G/ADP/Q2/PAK/4  
 
18 July 2016  
(16-3842)  Page: 1/4  
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices  Original: English  
 
 ARTICLE 16.4 OF THE AGREEMENT 
ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS1 RAISED BY UKRAINE REGARDING THE 
ANTI-DUMPING INVESTIGATION CONCERNING IMPORTS OF CERTAIN 
COLD-ROLLED COILS/SHEETS ORIGINATING IN AND/OR 
EXPORTED FROM, INTER ALIA, UKRAINE 
The following communication, dated 15 July 2016, is being circulated at the request of the 
Delegation of Pakistan. 
 
_______________ 
 
 
On 16 July 2015, the National Tariff Commission (NTC) of the Government of Pakistan initiated an anti-dumping investigation concerning imports of certain cold-rolled coils/sheets (CR Coils/Sheets) 
originating in China and Ukraine. 
On 13 January 2016 NTC imposed provisional 18.92% to 19.04% anti-dumping duties for 
Ukrainian companies for a 4-month period. 
Question 1 
The investigating authority has cumulated imports of product under investigation 
originating from China and Ukraine. It should  be mentioned that vo lume of imports from 
China is incomparably larger than imports from Ukraine. 
For example, during the period of investigation total imports from China made more 
than 50% of total imports to Pakistan and 25% of total domestic consumption in Pakistan. It is clear that cumulative assessm ent of the effects of imports from China and 
Ukraine can not be applied in the light of  the different conditions of competition 
between Ukrainian and Chinese products (as it is defined by the provisions of Article 3.3 
of the Agreement on Antidumping). Indeed, imports from Ukraine that are only a 
fraction of those from China and have higher  export price cannot compete on the market 
of Pakistan. 
Would Pakistan please explain why imports of cold-rolled coils and sheets originating 
from Ukraine were cumulated with imports from China, taking into consideration the 
provisions of Article 3.3 of the Agreement on Antidumping? 
Reply 
Article 3.3 of the Agreement on Antidumping says that "Where imports of a product from more 
than one country are simultaneously subject to anti-dumping investigations, the investigating 
authorities may cumulatively assess the effects of such imports only if they determine that (a) the 
margin of dumping established in relation to the imports from each country is more than 
de minimis  as defined in paragraph 8 of Article 5 and the volume of imports from each country is 
not negligible and (b) a cumulative assessment of the effects of the imports is appropriate in light 
of the conditions of competition between the imported products and the conditions of competition between the imported products and the like domestic product." 
                                               
1 G/ADP/Q2/PAK/3. G/ADP/Q2/PAK/4 
 
- 2 - 
 
  In terms of Article 3.3 (a) of the Agreement on Antidumping, dumping margin shall be considered 
to be negligible if it is less than 2%, expressed as a percentage of the export price. Dumping margins, determined for Ukrainian exporters/producers of CR Coils are above the de minimis  level i.e. ranging from 19.87% to 20.25%. 
As regards the volume of dumped imports of CR Coils into Pakistan during the POI, Article 3.3 of 
the Agreement on Antidumping provides that the volume of such imports shall normally be regarded as negligible if the volume of dumped imports of an investigated product is found to 
account for less than 3% of total imports of a like product unless imports of the investigated 
product from all countries under investigation which individually account for less than 3% of the total imports of a like product collectively account for more than 7% of the imports of like product. The information/data on dumped imports of the investigated product and other imports of 
CR Coils/Sheets shows that the share of dumped  imports from Ukraine was 5.21% of the total 
imports of CR Coils/Sheets during the POI. On  the basis of above information, the NTC has 
preliminary determined that the volume of dumped imports of the investigated product from 
Ukraine during the POI was well above the negligible threshold set-out in Article 3.3 of the 
Agreement on Antidumping. 
Weighted average export price charged by the exporters of CR Coils/Sheets from China and 
Ukraine during the POI shows that there was a price competition between imports of the 
investigated product. It may be further noted that the export price of CR Coils/Sheets charged by the Ukrainian exporters is slightly lower than th e export price charged by the Chinese exporters. 
There is a competition between investigated product imported from Ukraine and the domestic like 
product in terms of price, market share, and sales etc. 
On the basis of the information used in this investigation and subsequent analysis of the same, the 
Government of Pakistan feels it has duly consider ed the provisions of Arti cle 3.3 of the Agreement 
on Antidumping while making preliminary determination in the subject investigation.  
Question 2 Import of the product concerned from Ukraine into Pakistan can be treated as negligible 
as it was at the insignificant level both in terms of total import volume (5.2%) and of 
the market share (approximately 2.5%) in Paki stan during the period of investigation. 
Therefore, there were no sufficient grounds to include Ukraine in the current investigation. 
Would Pakistan please explain how imposi tion of provisional measures against 
Ukrainian product complies with the provisio ns of Articles 3.4 and 7.1 (iii) of the 
Agreement on Antidumping, taking into th e consideration positive dynamic of the 
Pakistani domestic industry and low import quantities of the product concerned from 
Ukraine? 
Reply 
As regards the volume of dumped imports, Articl e 3.3 of the Agreement on Antidumping provides 
that the volume of dumped imports shall normally be regarded as negligible if the volume of dumped imports of an investigated product is found to account for less than 3% of total imports of a like product unless imports of the investigated product from all countries under investigation 
which individually account for less than 3% of the total imports of a like product collectively 
account for more than 7% of the imports of like product.  
The information/data on dumped imports of the investigated product and other imports of CR 
Coils/Sheets shows that the share of dumped impo rts from Ukraine was 5.21% of the total imports 
of CR Coils/Sheets during the POI. On the basi s of above information, the National Tariff 
Commission has preliminarily determined that the volume of dumped imports of the investigated 
product from Ukraine during the POI, which was above the negligible threshold set-out in 
Article 3.3 of the Agreement on Antidumping. 
In terms of Article 3.4 of the Ag reement on Antidumping, the NTC has analysed the impact of the 
dumped imports on the domestic industry producing CR Coils/Sheets and evaluated all relevant G/ADP/Q2/PAK/4 
 
- 3 - 
 
  economic factors including actual and potential decline in sales, profits, output, market share, 
productivity, return on investments, or utilization of capacity; factors affecting domestic prices; the magnitude of the margin of dumping; actual and potential negative effects on cash flow, inventories, employment, wages, growth, ab ility to raise capital or investments. 
In terms of Article 7.1 (iii) of the Agreement on Antidumping, the NTC has concluded that the 
provisional measures were necessary to prevent injury being caused during the investigation. However, for the purpose of imposition of lesser duty, the NTC calculated injury margin to 
ascertain whether a lower duty would be adequate to remove injury being suffered by the 
domestic industry due to dumped imports of investigated product from China and Ukraine. 
Therefore, the NTC imposed lesser duty on the exporters of Ukraine.  
Question 3 
The Pakistani domestic industry indicators, in particular, production volumes, sales, 
domestic market share, capacity utilizatio n, employment, wages and productivity, had 
positive trends during the period of investigation. 
Would Pakistan please explain how conc lusion of National Tariff Commission 
(hereinafter – the NTC) of the Government of  Pakistan on existence of material injury 
complies with the provisions of Article 3.4 of the Agreement on Antidumping? 
Reply 
The National Tariff Commission, Government of Paki stan, in terms of Article 3.4 of the Agreement 
on Antidumping, has examined the impact of the dumped imports of CR Coils/Sheets on the 
domestic industry of Pakistan producing CR Coils/Sheets on actual and potential decline in sales, 
profits, output, market share, productivity, retu rn on investments, or utilization of capacity; 
factors affecting domestic prices; the magnitude of the margin of dumping; actual and potential negative effects on cash flow, inventories, employ ment, wages, growth, ability to raise capital or 
investments.  
 Facts and analysis of the information available in the subject investigation revealed that the 
domestic industry of Pakistan producing CR Coils/Sheets has suffered material injury due to 
dumped imports of the investigated product during POI on account of:  
(a) Increased volume of dumped imports; 
(b) Price undercutting; 
(c) Price depression; 
(d) Price suppression; 
(e) Decline in profits; 
(f) Negative effects on cash flows; 
(g) Decline in market share; 
(h) Negative effect on inventories; 
(i) Decline in return on investment; 
(j) Negative effect on growth; 
(k) Negative effect on ability to raise capital and 
(l) Magnitude of the margin of dumping. 
 The NTC has further concluded that there is a causal relationship between dumped imports of the 
investigated product and the material injury to the domestic industry of Pakistan producing 
CR Coils/Sheets. Hence the NTC feels that it has co mplied with the provisions of Article 3.4 of the 
Agreement on Antidumping.  G/ADP/Q2/PAK/4 
 
- 4 - 
 
  Question 4 
According to Article 3.5 of the Agreement on  Antidumping, the authorities shall also 
examine any known factors other than the dump ed imports, which at the same time are 
injuring the domestic industry. The injuries caused by these other factors must not be 
attributed to the dumped imports.  
Would Pakistan please explain what methodol ogy is used by the NTC while considering 
separate and aggregate influence of all ot her factors on the domestic industry?  
Would Pakistan also clarify how the conclusi ons of the NTC on the "other factors" 
established in report on preliminary dete rmination comply with Article 3.5 of the 
Agreement on Antidumping in particular with  the requirement that injuries caused by 
these other factors must not be attributed to the dumped imports? 
Reply 
The following other factors have been analysed in detail in the report of preliminary determination: 
i. the volume and prices of imports not sold at dumping prices,  
ii. contraction in demand or changes in the patterns of consumption,  
iii. trade restrictive practices of and competition between the foreign and domestic 
producers,  
iv. developments in technology and  
v. the export performance and productivity of the domestic industry. 
On the basis of the evidence and information avai lable with the NTC, it is concluded that the 
domestic industry of Pakistan producing CR Coils/Sheets did not suffer material injury due to 
imports of CR Coils/Sheets from sources other than dumped sources during the POI. It is further 
concluded that the domestic industry did not suffer material injury due to contraction in demand and changes in the pattern of consumption of CR Coils/Sheets during the POI.  
 
The factors mentioned at Article 3.5 of the Agreement on Antidumping were also analyzed and it was found that: 
 
i. The domestic industry did not export, ther efore, there is no effect on export 
performance and productivity of the domestic industry; 
ii. There was no change in trade restrictive practices and competition between foreign 
producers other than producers from China, Ukraine and domestic producers;  
iii. There was no considerable change in technology; 
Therefore, the NTC has complied with the prov isions of Article 3.5 of the Agreement on 
Antidumping while making preliminary determination in the subject investigation.  
 
__________