formalizes appointment of Dominique Avot to the post of Hearing Officer at DG Trade’s Trade Defence Unit. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:152:0003:0003:EN:PDF

1 May 2012: EU publishes notice of impending expiry of AD duties. EU’s AD duties on imports of gas-fuelled, non-refillable pocket flint lighters and certain refillable pocket flint lighters from China and Taiwan will expire on 13 December 2012, unless a request for an expiry review is timely filed. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:127:0003:0003:EN:PDF

APRIL 2012

27 April 2012: EU initiates an AS investigation into imports of bicycles from China. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:122:0009:0018:EN:PDF

25 April 2012: EU initiates an expiry review of AD duties on imports of ironing boards from China and Ukraine. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:120:0009:0018:EN:PDF

24 April 2012: Following an expiry review, the EU prolongs AD duties on imports of tartaric acid from China for another five years. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:110:0003:0016:EN:PDF

24 April 2012: EU publishes notice of impending expiry of AD duties. EU’s AD duties on imports of silico-manganese (including ferro-silico-manganese) from China and Kazakhstan will expire on 6 December 2012, unless a request for an expiry review if timely filed. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:119:0008:0008:EN:PDF

24 April 2012: EU publishes notice of change of name of Chinese exporter covered by AD duties on imports of ceramic tiles from China. Heyuan Wanfeng Ceramics Co., Ltd has changed its name to Guangdong Luxury Micro-crystal Stone Technology Co., Ltd. and will benefit from the same AD duty. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:119:0009:0009:EN:PDF

21 April 2012: EU publishes notice of impending expiry of AD duties. EU’s AD duties on imports of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film from India, Brazil and Israel will expire on 7 November 2012, unless a request for an expiry review is timely filed. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:117:0007:0007:EN:PDF

20 April 2012: EU excludes Hangzhou Bioking Biochemical Engineering Co. („Hangzhou Bioking”), Ltd from existing AD duties on imports of tartaric acid from China. AD duties on imports of tartaric acid from China are still in force, for the duration of an expiry review, initiated in January 2011. However, as Hungzhou Bioking had been found not to be dumping in the original AD investigation and the WTO has recently found – in DS295 Mexico — Definitive Anti-Dumping Measures on Beef and Rice – that such companies must be completely free of any follow-up AD proceedings related to the original AD duties, the EU – together with the expiry review – had launched a separate review under Council Regulation 1515/2001 to determine how imports from Hangzhou Bioking should be treated. Soon afterwords, the EU initiated a new AD investigation only against Hungzhou Bioking. Accordingly, now, to avoid having tartaric acid imports from Hungzhou Bioking subject to two simultaneous AD proceeding (expiry review and the new AD investigation), the EU excluded Hungzhou Bioking from the existing measures and the ongoing expiry review. Its imports are still subject to the ongoing AD investigation. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:108:0001:0002:EN:PDF

20 April 2012: EU publishes notice of impending expiry of AD duties. EU’s AD duties on imports of dicyandiamide (DCD) from China will expire on 16 November 2012, unless a request for an expiry review is timely filed. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:116:0003:0003:EN:PDF

19 April 2012: Following long discussions, the EU formally creates the post of the Hearing Officer in trade defence proceedings, whose tasks are to safeguard the effective exercise of the procedural rights of the parties in trade defence proceedings and ensure that the trade proceedings are handled impartially, fairly and within a reasonable time. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:107:0005:0011:EN:PDF

19 April 2012: EU’s General Court dismisses – on inadmissibility – Wurth’s appeal against AD duties on fasteners from China. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:165:0017:0017:EN:PDF

18 April 2012: EU imposes definitive AD duties on imports of oxalic acid from India and China.  The duties, ranging from 22,8% to 43,6% for India and 14,6% to 52,2% for China, were imposed at the level of dumping. Council Implementing Regulation No 325/2012. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:106:0001:0010:EN:PDF

18 April 2012: EU’s AD duties on imports of frozen strawberries from China expire today, as no expiry review request has been properly lodged. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:110:0007:0007:EN:PDF

17 April 2012: EU publishes notice of change of name of Chinese exporter covered by AD duties on imports of certain finished polyester filament fabrics from China.  Shaoxing Zhengda Group Co., Ltd. has changed its name to Zhengda United Holding Group Co., Ltd and will benefit from the same AD duty. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:110:0006:0006:EN:PDF

12 April 2012: EU reduces the Byrd Amendment retaliation duties on US imports to 6%. After the EU challenged – and won – its WTO dispute against the US on the Byrd Amendment (providing, inter alia, that money collected from AD and CVD duties would be disbursed to the domestic industries hurt by imports), the US failed to comply with the unfavorable WTO ruling. In 2005, the EU therefore retaliated against the US in the amount equal to the trade damage caused by the Byrd Amendment. This amount was calculated at almost 28 million USD and it was established that the EU could impose a duty of 15% on selected US imports, as this would reduce US imports by a similar amount. As the Byrd Amendment disbursements have decreased, the EU – as it has done every year since retaliation – recalculated the damage from the Byrd Amendment and discovered it has further decreased to slightly above 3 million USD. In contrast to previous years, the EU could not adjust its retaliation to the proper amount by removing additional products from the list and thus decided to decreased the duties to 6% instead. US imports subject to retaliatory duties include sweetcorn, certain frames and mountings for spectacles and goggles, and crane lorries.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 308/2012

11 April 2012: EU initiates partial interim review of imports of AD duties on ethanolamines from the United States.  The purpose of the review is to determine whether – in light of increased export prices – the duties should be lowered for one of the exporters, Dow Chemicals. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:103:0008:0010:EN:PDF

5 April 2012: EU terminates AD investigation into imports of sodium cyclamate from China, limited to two Chinese exporting producers Fang Da Food Additive (Shen Zhen) Limited and Fang Da Food Additive (Yang Quan) Limited, as the complaint has been withdrawn. The investigation was initiated in February 2011 based on a complaint from Productos Aditivos SA, the sole EU producer. Commission Decision 2012/185/EU. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:099:0033:0034:EN:PDF

5 April 2012: EU publishes notice confirming that imports of silico-manganese from Kazakhstan exported by Transnational Company ‚Kazchrome’ AO are no longer subject to AD duties. In a judgment of 30 November 2011 in Case T-107/08, the EU General Court annulled such AD duties with respect to Kazchrome. Accordingly, importers can seek from their national customs authorities repayment or remission of all AD duties paid on such imports and no future duties will be collected. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:102:0039:0039:EN:PDF

MARCH 2012

31 March 2012: EU initiates AD investigation into imports of welded tubes, pipes and hollow profiles of square or rectangular cross-section, of iron other than cast iron or steel other than stainless, from the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey and Ukraine. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:096:0013:0021:EN:PDF

23 March 2012: EU terminates AD investigation into imports of certain stainless steel fasteners and parts thereof from India.  A joined AD/AS investigation was initiated in May 2011 at the request of the European Industrial Fasteners Institute EiFi.  However, during the AD investigation, it transpired that the major exporter causing damage to the EU industry, Viraj Profiles Ltd., accounting for 87% of all exports subject to the proceeding, had not been dumping. Its low price, but not dumped, was mainly due – according to the European Commission – to its vertical integration going back in the value chain all the way to the making of steel from scrap, while other producers manufactured fasteners directly from wire.  Although the EU did find injury, it also concluded that the remaining Indian imports were too small to satisfy the causation requirement and accordingly terminated the AD investigation. Commission Decision 2012/163/EU. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:084:0036:0047:EN:PDF

23 March 2012: EU publishes notice on planned implementation of the WTO’s Fasteners Ruling (DS397 European Communities — Definitive Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Iron or Steel Fasteners from China). In Fasteners, the WTO found that Article 9(5) of the EU’s Basic Anti-Dumping Regulation – regulating conditions under which exporters from non-market economy countries – mainly China – can request ‚individual treatment’ (i.e., request ‚individual treatment’ (‚IT’), i.e., an individual dumping margin) was inconsistent with certain articles of the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement. This posed three problems for the EU. First, the Fasteners AD investigation needed to be corrected. On 6 March 2012, the EU published a separate notice dealing specifically with that investigation. Second, Art. 9(5) of the Basic AD Regulation needs to be amended. Third, the EU wants to avoid WTO litigation over all other existing AD duties where Art. 9(5) – inconsistent with the WTO AD Agreement – denied the grant of IT. For this reason, the EU published this notice, the purpose of which is to enable all exporters in non-market economy countries, covered by existing AD duties, to request a review of such measures, where the applicant exporter (i) was denied IT, or (ii) considers it was discouraged from cooperating and requesting IT because of the administrative burden or because it considered that it did not meet all the criteria required. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:086:0005:0011:EN:PDF

22 March 2012: European Court of Justice invalidates – in a preliminary reference ruling from Germany – AD duties on certain prepared or preserved citrus fruits from China. The ECJ found improprieties with the selection of the analogue country. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:133:0005:0006:EN:PDF

21 March 2012: In two sister cases, T-113/06 and T-116/06, the General Court invalidates – with respect to the applicants – AD duties on farmed salmon from Norway imposed in 2006. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:133:0021:0022:EN:PDF

19 March 2012: EU reopens AD investigation into imports of certain iron or steel fasteners from China. In January 2009, following the original investigiation, the EU imposed AD duties. China challenged the duties in the WTO. In DS397 European Communities — Definitive Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Iron or Steel Fasteners from China, the WTO found that the EU violated the applicable WTO law, including with respect to (i) conditions for grant of individual examination; (ii) certain aspects of dumping determination; (iii) definition of EU industry; (iv) volume of dumped imports; (v) the causation analysis; and (vi) treatment of confidential information. The published notice reopens the investigation to address and remedy these violations as follows. With respect to:

  • individual treatment (IT) – the EU is asking parties which consider to have been discouraged from requesting IT because of the administrative burden, or because they considered that they did not meet all criteria – to request a review of their treatment;
  • the dumping determination – the EU intends to re-disclose to interested parties more precise information regarding the product characteristics which were found to be pertinent in the determination of the normal value;
  • the definition of domestic industry – the EU intends to re-examine its definition of the Union industry and the level of representativity and ascertain whether the percentage of production of fasteners of that industry out of the total estimated production represents a „major proportion” in the sense of the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement;.
  • the volume of dumped imports – the EU intends to revise its injury assessment by excluding imports for which no dumping was found;
  • causation – the EU intends to reassess causation by taking into account the EU industry’s specific export performance instead of the overall export statistical data reported by Eurostat;
  • confidential information – the EU will ask the two EU producers to provide appropriate statements of reasons why confidential information was not susceptible of non-confidential summary. The Commission also intends to disclose the Eurostat data on total EU production of fasteners as originally presented.

Interested parties will be invited to comment and comments will be examined and the findings resulting therefrom will be further disclosed to all interested parties. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:066:0029:0031:EN:PDF

13 March 2012: EU publishes the change of address of Chinese exporter RZBC Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd., a company granted an undertaking under AD measures on imports of citric acid from China. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:074:0016:0016:EN:PDF

9 March 2012: EU initiates an ex officio interim review of AD duties on imports of bicycles from China. Bicycles from China have been subject to AD duties since 1993. In 1997, they were extended to certain bicycle parts. Simultaneously, a complicated exemption scheme has been put in place to allow duty-free parts imports if enough value was added in the EU. More than 250 companies benefit today from the exemption scheme. As the original duties and market analysis were performed almost 20 years ago, many injury-related factors have changed since then, including (i) abolishment of the export quota system that prevented Chinese exporters from obtaining MET treatment; (ii) changes in the structure of EU industry (e.g., switching from complete production cycle to assembly operations based on imported parts, EU enlargements which led to new EU producers, as well as moving of EU production from Western to Central and Eastern Europe which could lower production cost); (iii) movement from bicycles made of steel to those of aluminium alloys; and (iv) rapidly growing number of companies benefiting from the exemption scheme, which led the monitoring system to become highly complex and burdensome. The review will last 15 months. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:071:0010:0022:EN:PDF

9 March 2012: EU initiates an expiry review to determine whether AD measures on certain tungsten electrodes from China should be maintained. The review will last 15 months. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:071:0023:0031:EN:PDF

2 March 2012: EU reopens AD investigation into ironing boards from China. Following the EU General Court’s decision in Case T-274/07 Zhejiang Harmonic Hardware Products Co. Ltd v Council of the European Union, in which the Court invalidated the AD duties with respect to exports by Zhejiang Harmonic Hardware Products Co. Ltd. („Harmonic”), importers can request repayment or remission of AD duties on past imports from Harmonic and no new duties are collected on such imports. However, the EU has now reopened the proceeding to remedy the procedural deficiencies identified by the Court. In practical terms it means, the EU will seek to reimpose the duties on imports from Harmonic once all deficiencies are corrected. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:063:0010:0012:EN:PDF

FEBRUARY 2012

28 February 2012: EU’s AD duties on imports of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) from Korea expire today. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:057:0010:0010:EN:PDF

24 February 2012: EU initiates an expiry review of AD duties on imports of certain polyethylene terephthalate (PET) from India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Taiwan and Thailand, as well as an expiry review of CVD duties on imports of certain polyethylene terephthalate (PET) from India. Both reviews will last 15 months.
Review of AD measures:http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:055:0004:0013:EN:PDF
Review of CVD measures: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:055:0014:0022:EN:PDF

24 February 2012: EU initiates an anti-subsidy (CVD) investigation into imports of certain organic coated steel products from China. The complaint was lodged by EUROFER and alleges that the Chinese coated steel industry benefits from a number of subsidies, including:

  • exemptions from income and other direct taxes (e.g. income tax credit for the purchase of domestically manu­factured production equipment, preferential tax policies for high and new technology enterprises, tax policies for the deduction of R&D expenses, income tax concessions for enter­prises engaged in comprehensive resource utilisation, tax credit concerning the purchase of special equipment, preferential income tax policy and local tax discounts for enterprises located in specific regions, income tax exemption for investment in domestic technological renovation, dividend exemption between qualified resident enterprises);
  • indirect tax and tariff exemptions (e.g. VAT deduction on fixed assets);
  • preferential loans and interest rate subsidies (e.g. policy loans, loans and interest forgiveness, intra-group financial guarantees);
  • equity programmes (e.g. debt for equity swaps, equity infusions, unpaid dividends);
  • government provision of goods for less than adequate remuneration (e.g. provision of land use rights, water, electricity, inputs);
  • purchase of goods by the government above the market prices;
  • preferential tax rates for foreign invested enterprises (e.g. income tax exemptions or reductions under the two free/three half programme, local income tax exemptions or reductions, tax concessions, VAT refunds for purchasing domestically-produced equipment, import duty and VAT exemptions for foreign invested enterprises and certain domestic enterprises using imported equipment in encouraged industries);
  • grant programmes (e.g. ‘China World Top Brand’ programme, ‘Famous Brands’ programmes of Chongqing, Hubei Province, Ma’anshan, Shandong Province and Wuhan); and
  • regional programmes (e.g. Tianjin, North East region, Jiangsu Province, Hebei Province).

EUROFER alleges that the subsidized imports have increased in absolute terms and in terms of market share, causing injury, mainly lower sales, prices, and market share of the EU industry, resulting in substantial adverse effects on the overall performance, the financial situation and the employment situation of the EU industry. The investigation will last 13 months. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:052:0004:0012:EN:PDF

16 February 2012: EU initiates an AD investigation into imports of ceramic tableware and kitchenware from China. The investigation was requested by EU producers who requested anonymity. For information purposes only, the product concerned currently falls within CN codes 6911 10 00, ex 6912 00 10, ex 6912 00 30, ex 6912 00 50 and ex 6912 00 90. As China is a non-market economy, Russia was initially chosen by the complainants as the analogue country to establish normal value. The complainants allege that imports of product concerned have increased overall in terms of market share, having a negative impact on the quantities sold, prices and the market share held by EU industry, resulting in substantial adverse effects on the overall performance of the Union industry. The investigation may last up to 15 months. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:044:0022:0032:EN:PDF

16 February 2012: EU initiates an AD investigation into imports of threaded tube or pipe cast fittings, of malleable cast iron from China, Thailand and Indonesia,. The complaint was brought by the Defence Committee of Tube or Pipe Cast Fittings, of Malleable Cast Iron of the European Union. For information purposes only, the product concerned currently falls within CN code ex 7307 19 10. As China is a non-market economy, Argentina was initially chosen by the complainants as the analogue country to establish normal value. The complainants allege that imports of the product concerned have increased overall in absolute terms as well as in terms of market share, having a negative impact on the quantities sold and the market share of the EU industry, resulting in substantial adverse effects on the finances and employment of the EU industry. The investigation may last up to 15 months. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:044:0033:0043:EN:PDF

16 February 2012: The European Court of Justice dismisses the appeal filed by the Council and the Commission to the judgment of the EU’s General Court in Case T-249/06. Joined Cases C-191/09 P and C-200/09 Council of the European Union, European Commission (C-200/09 P) v Interpipe Nikopolsky Seamless Tubes Plant Niko Tube ZAT, Interpipe Nizhnedneprovsky Tube Rolling Plant VAT. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:098:0002:0002:EN:PDF

11 February 2012: EU initiates – ex officio – a partial interim review of AD duties on imports of hand pallet trucks and their essential parts from China in an effort to increase AD duties. The EU imposed AD duties in 2005 and in 2009 extended them – by an anti-circumvention investigation – to imports from Thailand. In October 2011, following an expiry review, AD duties were extended for additional five years. The EU initiated the current review as it found evidence that most likely the level of dumping has increased, based on (i) comparison of Chinese export prices with a normal value established on the basis of EU prices; (ii) indications of price distortions in the steel market in China due to State interference, calling into question the MET status granted to one exporter; (iii) indications that the Chinese production capacity is much bigger than China’s domestic demand; and (iv) Eurostat statistics, which show that imports from China have replaced almost entirely imports from other third countries in recent years. Based on the above, the EU concluded that the circumstances have significantly changed, that these changes are of a lasting nature, and that the continued imposition of AD duties at the existing level is no longer sufficient to offset dumping. The review may take up to 15 months. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:041:0014:0025:EN:PDF

11 February 2012: EU imposes provisional CVD duties on imports of certain stainless steel fasteners and parts thereof from India . The CVD investigation was initiated – together with a parallel AD investigation – in May 2011 at the request of the European Industrial Fasteners Institute („EiFi”). The EU applied sampling to Indian exporters and chose three main companies accounting for ca. 98% of Indian exports. A request of one exporter for individual examination was provisionally rejected as too burdensome. The EU also applied sampling to EU producers: although 5 out of total of 15 EU producers were initially selected, one producer withdrew. Nevertheless, as the remaining four producers represented 32 % of the estimated EU production during the IP, the sample was still considered to be representative. As only two importers agreed to participate, the EU did not apply sampling to EU importers.

The EU found seven subsidy programs countervailable: (a) Duty Entitlement Passbook Scheme; (b) Advance Authorisation Scheme; (c) Export Promotion Capital Goods Scheme; (d) Export Oriented Units Scheme; (e) Focus Product Scheme; (f) Export Credit Scheme; and (g) Electricity Duty Exemption. The subsidy rates, expressed ad valorem were found to range from 3,2 % to 16,5 %, and – as they were lower than the injury margin – they were the basis for the CVD duties. The EU concluded that there was material injury to the EU industry, as most injury indicators such as production (– 25 %), capacity utilisation (– 6 %), sales volume (– 14 %), market share (– 21 %), and employment (– 24 %) deteriorated during the period considered, even though there was an increase in consumption. Moreover, financial performance, such as cash flow and profitability were seriously affected. Due to no interest in the case by either EU users or importers, the EU also concluded that imposition of CVD duties would not be against EU interest. Accordingly, CVD duties were imposed in the following amounts:

  • Agarwal Fastners Pvt. Ltd., Vasai (East), Thane, Maharashtra, 11,7%;
  • Raajratna Ventures Ltd., Ahmedabad, Gujarat, 13,0%;
  • Viraj Profiles Limited, Boisar, Thane, Maharashtra, 3,2%;
  • Companies listed in the Annex (cooperating non-sampled exporters) 13,6%;
  • All other companies 16,5%.

Commission Regulation (EU) No 115/2012. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:038:0006:0028:EN:PDF

9 February 2012: Following an expiry review, EU decides to continue AD duties on imports of steel ropes and cables from China and Ukraine, as extended to imports from Morocco, Moldova and Korea, for another five years. At the same, the EU allows AD duties on imports from South Africa to lapse. The duties on imports from China, Ukraine, India, and South Africa were first imposed in 1999. Over the next years, they were extended – through anti-circumvention proceedings – to imports from Morocco, Moldova and Korea. In November 2010, an expiry review was initiated of AD duties on imports from China, Ukraine and South Africa (and, by extension, the remaining three countries). As no request for a review was filed for India, these duties expired on 17 November 2010. In the course of the review, it was concluded that while AD duties should be maintained for imports from China and Ukraine (and – by extension – Morocco, Moldova and Korea), there was no likelihood of resumed dumping nor injury in case of South Africa and thus those duties were allowed to lapse. Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 102/2012. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:036:0001:0016:EN:PDF

2 February 2012: The European Court of Justice sets aside the judgment of the General Court in Case T 401/06, Brosmann Footwear (HK) Ltd and Others v Council. Case C-249/10 P, Brosmann Footwear (HK) Ltd. and Others v Council. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:080:0003:0004:EN:PDF

JANUARY 2012

25 January 2012: EU terminates a partial interim review of AD duties on imports of ferro-silicon from Russia without amending the level of duties. The review was initiated at the request of the Russian exporting producer Joint Stock Company (JSC) Chelyabinsk Electrometallurgical Integrated Plant and its related company Joint Stock Company (JSC) Kuznetsk Ferroalloy Works. In the course of the review, the EU found a high dumping margin and concluded that no sufficient evidence was adduced by the applicant that the changes – (i) reorganization of the company and focus on new emerging markets; (ii) higher prices; (iii) growing demand in Russia, and (iv) operation at full capacity – were of lasting nature. Accordingly, the review was terminated without amending the measures. An undertaking offer was rejected as well. Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 60/2012. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:022:0001:0007:EN:PDF

21 January 2012: EU initiates an expiry review of AD duties on imports of ethanolamines from the United States of America to determine whether to continue the duties for additional five years. The review was requested by BASF AG, Ineos Europe AG, and Sasol Germany GmbH, EU producers of ethanolamines. It will last up to 15 months. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:018:0016:0018:EN:PDF

13 January 2012: Dashiqiao Sanqiang Refractory Materials files an appeal to the EU Court of Justice from the EU General Court’s dismissal of its challenge to the result of a partial interim review of AD duties on imports of certain magnesia bricks from China. Case C-15/12 P. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:089:0013:0014:EN:PDF

12 January 2012: EU terminates AD investigation into imports of vinyl acetate from the United States of America, as the complaint had been withdrawn. The investigation was initiated in December 2010 at the request of Ineos Oxide Ltd., an EU producer. Commission Decision 2012/24/EU. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:008:0036:0037:EN:PDF

12 January 2012: EU extends AD duties on molybdenum wires from China to imports from Malaysia. AD duties were imposed on imports of molybdenum wires from China in 2010. In May 2011, in light of increasing imports from Switzerland and Malaysia, the EU initiated – at the request of an EU producer – an anti-circumvention investigation. No Malaysian or Swiss exporters participated. With respect to Malaysia, the EU found that (i) there had been a change of pattern of trade between China, Malaysia and the EU; (ii) there was no sufficient due cause or economic justification for such a change; (iii) the practice undermined the remedial effects of AD duties; and (iv) there was dumping. Accordingly, AD duties on imports of molybdenum wire from China were extended to imports from Malaysia. The investigation was terminated with respect to Switzerland, as – although some increase in imports was observed – they ceased and there were none during the POI. Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 14/2012. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:008:0022:0026:EN:PDF

12 January 2012: EU lowers AD duties on imports of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film from India from Ester Industries Limited. Imports of PET from India have been subject to AD duties since 2001. In October 2010, the EU initiated – at the request of Ester Industries Limited, an Indian exporting producer – a partial interim review to determine whether the level of dumping had not changed. As a result of the review, the EU found that the dumping margin had decreased from 29.3% to 8.3%. The EU found the reason for this decrease – lower costs of production associated with a new production plant, higher economies of scale, closer sourcing of raw materials which decreased the transportation cost – to be of lasting nature and accordingly adjusted the AD duty applicable to this exporter. The EU also refused to lower the residual AD duty for other Indian exporters, claiming that the review was limited to the applicant only and that different time periods on basis of which dumping margins had been established made adjustment to the residual rate unwarranted. Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 13/2012. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:008:0017:0021:EN:PDF

7 January 2012: Following an expiry review, EU decides to continue AD duties on imports of certain stainless steel fasteners and parts
thereof from China and Taiwan
for another five years. AD duties on imports of stainless steel fasteners from China, Taiwan, Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam were imposed in 2005. In November 2010 an expiry review was initiated – at the request of EU producers Bulnava SRL, Inox Viti di Cattinori Bruno & C. SNC, Inox Bolt SRL, Bontempi Vibo SpA. and Ugivis SA – to determine whether duties on China and Taiwan should be continued for additional five years. No review was initiated with respect imports from Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam and those duties were dropped. As a result of the review, the EU concluded that AD duties on imports from China and Taiwan should be maintained. Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2/2012. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:005:0001:0015:EN:PDF

6 January 2012: EU publishes the change of address of Chinese exporter Weifang Ensign Industry Co. Ltd, a company granted an individual AD duty and an undertaking under AD measures on imports of citric acid from China.
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:003:0010:0010:EN:PDF
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:003:0011:0011:EN:PDF

DECEMBER 2011

16 December 2011: EU’s General Court dismisses the action brought by Dashiqiao Sanqiang Refractory Materials against the result of a partial interim review of AD duties on imports of certain magnesia bricks from China, in which the EU allegedly changed its treatment of non-refunded Chinese VAT. Case T-423/09, Dashiqiao Sanqiang Refractory Materials v Council. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:032:0021:0022:EN:PDF

10 December 2011: EU’s AD duties on imports of furfuryl alcohol from China expire today. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:019:0008:0008:EN:PDF

NOVEMBER 2011

30 November 2011: EU’s General Court invalidates AD duties on imports of silico-manganese from Kazakhstan applicable to Kazakh producer Transnational Company ‘Kazchrome’ AO. Case T-107/08, Transnational Company ‘Kazchrome’ and ENRC Marketing v Council and Commission. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:025:0048:0048:EN:PDF




                       Rue Abbé Cuypers 3          1040 Brussels          BE         

www.eutradedefence.com