G/SG/N/8/RUS/2  
G/SG/N/10/RUS/2  
 
6 August 2013  
(13-4204)  Page: 1/7  
Committee on Safeguards  Original: English  
 
 NOTIFICATION UNDER ARTICLE 12.1(B) OF THE AGREEMENT 
ON SAFEGUARDS ON FINDING A SERIOUS INJURY 
OR THREAT THEREOF CAUSED 
BY INCREASED IMPORTS 
 
NOTIFICATION OF A PROPOSAL TO IMPOSE A MEASURE 
RUSSIAN FEDERATION  
(Tableware and Kitchenware of Porcelain) 
The following submission, dated 2 August 2013 is  being circulated at the request of the 
Russian Federation. 
 
_______________ 
 
 
On 3 September 2012 the Department for Internal  Market Defence of the Eurasian Economic 
Commission (hereinafter ‘the Department’) initiated a safeguard investigation with regard to the 
imports of tableware and kitchenware of porcelain into the single customs territory of the Customs 
Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation (hereinafter ‘the CU’) (see WTO document G/SG/N/6/RUS/2).  
In accordance with Article 12.1 (b) of the Agreem ent on Safeguards hereby the Russian Federation 
notifies the Committee on Safeguards that the Department has found serious injury to the domestic industry caused by increased imports. 
 
The product which has been found to be imported into the CU in such quantities and under such 
conditions as to cause serious injury to the CU industry which produces like or directly competitive 
product is tableware and kitchenware of porcelain (hereinafter ‘the product under consideration’). 
The like or directly competitive product produced by CU producers is hereinafter referred to as ‘the like product’.  
1  PROVIDE EVIDENCE, CITING RELEVANT DATA AND THE APPLICABLE PERIOD OF 
INVESTIGATION OF SERIOUS INJURY OR THREAT THEREOF CAUSED BY INCREASED 
IMPORTS 
1.1  Analysis of the Customs Union mark et of the product under consideration 
(a) Consumption 
 
  2009 2010 2011 January-
June 2011 January-
June 2012 
Volume of apparent consumption, 
tons 54 100 73 207 80 858 33 615 38 304 
Change as compared to the 
previous period, % - 35,3 10,5 - 14 
Change as compared to 2009, % - 35,3 49,5 - - 
 G/SG/N/8/RUS/2 • G/SG/N/10/RUS/2 
 
- 2 - 
 
  Consumption of the product under consideration in the CU increased by 49,5% between 2009 
and 2011. In the first half of 2012 it increased by 14% as compared to the same period of 2011.  (b) Production 
 
  2009 2010 2011 January-
June 2011 January-
June 2012 
Volume of production of the like product 
in CU, tons 16 075 15 071 15 629 6 849 7 007 
Change in the volume of production of 
the like product in CU as compared to 
the previous period, % - -6,2 3,7 - 2,3 
Change in the volume of production of 
the like product in CU as compared to 2009, % - -6,2 -2,8 - - 
 
In 2011, as compared to 2009, production of th e like product in the CU decreased by 2,8%. 
In 2010, as compared to 2009, it fell by 6,2%, in 2011, as compared to 2010, it grew by 3,7%. In 
the first half of 2012, production increased by 2,3% as compared to the first half of 2011.  
(c) Sales 
 
  2009 2010 2011 January-
June 2011 January-
June 2012 
Change in the volume of sales of the 
like product by the CU producers in the CU as compared to the previous period, % - -7,3 4,7 - 5,0 
Change in the volume of sales of the 
like product by the CU producers in the 
CU as compared to 2009, % - -7,3 -2,9 - - 
Change of the market share held by the 
CU producers as compared to the previous period, p.p. - -8,9 -1 - -1,4 
 
Between 2009 and 2011 the volume of sales of the like product by CU producers on the CU market 
increased by 4,7%. In 2010 sales of the like product fell by 7,3% as compared to 2009, in 2011 they fell by 2,9% as compared to 2010. In the first half of 2012, sales of the of like product 
increased by 5,0% as compared to the first half of 2011. In 2010 the market share held by CU 
producers decreased by 8,9 percentage points as compared to 2009. Between 2010 and 2011 the market share held by CU producers decreased by 1 percentage point. In the first half of 2012 
market share held by the CU producers on the CU market fell by 1,4 percentage points as 
compared to the same period of 2011.  (d) Imports 
 
  2009 2010 2011 January-
June 2011 January-
June 2012 
Volume of imports, tons 38 734,9 58 959,0 65 934,4 27 464,4 31 843,3 
Change as compared to the 
previous period, %  - 52,2 11,8 - 15,9 
Change as compared to 2009, % - - 70,2 - - 
 Between 2009 and 2011 imports grew by 70,2% an d the market share held by imports grew by 
1 percentage point. In the first half of 2012 the volume of imports increased by 15,9% as compared to the first half of 2011. 
 
1.2  Analysis of the situation of the CU industry 
Following figures on economic indicators of CU  industry are based on the data submitted by 
5 domestic producers representing 80% of total domestic production. 
 G/SG/N/8/RUS/2 • G/SG/N/10/RUS/2 
 
- 3 - 
 
  (a) Production 
 
  2009 2010 2011 January-
June 2011 January-
June 2012 
Change in the volume of production of 
the like product by the CU industry as compared to the previous period, % - 6,1 -8,3 - -2,7 
Change in the volume of production of 
the like product by the CU industry as 
compared to 2009, % - 6,1 -2,7 - - 
 
The table above shows that between 2009 and 2011 production of the like product by the CU 
industry fell by 2,7%. In the first half of 2012, th e volume of production of the like product by the 
CU industry decreased by 2,7% as compared to the  same period of 2011.  
(b) Sales 
 
  2009 2010 2011 January-
June 2011 January-
June 2012 
Change in the volume of sales of the 
like product by the CU industry in the CU as compared to the previous period, % - 3,1 -7,9 - -1,8 
Change in the volume of sales of the 
like product by the CU industry in 
the CU as compared to 2009, % - 3,1 -5 - - 
 
During the period from 2009 to 2011 sales of the like  product by the CU industry in the CU fell by 
5%. In the first half of 2012 the volume of sales of  the like product by the CU industry in the CU 
decreased by 1,8% as compared to the first half  of 2011, whereas the market share held by the 
CU industry decreased by 2,4 percentage points. 
 
(c) Inventories  
  2009 2010 2011 January-
June 2011 January-
June 
2012 
Change in the volume of inventories of 
the like product in the CU industry as compared to 2009, % - 3,4 5,3 - - 
Change in the share of  inventories in 
the volume of production of the like 
product by the CU industry as 
compared to the previous period, p.p. - -0,4 1,8 - 0,8 
 
As a result of the loss of sales during the period under consideration inventories of the like product in the CU industry increased. As of the end of 2 011 the volume of inventories in the CU industry 
exceeded their volume as of the end of 2009 by 5, 3%. In 2010, as compared to 2009, the share of 
inventories in the volume of production of the like product by the CU industry decreased by 
0,4 percentage points. In 2011 it grew by 1,8 pe rcentage points as compared to 2010. In the 
first half of 2012 the share of inventories in the volume of production of the like product by the 
CU industry increased by 0,8 percentage poin ts as compared to the first half of 2011. 
 (d) Exports 
 
  2009 2010 2011 January-
June 2011 January-
June 2012 
Change in the volume of exports of the 
like product by the CU industry as compared to the previous period, % - 36,4 -26,7 - -41,9 
Change in the volume of the CU industry’s 
exports as compared to 2009, % - 36,4 0 - - 
Change in the volume of the CU industry’s 
exports in relation to volume of the CU industry’s production as compared to the previous period, p.p. - + 0,9 - 0,8 - - 1,1 G/SG/N/8/RUS/2 • G/SG/N/10/RUS/2 
 
- 4 - 
 
  As shown in the table above, during the period from 2009 to 2011 the volume of exports of the 
like product by the CU industry remained the same. In the first half of 2012, as compared to the first half of 2011, the volume of exports of the li ke product by the CU industry in absolute terms 
decreased by 41,9% and in relation to the volu me of production decreased by 1,1 percentage 
points. 
 (e) Production capacity and capacity utilization 
 
  2009 2010 2011 January-
June 2011 January-
June 2012 
Change in production capacity as compared 
to the previous period,% - 7,3 0,4 - -1,2 
Change in capacity utilization as compared to 
the previous period, p.p. - -0,6 -4,5 - -0,7 
 
During the period from 2009 to 2010 the producti on capacity of the CU industry grew by 7,3%. 
In 2011, as compared to 2010, the capacity of the CU  industry grew by 0,4%, but in the first half 
of 2012, as compared to the first half of 2011, it fell by 1,2%. Between 2009 and 2010 the level of 
capacity utilization fell by 0,6 percentage poin ts. In 2011, as compared to 2010, the level of 
capacity utilization further decreased by 4,5 percentage points, in the first half of 2012, as 
compared to the first half of 2011, it fell by 0,7 percentage points. 
 (f) Costs, price and profitability 
 
  2009 2010 2011 January-
June 2011 January-
June 2012 
Change in the weighted average cost of 
production of a unit of the like product by the CU industry as compared to the previous period, % - 8,9 16,7 - 9,2 
Change in the weighted average cost of 
production of a unit of the like product by 
the CU industry as compared to 2009, % - 8,9 27,2 - - 
 
The table above shows that during the period from 2009 to 2011 the weighted average cost of production of a unit of the like product by the CU  industry grew by 27,2%. In the first half of 2012 
it grew by 9,2% as compared to the same period of 2011. 
 
  2009 2010 2011 January-
June 2011 January-
June 2012 
Change in the profitability of sales of the 
CU industry as compared to the previous period, p.p.  - 2,1 -5,2 - -1,7 
 
Between 2009 and 2010 the profitability of sales of the CU industry grew by 2,1 percentage points, 
but in 2011 it fell by 5,2 percentage points as compared to 2010. In the first half of 2012 the profitability of sales of the CU industry fell by 1,7 percentage points as compared to the first half of 2011.  
 
  2009 2010 2011 January-
June 2011 January-
June 2012 
Change in the weighted average price of 
the like product as compared to the previous period,% - 11,1 11,2 - 7,5 
Change in the weighted average price of 
the like product as compared to 2009,% - 11,1 23,6 - - 
 
During the period from 2009 to 2011 the weighted average price of the like product grew 
by 23,6 %. Between 2009 and 2010 the weight ed average price of the like product grew 
by 11,1%, in 2011 it further grew by 11,2% as co mpared to 2010. In the first half of 2012 the 
weighted average price of the like product grew by  7,5% as compared to the first half of 2011. 
 
Despite the increase of the weighted average price of the like product it didn’t meet the cost of 
production of the like product and profitability of the sales of the CU industry was negative.   G/SG/N/8/RUS/2 • G/SG/N/10/RUS/2 
 
- 5 - 
 
  (g) Employment 
 Between 2009 and 2011 the number of persons employ ed by the industry fell by 4,5%, at the 
same time wages increased by 12,5%. In the first half of 2012 employment in relation to the like 
product decreased by 6,7%, the wages grew by 9,8% as compared to the first half of 2011. 
 (h) Investments 
 
During the period from 2009 to 2011 the funds inve sted by the CU industry in the production of 
the like product grew by 280%, in the first half of 2012, as compared to the first half of 2011 the volume of investments into the production  of the like product fell by 56,6%.  
 
1.3  Causality 
  2009 2010 2011 January-
June 2011 January-
June 2012 
Change of the market share held by 
the CU industry as compared to the previous period, p.p. - - 5,3 - 2,8 - - 2,4 
Change of the market share held by 
imports as compared to the previous 
period, p.p. - + 8,9 + 1 - + 1,5 
 
During the period under consideration increased imports resulted in a substitution of the like 
product produced by the CU industry on the CU ma rket by the imported product. As shown in the 
table above, in 2010 the market share held by im ports increased by 8,9 percentage points as 
compared to 2009, while the market share held by  the CU industry decreased by 5,3 percentage 
points; in the first half of 2012, as compared to the first half of 2011, it increased by 1,5 percentage points, while the market shar e held by the CU industry decreased by 
2,4 percentage points. 
 
  2009 2010 2011 January-
June 2011 January-
June 2012 
Ratio of import price to price of like 
product produced by the CU industry, %1 67,2 69,9 65 70,5 66,9 
 
During the period under consideration the weighted average price of the like product produced by 
the CU industry was higher than the weighted  average price of the imported product.  
 The investigating authority analyzed the effects of other factors (exports of the CU industry, technological weakness) and found that they did not cause serious injury to the CU industry. 
 
2  PROVIDE INFORMATION ON WHETHER THERE IS AN ABSOLUTE INCREASE IN IMPORTS OR AN INCREASE IN IMPORTS RELATIVE TO DOMESTIC PRODUCTION 
  2009 2010 2011 January-
June 2011 January-
June 2012 
Volume of imports, tons 38 734,9 58 959,0 65 934,4 27 464,4 31 843,3 
Change as compared to the previous 
period, %  - 52,2 11,8 - 15,9 
Change as compared to 2009, % - - 70,2 - - 
Ratio of the volume of imports to the 
volume of production  2,41 3,91 4,22 3,90 4,37 
Change as compared to the previous 
period, %  - +62,4 +7,8 - +12,2 
Change as compared to 2009, %  - - +75,1 - - 
 
The above table shows that during the period from 2009 to 2011 imports increased in absolute 
terms by 70,2%. In the first half of 2012 imports increased in absolute terms by 15,9% as 
compared to the first half of 2011. 
                                               
1 ± 15% to actual data. G/SG/N/8/RUS/2 • G/SG/N/10/RUS/2 
 
- 6 - 
 
  The ratio of the volume of imports to the volume of production during the period from 2009 
to 2011 increased by 75,1 %, in the first half of 2012 the ratio of the volume of imports to the 
volume of production in absolute terms increased by 12,2 % as compared to the first half of 2011. 
 
3  PROVIDE THE PRECISE DESCRIPTION OF THE PRODUCT INVOLVED PROVIDE THE 
HARMONIZED SYSTEM NUMBERS UNDER WHICH THE PRODUCT ENTERS AT LEAST AT A 6-DIGIT HS LEVEL, AND AT A SUB-NATIONAL LEVEL (E.G. 8-DIGIT HS, 9-DIGIT HS OR 
10-DIGIT HS) IF PRACTICABLE. (THE HS CODES WILL BE PROVIDED FOR REFERENCE 
PURPOSES ONLY.) 
Tableware and kitchenware of porcelain classified under code 6911 10 000 0 of the Single 
Commodity Nomenclature for Foreign Econom ic Activities of the Customs Union.  
 
4  IF THE FINAL MEASURE REPLACES A PROVISIONAL MEASURE, OR IF A FINAL MEASURE IS EXTENDED, A MEMBER IS ENCOURAGED TO PROVIDE A WRITTEN 
DESCRIPTION OF ANY PART OF THE IMPORT ED PRODUCT THAT WILL NO LONGER BE 
SUBJECT TO THE MEASURE AND THE HARMONIZED SYSTEM NUMBERS UNDER WHICH IT ENTERS AT LEAST AT A 6-DIGIT LEVEL, AND AT A SUB-NATIONAL LEVEL (E.G., 8-DIGIT, 
9-DIGIT OR 10-DIGIT LEVEL) IF PRACTICABLE. 
Not applicable. 
 5  PROVIDE PRECISE DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED MEASURE. 
The Department proposes to apply a safeguard meas ure in the form of a safeguard duty at rates 
as specified in the following table.  
Period of application First year Second year Third year 
Amount of duty 1479 US dollars per ton 1035,3 US dollars 
per ton 591,6 US dollars per 
ton 
 
6  PROVIDE PROPOSED DATE OF INTRODUCTION OF THE MEASURE. 
September 2013. 
 
7  PROVIDE EXPECTED DURATION OF THE MEASURE. 
The expected duration of the measure is 3 years.   
 
8  FOR A MEASURE WITH A DURATION OF MORE THAN THREE YEARS, PROVIDE THE 
PROPOSED DATE FOR THE REVIEW (UNDER AR TICLE 7.4) TO BE HELD NOT LATER THAN 
THE MID-TERM OF THE MEASUR E, IF SUCH A DATE FOR THE REVIEW HAS ALREADY BEEN 
SCHEDULED. 
Not available. 
 
9  IF THE EXPECTED DURATION IS OVER ONE YEAR, PROVIDE EXPECTED TIMETABLE 
FOR PROGRESSIVE LIBERALIZATION OF THE MEASURE. 
The measure is to be liberalized as stated in title above. 
 
Period of application First year Second year Third year 
Amount of duty 1479 US dollars per ton 1035,3 US dollars 
per ton 591,6 US dollars per 
ton 
 G/SG/N/8/RUS/2 • G/SG/N/10/RUS/2 
 
- 7 - 
 
  10  IF THE NOTIFICATION RELATES ONLY TO A FINDING OF SERIOUS INJURY OR 
THREAT THEREOF, AND DOES NOT RELATE TO A DECISION TO APPLY OR EXTEND A 
SAFEGUARD MEASURE, PROVIDE INFORMAT ION REGARDING PROC EDURES FOR PRIOR 
CONSULTATION WITH THOSE MEMBERS HA VING A SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST AS 
EXPORTERS OF THE PRODUCT CONCERNED. 
Consistent with Article 12.3 of the Agreement on Safeguards, the Russian Federation is prepared 
to hold consultation with those Members having a substantial interest as exporters of the product 
concerned, with a view to, inter alia, reviewing the information provided in this notification and 
exchanging views on the appropriate remedy.  11  IF THE MEASURE IS BEING EXTENDED, ALSO PROVIDE: 
(i) evidence that the industry concerned is  adjusting and that the safeguard measure 
continues to be necessary to pr event or remedy serious injury; 
 
(ii) reference to the WTO document that noti fied the initial application of the measure; 
 (iii) duration of the measure from initial application till the date at which it will be 
extended; 
 and,  
(iv) precise description of the measure in pl ace prior to the date of extension (in this 
context, please note that the last senten ce of Article 7.4 states that: "A measure 
extended under paragraph 2 shall not be more restrictive than it was at the end of the 
initial period, and should co ntinue to be liberalized.") 
 Not applicable. 
 
12  IF THE NOTIFICATION RELATES TO A DE CISION TO APPLY OR EXTEND A SAFEGUARD 
MEASURE, MEMBERS ARE ENCOURAGED TO PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: 
(i) The major exporting Members of imports of the product involved. 
 
(ii) If there are any exporting Members to which the measure does not apply for any reason other than the application of Articl e 9.1, the names of such exporting Members 
and reasons for non-application of the measure. 
 The major exporting Members of the product under consideration are China, the European Union 
and Ukraine. 
   
__________