# EUR-Lex - 52012PC0227 - EN

*|*

# 52012PC0227

**Proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION terminating the interim review of the anti-dumping measures concerning imports of furfuraldehyde originating in the People's Republic of China and repealing those measures /* COM/2012/0227 final - 2012/0114 (NLE) */**

			*

			*

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

1.           CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL

· Grounds for and objectives of the proposal

This proposal concerns the application of
Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of 30 November 2009 on protection against
dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community[1] (‘the basic Regulation’) in the
interim review proceeding concerning the anti-dumping duty in force in respect
of imports of furfuraldehyde originating in the People's Republic of China (‘PRC’).

· General context

This proposal is made in the context of the
implementation of the basic Regulation and is the result of an investigation
which was carried out in line with the substantive and procedural requirements
laid out in the basic Regulation.

· Existing provisions in the area of the proposal

A definitive anti-dumping duty on imports
of furfuraldehyde originating in the PRC
was first imposed by Council Regulation (EC) No 95/95[2], and further confirmed by Council Regulations (EC) No 2722/1999[3], (EC) No 639/2005[4],
and (EU) No 453/2011[5].

· Consistency with other policies and objectives of the Union

Not applicable.

2.           RESULTS OF CONSULTATIONS WITH THE
INTERESTED PARTIES AND IMPACT ASSESSMENTS

· Consultation of interested parties

Interested parties concerned by the
proceeding have had the possibility to defend their interests during the
investigation, in line with the provisions of the basic Regulation.

· Collection and use of expertise

There was no need for external expertise.

· Impact assessment

This proposal is the result of the
implementation of the basic Regulation.

The basic Regulation does not provide for a
general impact assessment but contains an exhaustive list of conditions that
have to be assessed.

3.           LEGAL ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSAL

· Summary of the proposed action

On 5 July 2011 the Commission announced an
interim review of the anti-dumping duty in force in respect of imports of
furfuraldehyde originating in the PRC by a notice ('notice of initiation')
published in the Official Journal of the European Union.

In the absence of cooperation from parties,
the review investigation found evidence that the Union industry was not injured
during the review investigation period and that this was of a lasting nature.
The investigation also found that termination of the measures would be in the
interest of the Union.

Therefore, it is suggested that the Council
adopt the attached proposal for a Regulation in order to terminate the existing
measures, which should be published in the Official Journal of the European
Union by 4 July 2012 at the latest.

· Legal basis

Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of 30
November 2009 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members
of the European Community.

· Subsidiarity principle

The proposal falls under the exclusive
competence of the European Union. The subsidiarity principle therefore does not
apply.

· Proportionality principle

The proposal complies with the
proportionality principle for the following reasons:

The form of action is described in the
basic Regulation and leaves no scope for national decision.

Indication of how financial and
administrative burden falling upon the Union, national governments, regional
and local authorities, economic operators and citizens is minimized and
proportionate to the objective of the proposal is not applicable.

· Choice of instruments

Proposed instruments: regulation.

Other means would not be adequate for the
following reason:

The basic Regulation does not provide for
alternative options.

4.           BUDGETARY IMPLICATION

Although this would remove a duty in force,
the proposal has no implications for the Union budget given that all imports
are at present made under the inward processing regime.

2012/0114 (NLE)

Proposal for a

COUNCIL REGULATION

terminating the interim review of the
anti-dumping measures concerning imports of furfuraldehyde originating in the
People's Republic of China and repealing those measures

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the
Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No
1225/2009 of 30 November 2009 on protection against dumped imports from
countries not members of the European Community[6]
(‘the basic Regulation’), and in particular Articles 9 and 11(3), (5) and (6)
thereof,

Having regard to the proposal submitted by
the European Commission ('Commission') after consulting the Advisory Committee,

Whereas:

A.        PROCEDURE

1.           Measures in force

(1)       In 1995, the Council
imposed by Regulation (EC) No 95/95[7]
a definitive anti-dumping duty in the form of a specific duty on imports of
furfuraldehyde originating in the People's
Republic of China (‘PRC’ or 'the country concerned') (‘the original anti-dumping
measures’). The specific duty rate was set
at EUR 352 per tonne.

(2)       Following an interim review initiated in May 1997
upon the request of a Chinese exporter, the measures were maintained by
Regulation (EC) No 2722/1999[8] for a further period of four years.

(3)       In April 2005, following an expiry review, the Council by
Regulation (EC) No 639/2005[9] extended
the measures for a further period of five years.

(4)       In
May 2011, following a further expiry review, the Council by Regulation (EU) No
453/2011[10]
extended the measures for a further period of five years. The specific duty rate was set at the
same level as in the original anti-dumping measures, i.e. EUR 352 per tonne.

2.           Initiation of an interim
review

(5)       Recital (84) of Council
Regulation (EU) No 453/2011 stated that the Council considered it appropriate
to assess if the level of the duty was still relevant, given that the specific
duty had been established on the basis of the findings of the original
investigation in 1995 and never revised. The Commission would therefore
consider the ex officio initiation of an interim review pursuant to
Article 11(3) of the basic Regulation.

(6)       Having determined that the
Commission had at its disposal sufficient prima facie evidence for the
initiation of an ex officio interim review, and after consulting the
Advisory Committee, the Commission announced on 5 July 2011, in a notice
published in the Official Journal of the European Union[11] ('the notice of initiation'),
the initiation of an interim review pursuant to Article 11(3) of the basic
Regulation.

3.           Investigation

3.1.        Investigation period

(7)       The investigation
concerning dumping covered the period from 1 July 2010 to 30 June 2011 (‘the
review investigation period’ or ‘RIP’). The examination of the trends relevant
for the assessment of injury covered the period from 1 January 2008 to the end
of the review investigation period (‘the period considered’).

3.2.        Parties concerned by this
investigation

(8)       The Commission officially
advised the Union industry, exporting producers in the country concerned,
importers, users known to be concerned, and the authorities of the country
concerned of the initiation of the interim review.

(9)       Interested parties were
given the opportunity to make their views known in writing and to request a
hearing within the time limit set in the notice of initiation.

3.3.        Sampling for exporting
producers in the People's Republic of China

(10)     In
view of the apparent large number of exporting producers in the PRC, it was
considered appropriate to examine whether sampling should be used, in
accordance with Article 17 of the basic Regulation. In order to enable the
Commission to decide whether sampling would be necessary and, if so, to select
a sample, the exporting producers in the PRC were requested to make themselves
known within 15 days of the initiation of the review and to provide the
Commission with the information requested in the notice of initiation. Given that no exporting producers came forward to cooperate,
sampling was therefore not necessary.

3.4.        Questionnaire replies and
verifications

(11)     The Commission sent
questionnaires to all parties known to be concerned. No other parties made
themselves known within the deadlines set in the notice of initiation.

(12)     No replies to the
questionnaires were received from the two Union producers, the Chinese
exporting producers or from any importers or users. One producer in the
analogue country, Argentina, replied to the questionnaire.

(13)     Given the lack of
cooperation from parties, no verification visits were carried out.

B.        PRODUCT CONCERNED AND
LIKE PRODUCT

1.           Product concerned

(14)     The product concerned by
this review is the same as the one in the original investigation and the
following reviews mentioned above, namely furfuraldehyde originating in the
PRC, currently falling within CN code 2932 12 00 (‘the product concerned’).
Furfuraldehyde is also known as 2-furaldehyde or furfural.

(15)     Furfuraldehyde is a light
yellow liquid with a characteristic pungent odour, which is obtained by
processing different types of agricultural waste. Furfuraldehyde has two main
applications: as a selective solvent in petroleum refining for the production
of lubricating oils and as raw material for processing into furfuryl alcohol,
which is used to make synthetic resin for foundry moulds.

2.           Like product

(16)     As in the previous
investigations, it was considered that the furfuraldehyde produced in the PRC
and exported to the EU, the furfuraldehyde produced and sold on the domestic
market of the analogue country Argentina and the furfuraldehyde manufactured
and sold in the EU by the Union producers have the same basic physical and
chemical characteristics, and the same basic uses. They were therefore
considered to be like products within the meaning of Article 1(4) of the basic
Regulation.

C.        DUMPING

1.           General

(17)     No Chinese exporting
producer cooperated with the investigation and they did not submit any information.
Therefore, the findings on dumping set out below had to be based on facts
available, in particular Eurostat data, official export statistics of the PRC and
information submitted by the company in the analogue country, Argentina.

2.           Analogue country

(18)     Pursuant to Article 2(7)(a)
of the basic Regulation normal value was determined on the basis of the price
or constructed value in an appropriate market economy third country ('the
analogue country'), or the price from the analogue country to other countries,
including the Union, or, where those are not possible, on any other reasonable
basis, including the price actually paid or payable in the Union for the like
product, duly adjusted if necessary to include a reasonable profit margin.

(19)     As in the original investigation,
Argentina was proposed in the notice of initiation as an appropriate analogue
country for the purposes of establishing normal value pursuant to Article
2(7)(a) of the basic Regulation. Following the publication of the notice of initiation,
no comments concerning the proposed analogue country were received.

(20)     One producer of
furfuraldehyde in Argentina cooperated with the investigation by replying to a
questionnaire. The investigation showed that Argentina had a competitive market
for furfuraldehyde with around 90% of the market supplied by local production
and the rest by imports from third countries. The production volume in
Argentina constitutes more than 70% of the volume of Chinese exports of the
product concerned to the EU for inward processing. The Argentinean market was
therefore deemed sufficiently representative for the determination of normal
value for the PRC.

(21)     It is therefore concluded,
as in the previous investigations, that Argentina constitutes an appropriate
analogue country in accordance with Article 2(7)(a) of the basic Regulation.

3.           Dumping of imports during
the RIP

3.1.        Normal value

(22)     Normal value was
established on the basis of the information received from the cooperating
producer in the analogue country, i.e. on the basis of the price paid or
payable on the domestic market of Argentina by unrelated customers, since these
sales were found to be made in the ordinary course of trade.

(23)     As a result, normal value
was established as the weighted average domestic sales price to unrelated
customers by the cooperating producer in Argentina.

(24)     It was first established
whether the total domestic sales of the like product to independent customers
were representative in accordance with Article 2(2) of the basic Regulation,
i.e. whether they accounted for 5% or more of the total sales volume of the
product concerned exported to the Union. The domestic sales of the cooperating
producer in Argentina were sufficiently representative during the RIP.

(25)     The Commission subsequently
examined whether the domestic sales of the like product could be regarded as
being sold in the ordinary course of trade pursuant to Article 2(4) of the
basic Regulation. This was done by establishing for the
like product sold on the Argentinean market the proportion of profitable
domestic sales to independent customers during the RIP. Since all sales of the like product during the RIP were profitable,
normal value was based on weighted average of all domestic sales.

3.2.        Export price

(26)     As none of the Chinese
exporters to the EU cooperated with the investigation, export prices were
established on the basis of the facts available. The most appropriate basis was
found to be the information provided by Eurostat data in relation to imports
into the EU of the product concerned. Though most of these imports were made
under the inward processing regime (Chinese furfuraldehyde was further
processed into furfuryl alcohol for export), there was no reason to consider
that they were not a reasonable basis for establishing export prices.

3.3.        Comparison

(27)     For the purposes of
ensuring a fair comparison between the normal value and the export price in
accordance with Article 2(10) of the basic Regulation, due allowance in the
form of adjustments was made with regard to certain differences in transport,
credit costs and insurance, which affected prices and price comparability.

3.4.        Dumping margin

(28)     In accordance with Article
2(11) of the basic Regulation, the dumping margin was established on the basis
of a comparison of the weighted average normal value with the weighted average
export prices at the same level of trade. This comparison showed a margin of
dumping of 5,6%.

4.           Lasting nature of changed
circumstances

(29)     Further to the analysis of
the existence of dumping during the RIP, the likelihood of the continuation of
dumping should measures be repealed was investigated. Given the fact that no
exporting producer in the PRC cooperated in this investigation, the conclusions
below rely on facts available in accordance with Article 18 of the basic
Regulation.

(30)     In this respect the
following elements were analysed: Chinese domestic demand and consumption, and
the development of Chinese exports to the EU under the inward processing regime
(IPR).

(31)     According to information
available, since 2007 the domestic consumption of furfuraldehyde in the PRC has
been increasing at a faster pace (an average forecasted annual growth for the
time period 2007-2012 of approx. 9%) than the Chinese production capacity of
that product (approx. +6%). The rise in Chinese domestic furfural consumption
is mostly explained by the growing demand for furfuraldehyde's main downstream
product, furfuryl alcohol. Chinese production of furfuryl alcohol has been
drastically increasing since 1999, reflecting an emphasis on manufacturing
higher-value furfural products and increasing demand for furan resins from the
foundry industry.

(32)     Moreover, domestic demand
for corn cob, the main raw material used by Chinese furfuraldehyde producers,
has been increasing. With the rising global population, especially in the PRC
and India, and the change from a grain based diet to a protein based diet, the
global demand for corn is forecasted to grow at an increased rate. The PRC is
the world's second largest corn consumer. In addition to the increase in
industrial uses of corn, the Chinese demand for feed and livestock production
is growing 3% to 6% annually. Whereas the PRC's corn consumption has been
growing rapidly over the last few years, its production has been falling behind
the demand. It is expected that during the time period 2011-2015 corn exports
from the USA to the PRC will quintuple. It also has to be noted that Chinese
furfural producers are facing more and more competition from xylose and xylitol
producers, with whom they share the same feedstock (corn cobs).

(33)     Concerning Chinese exports
to the EU during the RIP, it should be noted that virtually all furfuraldehyde
from the country concerned is imported exclusively under inward processing
arrangements (IPR). This practice started in 2000 with approx. 75% of Chinese
yearly quantities of furfuraldehyde being shipped into the Union without being
subject to anti-dumping duty, with the aim of further processing them into furfuryl
alcohol destined for export to third countries. Since 2001, free market imports
from the country concerned have almost completely ceased.

(34)     The long-term changes in
the domestic demand for furfural in China and the tight supply-demand situation
on the Chinese corn market, along with the structure of Chinese imports to the
EU as explained in the previous recital, seem to have led to a change in the
level of dumping practiced by the Chinese exporting producers. A comparison of
Chinese export prices to the EU with the normal value of the product concerned,
all duly adjusted, shows a decrease in the dumping margin during the RIP, as
compared to the previous expiry review investigation.

(35)     In conclusion, the above
analysis shows that the changes in the Chinese domestic demand and consumption
of corn cobs and furfuraldehyde and consequently of prices, are of a lasting
nature. Therefore it can be concluded that if anti-dumping measures are repealed,
Chinese exports into the Union would not significantly increase.

D. UNION INDUSTRY

(36)     The Union industry ('UI')
consists of two companies: Lenzing AG (Austria) and Tanin Sevnica kemicna
industrija d.d (Slovenia), which together account for 100% of Union production
of the like product in the RIP. On this basis, the two Union producers constitute
the Union industry within the meaning of Article 4(1) and Article 5(4) of the
basic Regulation. Neither company replied to the questionnaires sent to them or
fully cooperated in the investigation.

(37)     Given the lack of
cooperation from the Union industry, data for examining the situation of the
Union market and injury caused to the Union industry by dumped imports from the
PRC has been taken from facts available, including data extrapolated from
information collected in the recent expiry review which covered the period from
1 January 2007 until 31 March 2010. Any sources given for the data in the
tables below therefore relates to the period 2007-2009 unless specified. Nutrafur,
the Spanish producer that lodged the original complaint in 1994 under the name
of Furfural Espanol S.A., ceased production in October 2008. The production
figures of Nutrafur in 2008 were included in the consumption in the Union
market. For reasons of confidentiality data concerning the performance of the
Union industry are given only in indexed form.

E. SITUATION ON THE UNION MARKET

1.           Consumption in the Union
market

(38)     Union
consumption of furfuraldehyde for 2008 and 2009 was established on the basis of
the verified sales volumes of the Union industry on the Union market (including
the sales of Nutrafur until October 2008 while it was still producing
furfuraldehyde) plus imports under Inward Processing Regime (IPR) from the PRC
and imports from other third countries into free circulation, based on data of
the importer International Furan Chemicals BV ('IFC') verified during the last
expiry review investigation and Eurostat. As Eurostat
does not disclose the complete information for confidentiality reasons,
Eurostat data were used only for the imports from other third countries except the
PRC and the Dominican Republic, since IFC is the sole importer of
furfuraldehyde from these sources.

(39)     Facts available were used
for 2010 and the RIP due to the lack of cooperation from both the Union
industry and the sole importer and the confidentiality of large amounts of data
usually available from Eurostat. In the absence of any indications to the
contrary, there was no reason to believe that there has been any marked shift
in Union consumption since 2009 and it was considered that it remained at the
same levels during 2010 and the RIP.

(40)     On
this basis, during the period considered, the Union consumption decreased by 17%,
from 45 738 tonnes in 2008 to 38 000 tonnes during the RIP.

Table 1 – Union consumption

Year || 2008 || 2009 || 2010 || RIP

Tonnes || 45 738 || 38 175 || 38 000 || 38 000

Index (2008=100) || 100 || 83 || 83 || 83

Y/Y trend || || -17 || 0 || 0

Source: verified questionnaire replies of
the Union industry and IFC, Eurostat

2.           Imports from the PRC

2.1.        Volume, market share and
prices

(41)     According to Chinese export
statistics, Chinese imports were being made under IPR during the RIP. The
Chinese IPR volume increased from 10 002 tonnes in 2008 to 13 975 tonnes in the
RIP, i.e. by 40%. Over the period considered the Chinese market share for IPR increased
from 22% to 37%, i.e. by 15 percentage points.

(42)     The Chinese IPR price increased
by 47% from EUR 1014 per MT in 2008 to EUR 1488 in the RIP. It is noted that
during the RIP prices of Chinese imports increased rapidly, reaching a high
point of over 1700 EUR/MT.

Table 2 – Imports from the PRC

Year || 2008 || 2009 || 2010 || RIP

Tonnes || 10 002 || 5 159 || 8 375 || 13 975

Index (2008=100) || 100 || 52 || 84 || 140

Y/Y trend || || -48 || 32 || 56

Market share || 22% || 14% || 22% || 37%

Price, EUR/tonne || 1 014 || 690 || 1 362 || 1 488

Index (2008=100) || 100 || 68 || 134 || 147

Source: Verified questionnaire response of
IFC, Chinese export statistics

3.           Import volumes and prices
from other third countries

(43)     It should be noted that, as
in the original investigation, imports from the Dominican Republic were
entirely shipments from a parent company to its European subsidiary to produce
furfuryl alcohol. Thus, the prices used in these transactions are transfer
prices between related companies which may not reflect real market prices.
Given the lack of cooperation from the importer concerned and the
confidentiality of data in Eurostat, it has been assumed that imports and
prices from the Dominican Republic remained constant during 2010 and the RIP.

Table 3 - Imports into the Union from the
Dominican Republic

Year || 2008 || 2009 || 2010 || RIP

Tonnes || 27 662 || 24 996 || 25000 || 25000

Index (2008=100) || 100 || 90 || 90 || 90

Y/Y trend || || -10 || 0 || 0

Market share || 60% || 65% || 66% || 66%

Price, EUR/tonne || 982 || 582 || 582 || 582

Index (2008=100) || 100 || 59 || 59 || 59

(44)     According to Eurostat,
import volumes of furfuraldehyde into the Union from countries other than the
PRC, together with their average prices, developed as follows:

Table 4 - Imports into the Union from other
third countries

Year || 2008 || 2009 || 2010 || RIP

Tonnes || 1 583 || 1 226 || 138 || 162

Index (2008=100) || 100 || 77 || 9 || 10

Y/Y trend || || -23 || -69 || 2

Market share || 3% || 3% || 1% || 1%

Price, EUR/tonne || 997 || 632 || 1 473 || 1 685

Index (2008=100) || 100 || 63 || 148 || 169

4.           Export volumes and prices
from the EU to other third countries

(45)     During
the period considered data was only available for 2008 and 2009. No reliable
statistical data was available to assess the evolution of the dataset into 2010
and the RIP. In the absence of cooperation from the Union industry facts
available were used and the assumption made that exports from the EU would
continue at the same volume levels as 2009 with a price increase in line with
that found on the EU market.

Table 5 – Export volumes and prices of the
Union Industry to other third countries

Year || 2008 || 2009 || 2010 || RIP

Quantities - Index (2008=100) || 100 || 155 || 155 || 155

Y/Y trend || || 55 || 0 || 0

Prices - Index (2008=100) || 100 || 77 || 134 || 147

Y/Y trend || || -23 || 57 || 13

5.           Economic situation of the
Union industry

(46)     The economic situation of
the Union industry, i.e. the two companies Lenzing and Tanin, is analysed below
using data collected during the expiry review plus facts available for the current
review investigation period (RIP).

5.1.        Production

(47)     The total production by the
Union industry of the like product increased by 5% until 2009. In the absence
of other data it was assumed that production remained stable in 2010 and the
RIP.

Table 6 - Union production

Year || 2008 || 2009 || 2010 || RIP

Index (2008=100) || 100 || 105 || 105 || 105

Y/Y trend || || 5 || 0 || 0

Source: Verified questionnaire replies of
the Union producers

5.2.        Production capacity and
capacity utilisation

(48)     The total production
capacity of the Union industry remained the same in 2008 and 2009. Given the
lack of cooperation from the Union industry it was assumed that capacity and
utilisation remained the same in 2010 and the RIP.

Table 7 - Union capacity

Year || 2008 || 2009 || 2010 || RIP

Index (2008=100) || 100 || 100 || 100 || 100

Capacity utilisation || 92% || 96% || 96% || 96%

Source: Verified questionnaire replies of
the Union producers

5.3.        Level of stocks

(49)     Given the lack of
cooperation of the Union industry it was assumed that stock levels remained the
same as they were at the end of 2009.

Table 8 – Stocks

Year || 2008 || 2009 || 2010 || RIP

Index (2008=100) || 100 || 56 || 56 || 56

Y/Y trend || || -44 || 0 || 0

Source: Verified questionnaire replies of
the Union producers

5.4.        Sales volume and market
share

(50)     The Union industry's sales
volume to unrelated customers in the Union market increased by 12% from 2008 to
2009. In the absence of data from the Union industry it was assumed that volume
of sales did not increase in 2010 or the RIP.

Table 9 – Sales volume and EU market share

Year || 2008 || 2009 || 2010 || RIP

Index (2008=100) || 100 || 112 || 112 || 112

Market share ranged || 10-20% || 14-24% || 14-24% || 14-24%

Source: Verified questionnaire replies of
the Union producers

5.5.        Average sales prices

(51)     During the period
considered the average sales prices charged by the Union industry on the Union
market increased substantially by 36%. This was caused by a large price
increase during 2010 and the RIP.

Table 10 – Average sales price in the EU

Year || 2008 || 2009 || 2010 || RIP

Index (2008=100) || 100 || 89 || 108 || 136

Y/Y trend || || -11 || 19 || 28

Source: Verified questionnaire replies of
the Union producers plus facts made available to the Commission

5.6.        Average cost of production

(52)     As no cost of production
data was made available by the Union industry for 2010 and the RIP data from
the previous expiry review was increased by 6% to take into account inflation
during the period.

Table 11 – Average cost of production

Year || 2008 || 2009 || 2010 || RIP

Index (2008=100) || 100 || 100 || 102 || 106

Y/Y trend || || 0 || 2 || 4

Source: Verified questionnaire replies of
the Union producers

5.7.        Profitability and cash flow

(53)     Calculation of the profits
made by the Union industry, based on the price and cost data above, showed a
significant increase during the period considered due to the price increases on
the EU market combined with no evidence of increase in production costs beyond
inflation. Cash flow is considered, in the absence of any other data, to have
followed a trend similar to profitability.

Table 12 – Profitability and cash flow

Year || 2008 || 2009 || 2010 || RIP

Profitability Index (2008=100) || 100 || 96 || 153 || 297

Y/Y trend || || -4 || 57 || 144

Cash Flow - Index (2008=100) || 100 || 34 || 69 || 69

Y/Y trend || || +66 || 36 || 0

Source: Verified questionnaire replies of
the Union producers

5.8.        Investments, return on
investments and ability to raise capital

(54)     In the absence of data from
the Union industry, given the increases in prices in 2010 and the RIP it has
been assumed that there was a return to the level of investment as that seen in
2007. Return on investment has been assumed to follow the same basic trend as
profitability shown in Table 12.

(55)     Table 13 – Investments and
return on investments

Year || 2008 || 2009 || 2010 || RIP

Investments index (2008=100) || 100 || 3 || 163 || 163

Y/Y trend || || -97 || 160 || 0

Return on investments index (2008=100) || 100 || -4 || 100 || 200

Y/Y trend || || -104 || 96 || 100

Source: Verified questionnaire replies of
the Union producers

5.9.        Employment and productivity

(56)     Given the lack of
information from the Union industry for 2010 and the RIP it has been considered
that employment and productivity remained constant during the period
considered.

Table 14 – Employment and productivity

Year || 2008 || 2009 || 2010 || RIP

Employment - Index || 100 || 100 || 100 || 100

Productivity (tonnes/employees) - Index || 100 || 100 || 100 || 100

Labour costs - Index || 100 || 100 || 100 || 100

Source: Verified questionnaire replies of
the Union producers

5.10.      Magnitude of dumping margin

(57)     Despite the lack of
cooperation from the Chinese exporting producers, the volume and value of
imports was analysed from Eurostat together with an estimation of market share.
The significant price increase in 2010 and 2011 has dramatically reduced the
margin of dumping from the PRC since the expiry review investigation period.

5.11.      Recovery from the effects of
dumped imports

(58)     As shown by the positive
evolution of most of the indicators listed above, during the period considered
the financial situation of the Union industry has fully recovered from the
injurious effect of the significantly dumped imports that were identified by
previous investigations originating in the PRC.

6.           Conclusion on the economic
situation of the Union industry

(59)     The measures against the PRC
have had a positive impact on the economic situation of the Union industry,
since most of the injury indicators showed a positive development: production,
sales volume and sales value increased between 2008 and the RIP. However given
the substantial increase in prices on the EU market, the Union industry is now achieving
profits far in excess of the target profit, set at the original investigation
as being 5%, to ensure its development.

(60)     Given the significant
increase in prices on the Union market during the RIP, with no evidence of a parallel
increase in costs, it is concluded that the Union industry has not suffered
material injury within the meaning of Article 3(5).

7.           Conclusion on the lasting
nature of these changed circumstances

(61)     Consideration has been
given as to whether the increase in prices on the EU market is a lasting change
in circumstances from the findings of the previous expiry review investigation.
The data available shows prices on the Union market recovering strongly,
matching the levels of 2008 and then overtaking these amounts whereas in the
expiry review investigation prices were falling. Moreover, unlike in the expiry
review, no evidence of undercutting was found. In the expiry review, profitability
was on a downward trend but data after the end of that investigation shows
profitability recovering strongly, matching the levels of 2008 and then
exceeding them.

(62)     It was analysed whether,
however, the change in prices since the end of the expiry review investigation
period could be based on a particularly poor harvest season in the PRC, as
furfuraldehyde is produced there from agricultural waste. However the price has
not fallen significantly since the harvest season at the end of 2010 and
therefore this was discounted. It appeared that there had been an increase in the
prices of imports originating in the PRC caused by the long-term growth in the
domestic demand for furfuraldehyde and the rising raw material costs in the
country concerned. Due to the lack of cooperation from the Chinese exporting
producers, this could not be verified, but the Commission received no evidence
that this was not the case.

(63)     Given the evidence
available to the Commission referred to above, and the lack of information
showing that the price increases referred to have been temporary, it has been
concluded that this change is of a lasting nature.

F.         TERMINATION OF THE ANTI-DUMPING PROCEEDING AND REPEAL OF
THE ANTIDUMPING MEASURES IN FORCE

(64)     In light of the above, it
is considered that the present anti-dumping review should be terminated and the
anti-dumping measures in force be repealed.

(65)     All parties were informed
of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of which it was intended
to recommend that the existing measures be terminated. They were also granted a
period within which they could make representations subsequent to this
disclosure. No comments were received.

(66)     It follows
from the above that the present anti-dumping review should be terminated and the
anti-dumping measures imposed by Regulation (EU) No 453/2011 on imports of
furfuraldehyde originating in the PRC should be terminated and the existing
duty repealed,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The interim review of the anti-dumping
duties applicable to imports of
2-furaldehyde (also known as furfuraldehyde or furfural) currently falling within
CN code 2932 12 00 originating in the People’s Republic of China is hereby
terminated.

Article 2

Regulation (EU) No 453/2011 is hereby repealed.

Article 3

This Regulation shall enter into force on
the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the
European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in
its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels,

For
the Council

The
President

[1]               OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 51.

[2]               OJ L 15, 21.1.1995, p. 11.

[3]               OJ L 328, 22.12.1999, p. 1.

[4]               OJ L 107, 28.4.2005, p. 1.

[5]               OJ L 123, 12.5.2011, p. 1.

[6]               OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 51.

[7]               OJ L 15, 21.1.1995, p. 11.

[8]               OJ L 328, 22.12.1999, p. 1.

[9]               OJ L 107, 28.4.2005, p. 1.

[10]             OJ L 123, 12.5.2011, p. 1.

[11]             OJ C 196, 5.7.2011, p. 9.