This document is meant purely as documentation tool and the institutions do not assume any liability for its contents
"B COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 2605/2000
of 27 November 2000
imposing definitive anti-dumping duties on imports of certain electronic weighing scales (REWS)
originating in the People’s Republic of China, the Republic of Korea and Taiwan
(OJ L 301, 30.11.2000, p. 42)
Corrected by:
"C1 Corrigendum, OJ L 60, 1.3.2001, p. 71 (2605/2000)2000R2605 — EN — 01.12.2000 — 000.001 — 1
COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 2605/2000
of 27 November 2000
imposing definitive anti-dumping duties on imports of certain
electronic weighing scales (REWS) originating in the People’s
Republic of China, the Republic of Korea and Taiwan
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December
1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members
of the European Community (
1), and in particular Article 9 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal submitted by the Commission after
consulting the Advisory Committee,
Whereas:
A. PROCEDURE
1.Initiation
(1) On 16 September 1999, the Commission announced by a notice
(‘Notice of initiation’) published in the Official Journal of the
European Communities (2), the initiation of an anti-dumping
proceeding with regard to imports into the Community of certain
electronic weighing scales (‘REWS’) originating in the People’ s
Republic of China (‘PRC’), the Republic of Korea (‘Korea’) and
Taiwan.
(2) The proceeding was initiated as a result of a complaint lodged on
30 July 1999 on behalf of the Community producers representing
a major proportion of the Community REWS industry, as defined
in Article 5(4) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96 (‘basic Regulation’).
The complaint contained evidence of dumping of the said product
and of material injury resulting therefrom, which was considered
sufficient to justify the initiation of a proceeding.
2.Investigation
(3) The Commission officially advised the complainant Community
producers, the exporting producers, the importers, the users (as
well as representative associations) known to be concerned and the
representatives of the exporting countries concerned of the
initiation of the proceeding. Interested parties were given the
opportunity to make their views known in writing and to request a
hearing within the time limits set out in the Notice of initiation.
(4) The Commission sent questionnaires to parties known to be
concerned and to other parties that made themselves known within
the deadlines set out in the Notice of initiation. Replies were
received from two Community producers, eight exporting
producers in the countries concerned, as well as certain known
related importers in the Community and the cooperating producer
in the analogue country. Replies were also received from two users
of the product concerned in the Community.
(5) The Commission sought and verified all the information it
deemed necessary for the purpose of a determination of dumping,
injury and Community interest. Verification visits were carried out
at the premises of the following companies:!B
(1) OJ L 56, 6.3.1996, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No
2238/2000 (OJ L 257, 11.10.2000, p. 2).
(2) OJ C 262, 16.9.1999, p. 8.2000R2605 — EN — 01.12.2000 — 000.001 — 2
(a)Community producers
Avery Berkel Ltd, Birmingham, United KingdomBizerba GmbH., Balingen, GermanyBizerba Belgium SA, Brussels, (a subsidiary of Bizerba
GmbH)
(b)Exporting producers
KOREA
A & D Korea Co. Ltd, Seoul
CAS Corporation, SeoulDescom Scales Mfg. Co. Ltd, Kyungki-Do
TAIWAN
Snowrex International Co. Ltd, TaipeiUWE-Universal Weight Enterprise Co. Ltd, Taipei
PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA
Mettler-Toledo Changzhou Scale Ltd, ChangzhouShanghai Teraoka Electronic Co. Ltd, ShanghaiShanghai Y amato Scale Co. Ltd, Shanghai
(c)Analogue country
INDONESIA
PT TEC Indonesia Co. Ltd, Batam
(d)Related importers
Ishida Europe AB, Gustavsberg, Sweden
Mettler-Toledo GmbH, Gießen, GermanyMettler-Toledo (Albstadt) GmbH, Albstadt, GermanyMettler-Toledo GmbH, Wien, Austria.
(6) The investigation of dumping and injury covered the period from 1
September 1998 to 31 August 1999 (‘investigation period’ or
‘IP’). The examination of trends relevant for the determination of
injury covered the period from 1 January 1995 up to the end of the
investigation period (‘analysis period’).
(7) All parties concerned were informed of the essential facts and
considerations on the basis of which it was intended to
recommend the imposition of the existing measures. Represen-
tations were received from interested parties following these
disclosures. The comments of these parties were considered and,
where appropriate, the findings have been modified accordingly.
3.Previous proceedings involving the product concerned
(8) In October 1993, by Regulation (EEC) No 2887/93 (
1), the
Council imposed definitive anti-dumping measures on imports on
REWS originating in Singapore and Korea. The measures
applicable to Singapore are subject to an ongoing review which
was opened in October 1998 (2) whereas the measures applicable
to Korea lapsed in October 1998.
(9) In April 1993, by Regulation (EEC) No 993/93 (3), the Council
imposed definitive anti-dumping measures on imports of REWS
originating in Japan. These measures are also subject to an
ongoing review which was opened in April 1998 (4).!B
(1) OJ L 263, 22.10.1993, p. 1.
(2) OJ C 324, 22.10.1998, p. 4.
(3) OJ L 104, 29.4.1993, p. 4.
(4) OJ C 128, 25.4.1998, p. 11.2000R2605 — EN — 01.12.2000 — 000.001 — 3
B. PRODUCT UNDER CONSIDERATION AND LIKE
PRODUCT
1.Product under consideration
(10) The product under consideration is electronic weighing scales for
use in the retail trade which incorporate a digital display of the
weight, unit price and price to be paid (whether or not including a
means of printing this data) falling within CN code
ex 8423 81 50. REWS have different models or levels of
performance and technology. In this respect, the industry defines
three segments of REWS; low, mid and high. These vary from
stand-alone REWS, without built-in printers, to more sophis-
ticated models with pre-set key systems and the possibility of
integration into computer-related control and management
systems.
(11) Although the potential use of REWS can vary because of
additional functionality in the mid and high range segments,
there is no significant difference in the basic physical and
technical characteristics of the various models of REWS. In
addition, the investigation has shown that between the three
segments there are no clear dividing lines, models in neighbouring
segments often being interchangeable. They have, therefore, to be
considered as one single product for the purposes of this
investigation.
2.Like product
(12) The investigation has shown that the various REWS produced in
the PRC, Korea, Taiwan and Indonesia (which served as an
analogue country for the PRC) and sold on these markets are,
despite differences in size, life span, voltage or design, identical to
or closely resemble the REWS exported from the PRC, Korea and
Taiwan to the Community and accordingly have to be considered
as like products.
(13) Likewise, the REWS produced by the Community industry and
sold on the Community market, are alike in all respects to the
REWS produced and exported from the PRC, Korea and Taiwan
to the Community.
(14) Therefore these products are alike within the meaning of Article
1(4) of the basic Regulation.
C. DUMPING
1.Market economy countries
General methodologyNormal value
(15) As far as the determination of normal value is concerned, it was
first established, for each exporting producer, whether its total
domestic sales of REWS were representative in comparison with
its total export sales to the Community. In accordance with Article
2(2) of the basic Regulation, domestic sales were considered
representative when the total domestic sales volume of each
exporting producer was at least 5 % of its total export sales
volume to the Community.
(16) Subsequently those types of REWS sold domestically by the
companies, that were identical or directly comparable to the types
sold for export to the Community, were identified.
(17) For each of the types sold by the exporting producers on their
domestic markets and found to be directly comparable to types
sold for export to the Community, it was established whether
domestic sales were sufficiently representative for the purposes of!B2000R2605 — EN — 01.12.2000 — 000.001 — 4
Article 2(2) of the basic Regulation. Domestic sales of a particular
type were considered sufficiently representative when the total
domestic sales volume of REWS of that type during the
investigation period represented 5 % or more of the total sales
volume of REWS of the comparable type exported to the
Community.
(18) An examination was also made as to whether the domestic sales of
each type could be regarded as having been made in the ordinary
course of trade, by establishing the proportion of profitable sales
to independent customers of the type in question. In cases where
the sales volume of REWS sold at a net sales price equal to or
above the calculated cost of production represented 80 % or more
of the total sales volume, normal value was based on the actual
domestic price, calculated as a weighted average of the prices of
all domestic sales made during the investigation period,
irrespective of whether these sales were profitable or not. In
cases where the volume of profitable sales of REWS represented
less than 80 % but 10 % or more of the total domestic sales
volume, normal value was based on the actual domestic price,
calculated as a weighted average of profitable sales only. In cases
where the volume of profitable sales of any type of REWS
represented less than 10 % of the total sales volume, it was
considered that this particular type was sold in insufficient
quantities for the domestic price to provide an appropriate basis
for the establishment of the normal value.
(19) Wherever domestic prices of a particular type sold by an exporting
producer could not be used, normal value was constructed.
Consequently, in accordance with Article 2(3) of the basic
Regulation, normal value was constructed by adding to the
manufacturing costs of the exported types, adjusted where
necessary, a reasonable percentage for selling, general and
administrative expenses (‘SG & A’) and a reasonable margin of
profit. To this end, it was examined whether the SG & A incurred
and the profit realised by each of the producing exporters
concerned on the domestic market constituted reliable data.
(20) Actual domestic SG & A expenses were considered reliable when
the domestic sales volume of the company concerned could be
regarded as representative. The domestic profit margin was
determined on the basis of domestic sales made in the ordinary
course of trade, i.e. when these sales to independent customers at
prices equal to or above the cost of production represented at least
10 % of the total of domestic sales volume of the company
concerned. Where this criterion was not met, a weighted average
profit margin of the other companies in the country concerned
with sufficient sales made in the ordinary course of trade was
used.
Export price
(21) In all cases where REWS were exported to independent customers
in the Community, the export price was established in accordance
with Article 2(8) of the basic Regulation, namely on the basis of
export prices actually paid or payable.
(22) Where the export sale was made to a related importer, the export
price was constructed pursuant to Article 2(9) of the basic
Regulation, namely on the basis of the price at which the imported
products were first resold to an independent buyer. In such cases,
adjustments were made for all costs incurred between importation
and resale and for profits accruing, in order to establish a reliable
export price. On the basis of the information available, this profit
was set at around 10 %. The information available was that
obtained from unrelated importers in a recent investigation
concerning the same product. This was also considered to be
reasonable for the functions performed by the parties concerned.!B2000R2605 — EN — 01.12.2000 — 000.001 — 5
Comparison
(23) The comparison was made on an ex-factory basis and at the same
level of trade. For the purpose of ensuring a fair comparison
between the normal value and the export price, due allowance in
the form of adjustments was made for differences affecting price
comparability in accordance with Article 2(10) of the basic
Regulation.
Dumping margin for the companies investigated
(24) According to Article 2(11) of the basic Regulation, the weighted
average normal value by type was compared with the weighted
average export price for each producer. However, the normal value
established on a weighted average basis was compared to prices of
all individual export transactions to the Community where there
was a pattern of export prices which differed significantly among
different regions, purchasers or time periods, and if the weighted
average to weighted average comparison would not reflect the full
degree of dumping being practised.
Dumping margin for non-cooperating companies
(25) For non-cooperating companies, a ‘residual’ dumping margin was
determined in accordance with Article 18 of the basic Regulation,
on the basis of the facts available.
(26) For those countries with a high level of cooperation, it was
decided to set the residual dumping margin at the level of the
cooperating company with the highest dumping margin.
(27) For those countries where the level of cooperation was low,
information from the cooperating company with the highest
dumping margin was used. The residual dumping margin was
determined on the basis of the weighted average margin of the
dumped types with the highest dumping margins exported in
representative quantities. This approach was also considered
necessary in order to avoid giving a bonus for non-cooperation
and in view of the fact that there were no indications that a
non-cooperating party had dumped at a lower level.
2.Korea
(28) Three companies replied to the questionnaire for exporting
producers. Two importers in the Community which were related
to two exporting producers also replied to the questionnaire.
Normal value
(29) For one exporting producer, normal value was entirely based on
domestic prices and for another exporting producer entirely on
constructed normal value. For the third company, both constructed
normal values and normal values based on domestic prices were
used.
(30) Where normal values were constructed, the manufacturing cost
and the SG&A of each exporting producer in question could be
used. For one producer, where sales of certain models were made
at a loss, the average profit of the remaining profitable models on
the domestic market was used. For the remaining producer, where
all domestic sales were made at a loss, the average profit of the
two other producers was used.
Export price
(31) In cases of sales for export to the Community of the product
concerned by the producing exporters to independent importers in!B2000R2605 — EN — 01.12.2000 — 000.001 — 6
the Community the export price was established in accordance
with Article 2(8) of the basic Regulation by reference to the prices
actually paid or payable.
(32) In cases of sales for export to the Community by the exporting
producers through related importers in the Community the export
price was reconstructed on the basis of the price at which the
imported products were first resold to an independent buyer
pursuant to Article 2(9) of the basic Regulation. Adjustments were
then made for all costs incurred between importation and resale
and for profits accruing, in order to establish a reliable export
price.
Comparison
(33) The comparison was made on an ex-factory basis and at the same
level of trade. For the purpose of ensuring a fair comparison,
account was taken, in accordance with Article 2(10) of the basic
Regulation, of differences in factors which were claimed and
demonstrated to affect prices and price comparability; all
allowances for differences in transport, insurance, handling,
loading and ancillary costs, credit, commissions, import charges
and after sales costs (warranty/guarantee etc.) have been granted
when applicable and justified. This included, in the case of two
companies, adjustments for costs incurred by a related party in
Japan.
(34) The same adjustments made to the normal value based on
domestic sales were also made on the normal value calculated in
accordance with Article 2(3) of the basic Regulation.
Dumping margin
(35) As provided by Article 2(11) of the basic Regulation, the weighted
average normal values of each type of the product concerned
exported to the Community were compared to the weighted
average export price of each corresponding type of the product
concerned. However, for two exporting producers, this method did
not reflect the full degree of dumping being practised and there
was a pattern of export prices which differed significantly among
different purchasers and regions. Therefore the normal value
established on a weighted average basis was compared to prices of
all individual transactions to the Community.
(36) The comparison showed the existence of dumping in respect of
two cooperating producers. The dumping margin expressed as a
percentage of the cif import price at the Community border is:
CAS Corporation, Seoul 0 %
A & D Korea Co. Ltd, Seoul 4,7 %Descom Scales Mfg. Co. Ltd, Kyungki-Do 4,9 %
Since the level of cooperation was high the residual dumping
margin was set at the same level as for the cooperating company
i.e. 4,9 %.
3.Taiwan
(37) Two companies replied to the questionnaire for exporting
producers.
Normal value
(38) For one producer all domestic sales of REWS (all of the low-range
segment) had been made at a loss. For the other producer, the!B2000R2605 — EN — 01.12.2000 — 000.001 — 7
comparable exported REWS (all of the low-range segment) had
not been sold on the domestic market.
(39) Therefore, for all product models sold for export to the
Community, normal value was constructed in accordance with
Article 2(3) of the basic Regulation. For each exporting producer
its manufacturing costs of the exported models and its own
domestic SG&A expenses were used. The profit margin used for
both exporting producers was the one established for the
profitable company on domestic sales of REWS models which
were made in the ordinary course of trade but which were not
comparable to the models exported.
Export prices
(40) All sales for export to the Community of the product concerned by
the two exporting producers were to independent importers in the
Community. Consequently, the export price was established
pursuant to Article 2(8) of the basic Regulation by reference to
the prices actually paid or payable.
Comparison
(41) The comparison was made on an ex-factory basis and at the same
level of trade. For the purpose of ensuring a fair comparison,
account was taken, in accordance with Article 2(10) of the basic
Regulation, of differences in factors which were claimed and
demonstrated to affect prices and price comparability; all
allowances for differences in transport, import charges, credit
and commissions, handling, loading and ancillary costs have been
granted where applicable and justified, in accordance with Article
2(10) of the basic Regulation.
(42) The same adjustments were also made to the normal values
calculated in accordance with Article 2(3) of the basic Regulation,
where applicable and justified.
Dumping margin
(43) As provided by Article 2(11) of the basic Regulation, the weighted
average normal values of each type of the product concerned
exported to the Community were compared to the weighted
average export price of each corresponding type of the product
concerned. However, for one exporting producer, this method did
not reflect the full degree of dumping being practised and there
was a pattern of export prices which differed significantly among
different purchasers and regions. Therefore, the normal value
established on a weighted average basis was compared to prices of
all individual transactions to the Community.
(44) The comparison showed the existence of dumping in respect of
two cooperating producers. The dumping margin expressed as a
percentage of the cif import price at the Community border is:
Universal Weight Enterprise (UWE) 5,5 %
Snowrex International 5,9 %
Since the level of cooperation was low, the residual dumping
margin was set at the level of the model with the highest
individual dumping margin sold in representative quantities.!B2000R2605 — EN — 01.12.2000 — 000.001 — 8
4.The People’s Republic of China
Analysis of market economy status
(45) Three Chinese companies requested market economy status
(‘MES’), pursuant to Article 2(7) of the basic Regulation. The
claim made by one company had to be rejected on the grounds that
the information submitted reached the Commission considerably
outside the deadlines and was furthermore incomplete in the
essential parts of the response with regard to the information
requested. The Commission sought all information deemed
necessary and verified all information submitted in the MES
applications, on-the-spot, at the premises of the remaining two
companies.
(46) The Commission found that both companies were selling at more
or less uniform, loss making prices in the PRC for several years.
Furthermore, both companies were not fully free to decide
whether and to what extent they should sell their production on the
domestic market. It has been the Commission’ s practice to reject
MES claims when domestic sales are restricted and where there is
no price variations between customers as such similar pricing may
result from centrally imposed price controls. Moreover, the
evidence indicated that these prices were at loss-making levels
for several years which also indicates that the producers did not
operate under market economy conditions.
(47) Consequently, the conditions set out in Article 2(7)(c) of the basic
Regulation were not met by the other two companies investigated.
After consultation of the Advisory Committee, the companies
concerned were therefore informed that their MES applications
had to be rejected.
Choice of analogue country
(48) In the absence of any companies fulfilling the requirements of
MES, it was necessary to compare the export prices of the Chinese
exporting producers with a normal value established for an
appropriate market economy country, pursuant to Article 2(7) of
the basic Regulation.
(49) Indonesia was suggested by the complainant and proposed by the
Commission in the Notice of initiation. No objections were raised
by any interested party with regard to this choice. One Indonesian
producer did subsequently cooperate and submitted a reply to the
questionnaire. This response was found to be acceptable.
Consequently, it was considered feasible to use Indonesia as an
analogue country in this investigation.
(50) It was decided that Indonesia was the most appropriate market
economy third country for the purpose of establishing normal
value, in view of the significant volume of domestic and export
sales made by the Indonesian producer as compared to imports
into the Community from the PRC and the level of competition on
the Indonesian and export markets which allowed for reasonable,
but not excessive profits. In addition, sales in Korea and Taiwan
were not considered as an appropriate basis for establishing
normal value, as the REWS sold in these markets were at the
lower end of the low range segment and, were not therefore,
comparable to the exported models originating in the PRC.
Individual treatment
(51) Each of the cooperating Chinese exporting producers requested
individual treatment. They replied to comprehensive questions
included in the MES claim form which was sent to the parties
concerned upon initiation of the proceeding. It was examined
these claims focusing mainly on those areas having a direct impact
on the companies’ export activities. It was found that with regard!B2000R2605 — EN — 01.12.2000 — 000.001 — 9
to the export activities the level of State interference was not such
as to allow for any substantial influence nor to permit circum-
vention of measures if exporters were given individual rates of
duty.
(52) For all three companies, an examination of the information
provided appeared to indicate that the companies fulfilled the
conditions for obtaining individual treatment.
Consequently, it has been decided to grant individual treatment to
the three companies.
Normal value
(53) Normal value for the Chinese exporting producers — which
exported only low-range segment types to the EU — was
calculated, in accordance to Articles 2(2) and 2(3) of the basic
Regulation, on the basis of the normal values established for the
cooperating Indonesian company by using the most competitive
low-range segment model sold both on the Indonesian and on the
export markets in significant quantities, and which was found to
be comparable to the Chinese types exported to the Community.
Export prices
(54) In cases of sales for export to the Community of the product
concerned by the producing exporters to independent importers in
the Community the export price was established according to
Article 2(8) of the basic Regulation by reference to the prices
actually paid of payable.
(55) In cases of sales for export to the Community by the exporting
producers through related importers in the Community the export
price was reconstructed on the basis of the price at which the
imported products were first resold to an independent buyer
pursuant to Article 2(9) of the basic Regulation.
Comparison
(56) The comparison was made on an ex-factory basis and at the same
level of trade. For the purpose of ensuring a fair comparison,
account was taken, in accordance with Article 2(10) of the basic
Regulation, of differences in factors which were claimed and
demonstrated to affect prices and price comparability; all
allowances for differences in transport, insurance, handling,
loading and ancillary costs, credit, commissions, import charges
and after sales costs (warranty/guarantee, etc.) have been granted
when applicable and justified.
Dumping margin
(57) As provided by Article 2(11) of the basic Regulation, the weighted
average normal values of the low-range segment type of the
product concerned exported to the Community were compared to
the weighted average export price of the corresponding type of the
product concerned. However, for one exporting producer the
normal value established on a weighted average basis was
compared to prices of all individual transactions to the
Community, as there was a pattern of export prices which differed
significantly among different purchasers, regions or time periods
and as the weighted average method did not reflect the full degree
of dumping being practised.
(58) The comparison showed the existence of dumping in respect of the
three cooperating producers accepted for individual treatment.
The dumping margin expressed as a percentage of the cif import
price at the Community border is:!B2000R2605 — EN — 01.12.2000 — 000.001 — 10
Shanghai Teraoka Electronic Co. Ltd, Shanghai 12,8 %
Shanghai Y amato Scale Co. Ltd, Shanghai 9,0 %
Mettler-Toledo Changzhou Scale Ltd, Changzhou 12,2 %
Since the level of cooperation was low, the residual dumping
margin was set at the level of the model with the highest
individual dumping sold in representative quantities as for the
cooperating companies, i.e. 30,7 %.
D. INJURY
1.Structure of the Community industry
(59) The structure of the Community industry has changed substan-
tially over the analysis period. Since October 1993 (i.e. when
definitive anti-dumping measures were imposed on imports of
REWS originating in Singapore and Korea) a restructuring and
consolidation programme has meant that of the nine companies
which cooperated in that investigation only four remained active
in the investigation period for the current investigation. It has
become evident during the investigation that other Community
producers have restructured and consolidated along similar lines.
(60) Although four Community producers supported the complaint
(representing over 50 % of Community production) only two of
these companies cooperated with the investigation by responding
to questionnaires. These two companies represented 39 % of total
Community production in the investigation period.
(61) It should be noted that for the purposes of the calculation of total
Community REWS production, in accordance with Article 4(1)(a)
and (2) of the basic Regulation, any company operating in the
Community related to exporting producers in the countries
concerned was excluded from the definition of total Community
production. In the case of Mettler-Toledo, it was clear that the
producer in the Community directly controlled its subsidiary in
the PRC.
(62) It was claimed by one of the other operators in the Community
(which has been excluded from the definition of a Community
producer because it is also one of the exporting producers in the
PRC) that the level of cooperation mentioned above (39 %) was
not sufficient to justify the continuation of the investigation. This
claim was rejected because the two cooperating Community
producers represented substantially more than 25 % of the total
production in the Community and, thus, qualify as a major
proportion of the Community production pursuant to Article 4(1)
of the basic Regulation. These two producers, therefore, constitute
the Community industry.
2.Apparent Community consumption
General
(63) Consumption in the Community has been calculated using
verified sales data provided by the Community industry and,
figures provided in the complaint (for other operators in the
Community), and import volumes obtained via Eurostat.!B2000R2605 — EN — 01.12.2000 — 000.001 — 11
REWS in units 1995 1996 1997 1998 IP
Consumption in the
Community161 682 172 314 177 391 201 123 218 655
Index — 1995 = 100 100 107 110 124 135
Low range REWS 59 952 77 100 74 614 79 502 79 754Index — 1995 = 100 100 129 124 133 133
Over the analysis period consumption of all REWS increased by
35 % and consumption of low range REWS increased by 33 %.
The increase in consumption in the low range segment is shown
separately because it is in this segment that 97 % of the imports
from the countries concerned in the investigation period were
concentrated. The increase in consumption in 1996 was caused by
a large increase in imports from the countries concerned. The
volume of imports then fell in 1997.
The euro-effect
(64) The increase in consumption from 1997 to the investigation period
was mainly due to a one-off increase in demand from retailers
arising from the introduction of the euro. Indeed, in anticipation of
the introduction of the euro retailers needed to be able to show
prices to customers in euros as well as in national currencies and
were, thus, bringing forward their replacement of old REWS. This
created an increase in demand within the Community market and
the volume of sales increased in all segments. This improved
situation will be of short-term duration and consumption is
forecast to fall, because many retailers who would have replaced
their REWS in the period from 2001 to 2004, will already have
done so from 1997 to 2000. Therefore, the overall impact of the
euro-effect will not be to increase consumption but simply to bring
forward some sales from one period (2001 to 2004) to another
(1997 to 2000).
(65) Although the final date for the implementation of retail
metrication in the UK will also have increased consumption, this
impact was not as important in increasing sales and affected that
Member State only.
(66) The table below shows the actual development/expected devel-
opment in consumption from 1995 to 2005. The table also shows
that the euro-effect provides a temporary boost to sales over the
period 1997 to 2000 and that from 2000 to 2002 consumption is
forecast to be lower. From 2004 onwards consumption is forecast
to return to its normal level (i.e. that of 1995/96).
(Consumption in ’000 units)
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
162 172 178 201 219 177 144 126 144 172 172
(67) The existence and/or importance of the euro-effect was contested
by some of the exporting producers. However, no alternative
explanation for the increase in consumption was provided. Their
claim was, therefore, rejected.!B2000R2605 — EN — 01.12.2000 — 000.001 — 12
(68) It was pointed out by an exporting producer that consumption had
increased since the previous investigations into the product
concerned, mentioned at recitals 8 and 9. Indeed, it was found
that consumption of the product concerned had increased and
continued to do so throughout the analysis period. However, as
explained above, this increase can in large part be attributed to the
euro-effect.
3.Imports into the Community from the countries con-
cerned
Cumulative assessment of the effects of the imports concerned
(69) It was first examined whether imports from the countries
concerned should be assessed cumulatively, taking into account
the findings on dumping as established above. It was found that:
— the dumping margins established were more than de minimis
for all countries concerned;
— the volume of imports from each country and corresponding
market shares were not negligible when compared to
Community consumption;
— the product concerned imported from the countries concerned
was largely interchangeable;
— the prices of the imports followed largely the same trend;
— an analysis of the conditions of competition between imported
REWS and the like products indicates that all REWS are sold
with a similar pricing policy to the same level of customers.
Certain exporting producers alleged that their imports should not
be cumulated with those from other countries, because the level of
price and trends in volume of their sales were not the same. It was
concluded, however, that all of the conditions justifying the
cumulation of the imports from the countries concerned were met
for the reasons given above. These arguments were therefore
rejected.
V olume of the imports concerned
(70) Based on information from Eurostat, the volume of REWS
imported from the countries concerned into the Community
during the analysis period increased from 14 533 units in 1995 to
33 063 units in the investigation period (i.e. by 123 %). The
investigation showed that more than 97 % of REWS imported
from the countries concerned during the investigation period were
in the low range segment as explained in recital 73.
Market share of imports
(71) The market share of the exporting producers increased from 9,2 %
to 15,0 % over the analysis period. This contrasts with the loss in
the Community industry market share over this period of – 4,6 %
for all REWS (i.e. from 26,1 % to 24,9 %) and – 22 % for REWS
in the low range segment (i.e. from 21,8 % to 17,1 %).
Price undercutting
(72) A comparison of sales prices on the Community market during the
investigation period was made between prices of the Community
industry and those of the cooperating exporting producers. In
accordance with previous investigations of this product, the!B2000R2605 — EN — 01.12.2000 — 000.001 — 13
comparisons were made on the basis of sales on the Community
market of comparable models at the same level of trade (prices to
independent dealers/importers). Also in accordance with previous
investigations, prices were compared by Member State of sale on a
weighted average basis per exporting producer. All prices were net
of rebates. Prices of the Community industry were adjusted to
ex-works prices. Prices of the dumped imports were cif
Community frontier and included import duties where applicable.
(73) The vast majority of models sold in the Community by the
cooperating exporting producers were for low range models (over
97 % by volume). The calculations made have not, therefore,
included the smaller quantities of mid and high range models as
they were considered unrepresentative.
(74) Within the low range sector three types of models were sold by the
Community industry:
I. standard counter scales or ‘mono’ scales (hereinafter referred
to as ‘mono’);
II. counter scales with a tower or customer display (hereinafter
referred to as ‘tower’); and
III. other types of low range scales such as hanging scales.
The comparisons were made taking into account ‘mono’ and
‘tower’ scales. Other low range scales (category III above) were
not taken into account because they were sold in marginal
volumes by both the Community industry and the exporting
producers and were, therefore, considered unrepresentative.
Results of the price comparisons
(75) The results of the price comparisons showed margins of under-
cutting ranging from 0 % to 52 % for PRC, 60 % to 65 % for
Taiwan and 30 % to 50 % for Korea.
4.Situation of the Community industry
Preliminary remarks
(76) As the Community industry data relates to only two Community
producers, some information shown below has been indexed for
reasons of confidentiality.
(77) In accordance with Article 3(5) of the basic Regulation, the
examination of the impact of the dumped imports on the
Community industry included an evaluation of all economic
factors and indices having a bearing on the state of the industry.
However, certain factors are not dealt with in detail below because
they were found to be not relevant for the situation of the
Community industry in the course of this investigation. It should
finally be noted that none of these factors necessarily gives
decisive guidance.
Production, utilisation of capacity and inventories
(78) Production of all REWS over the analysis period increased by
22 %. In contrast, however, the production of low range REWS
increased by only 5 % over the analysis period. The capacity
utilisation rate of the Community industry increased from 55 % to
65 % during the analysis period.!B2000R2605 — EN — 01.12.2000 — 000.001 — 14
Community industry production
and capacity
Index — 1995 = 1001995 1996 1997 1998 IP
V olume all REWS produced 100 102 105 107 122
V olume low range REWS
produced100 123 114 100 105
Capacity (all REWS) 100 100 100 100 105
Capacity utilisation rate (all
REWS)55 % 56 % 58 % 60 % 65 %
It was considered that the level of inventories could not be
considered to have any significant effect on the situation of the
Community industry because the Community industry used a
production to order system whereby stocks were almost non-exist-
ent.
Sales volume
(79) Sales of total REWS units made by the Community industry on
the Community market during the analysis period increased in
volume by 29 %. In contrast, sales of low range REWS increased
in volume by only 10 %.
Sales turnover
(80) The evolution of sales turnover is shown in indexed form in the
table below. The sales turnover of total REWS of the Community
industry on the Community market increased by 27 % during the
analysis period. In contrast, sales turnover of low range REWS fell
by 11 % during the analysis period.
Sales turnover
Index — 1995 = 1001995 1996 1997 1998 IP
All REWS 100 96 97 111 127
Low range 100 95 94 90 89
Market share and growth
(81) The Community industry’ s share of the Community market fell for
all REWS from 26,1 % in 1995 to 24,9 % in the investigation
period; i.e. a fall of 4,6 %. In contrast the Community industry’ s
share of the low range market fell from 21,8 % in 1995 to 17,1 %
in the investigation period; i.e. a fall of 22 %.
(82) Therefore, the Community industry could not benefit fully from
the growth of the market.
Market share of the Community
industry1995 1996 1997 1998 IP
All REWS 26,1 % 25,1 % 26,0 % 23,6 % 24,9 %
Index 100 96 100 91 96Low range REWS 21,8 % 17,9 % 19,8 % 16,1 % 17,1 %Index 100 82 91 74 78!
B2000R2605 — EN — 01.12.2000 — 000.001 — 15
Sales prices
(83) The average sales prices of all ranges of REWS to unrelated
customers decreased in value over the analysis period:
high range (– 11 %);
mid range (– 18 %); and
low range (– 17 %).
It was pointed out by an exporting producer that average sales
prices of all REWS increased over the analysis period which, it
was alleged, indicated that the Community industry had not
suffered injury. However, this apparent increase was entirely due
to changes in the product mix (i.e. substantial changes in the
volume of sales of the product ranges from 1995 to the
investigation period) and this claim was, therefore, rejected. This
is clearly shown from the above price trends for each range
segment.
Profitability
(84) The return on turnover of REWS as a whole rose from low positive
levels in 1995 to around 10 % in the investigation period. In
contrast the low range segment suffered a fall from low positive
profitability in 1995 to substantial losses in the investigation
period (around 20 %).
(85) The trend for REWS as a whole can be explained by an increased
sales volume and turnover resulting from the ‘euro effecte’ as
explained at recital 64. It should be noted that the Community
industry could not achieve an acceptable profit level in the years
prior to the existence of the ‘euro-effect’ and profitability was
only at levels sufficient to maintain the Community industry’ s
viability in the investigation period because the ‘euro-effect’ had
increased sales volume.
(86) An evaluation of the impact of the ‘euro-effect’ on profitability
was carried out, in order to show how profitability is expected to
deteriorate as the euro-effect recedes. It is forecast that
Community industry turnover will fall by at least 27 % (i.e. the
same amount that turnover rose under the euro-effect as shown at
recital 80.
(87) Further evidence of the impact of the euro-effect is apparent from
the profitability rate of the Community industry in 1996 (i.e.
before the euro-effect had an impact). At this time the profitability
rate was below 3 %.
(88) It is important to point out that the Community industry was not
able to fully benefit from the euro-effect because the return on
sales of low range REWS was well below the break even point
during the investigation period. This is significant because it is the
segment in which the imports from the countries concerned are
concentrated. The losses in this segment have reduced the overall
profitability of the Community industry and prevented it from
fully benefiting from the euro-effect and the anti-dumping
measures against imports originating in Japan and Singapore. In
addition, it is considered that the price depressive effects of the
dumped imports have also been felt within the mid and high range
segments because prices in one range inevitably have a knock-on
effect on the other segments.
(89) In conclusion, the overall profitability of the Community industry
was not at the level it could reasonably have expected during the
investigation period, due to the price depressive effects of the
dumped imports.!B2000R2605 — EN — 01.12.2000 — 000.001 — 16
Other performance related factors
(90) No detailed analysis was carried out on cash flow, ability to raise
capital (or investments) and return on investments because such an
analysis would relate to the situation of the company as a whole.
The companies other business lines represent more than 50 % of
total company turnover and, therefore, an overall analysis would
not necessarily be representative for the product under consider-
ation.
As concerns the impact on the Community industry of the
magnitude of the actual margin of dumping, given the volume and
the prices of the imports from the countries concerned, this impact
cannot be considered to be negligible.
Productivity, employment and wages
(91) The table below shows that during the analysis period employment
in the Community industry decreased by 11 %.
Productivity per employee
Index — 1995 = 1001995 1996 1997 1998 IP
Number of units produced 100 102 105 107 122
Number of employees 100 91 82 90 89
Productivity per employee 100 107 123 123 140
(92) Productivity per employee increased by 40 % over the analysis
period.
(93) No detailed analysis was carried out on wages given the
importance of other business lines in the overall companies’
activities. Such an analysis would relate to the situation of the
company as a whole and not necessarily be representative for the
product under consideration.
5.Conclusion on injury
(94) The above findings show that in the investigation period, taking
into account the developments over the period considered, the
Community industry suffered a reduction in average prices (in all
three ranges) and a loss in market share. The findings concerning
the low range REWS (in terms of sales volumes, average prices,
production, market share and profitability) show a substantially
worse situation to that of REWS as a whole. In particular, the poor
economic situation of the low range segment has prevented the
Community industry from achieving the overall profitability level
that it could have expected under the circumstances of the
euro-effect and the anti-dumping measures in place, particularly
bearing in mind the restructuring efforts which it has imple-
mented.
(95) It was, therefore, considered that the Community industry has
suffered material injury in the investigation period.
(96) It should be noted that the low range segment is important to the
Community industry as it needs to offer all three range segments
to its customers and any price pressure in the low range segment
inevitably depresses prices in the other segments which are largely
sold to the same customers.
(97) The euro-effect is temporary in nature, whereas there is no
indication that competition from dumped imports will cease. It is,
therefore, only a matter of time before the overall situation of the
Community industry deteriorates further. This is likely because a
fall in demand is expected to reduce production, sales, market!B2000R2605 — EN — 01.12.2000 — 000.001 — 17
share and prices. It also should be recalled that average prices in
the euro currency zone were much higher than outside this area,
giving an additional indication for future developments.
E.CAUSATION
1.Introduction
(98) The effect of the dumped imports on the Community industry was
examined.
(99) Furthermore, an assessment of the impact of all other known
factors on the Community industry was made. Such analysis
ensures that any injury caused by factors other than the dumped
imports concerned is not wrongly attributed to those dumped
imports.
2.Effect of the dumped imports
Effect on the volume of sales and market share
(100) During the period considered consumption on the Community
market increased by 35 %. However, Community industry sales
only increased by 29 % and the imports from the countries
concerned increased by 123 %.
(101) As explained at recital 81, the Community industry’ s market share
fell by 4.6 % over the period considered. In contrast, the market
share of imports from the countries concerned increased from
9,2 % to 15,1 % over the same period.
(102) As explained at recital 82, the Community industry’ s sales prices
decreased over the period considered. Over the same period, these
prices were significantly undercut by imports originating in the
countries concerned as shown by recital 75. All this had adverse
consequences for the profitability of the Community industry.
(103) The above analysis shows that there is a clear coincidence in time
between the decline of the Community industry in terms of key
financial and economic indicators and the rise in dumped imports
from the countries concerned.
Impact of the dumped imports on the low range segment
(104) The negative impact of the dumped imports on the overall
situation of the Community industry can be traced back by making
a refined causal link analysis based on the various market
segments of REWS.
(105) It should be recalled that during the investigation period, 97 % of
the imports from the cooperating exporting producers, amounting
to almost 15 000 units, were in the low range segment. Total
imports from the countries concerned amounted to 33 063 units in
the investigation period. It was, therefore, assumed that 97 % of
total imports were in the low range. This assumption was based on
the facts available, there being no reason to believe that the pattern
of the rest of the imports would be any different from those of the
cooperating exporting producers. Therefore, whereas the sales of
the Community industry in the low range segment were only
slightly lower than imports from the countries concerned at the
beginning of the period considered, they amounted to considerably
less than half of the imports from the countries concerned in the
investigation period. The table below shows the growth of the
sales volume of the Community industry low range segment
compared to an estimate of sales in the same segment by the
exporting producers in the countries concerned. This shows that
over the period considered, the exporting producers increased their
sales volume by 123 % in this segment whereas the Community
industry only managed to increase its sales volume by 10 %.!B2000R2605 — EN — 01.12.2000 — 000.001 — 18
Sales volume on the Community
market of low range REWS
Index — 1995 = 1001995 1996 1997 1998 IP
Community industry 100 106 109 104 110
Countries concerned — based
on 97 % of total exports14 407 31 849 25 629 33 430 32 071
Index of countries concerned 100 221 178 232 223
(106) The corresponding development in market share also shows that
imports from the countries concerned had increased over the
period considered at the expense of the Community industry. The
market share of low range imports from the countries concerned
increased from 9,2 % to 15,1 % (i.e. an overall increase of 65 %),
whereas the Community industry low range market share fell from
21,8 % to 17,1 % (i.e. a decrease of 22 %).
(107) Recital 82 records the development of average prices of the
Community industry. Although the Community industry’ s average
prices fell in all 3 model ranges, the fall in the low range segment
was significantly greater than the fall in overall average prices.
(108) It should also be recalled that the profits of the Community
industry were not evenly spread across the model range segments.
The anti-dumping duties, relating to imports from Japan and
Singapore (described at recitals 8 and 9) relate mainly to the high
and medium range segments and contributed to this profitability
situation. In contrast, the Community industry’ s sales in the low
range segment were made at a substantial loss. It is precisely this
segment which was targeted by the exporting producers in the
countries concerned.
3.Imports from other third countries
(109) During the investigation period, other imports into the Community
originated in several countries including Japan and Singapore as
shown in the table below.
V olume of imports of REWS
(excluding the countries concerned)1995 1996 1997 1998 IP
Japan 474 954 1 606 2 794 2 332
Japan — market share 0,3 % 0,6 % 1,0 % 1,6 % 1,2 %Singapore 3 776 863 987 1 332 427Singapore — market share 2,5 % 0,6 % 0,6 % 0,8 % 0,2 %Others 7 079 6 663 8 357 9 514 7 897Others — market share 4,4 % 3,9 % 4,7 % 4,7 % 3,6 %
Total imports (excluding the
countries concerned)11 329 8 480 10 950 13 640 10 656
(110) Imports from Japan and Singapore have been subject to
anti-dumping measures ranging from 15 % to 32 % throughout
the period considered and were small in volume. Prices to end
customers can be considered to be non-injurious. It is clear
therefore, that imports from these countries did not contribute to
the depression of prices and are unlikely to have contributed
significantly to the injury suffered by the Community industry.
(111) Imports from other third countries (mainly Switzerland, USA and
Indonesia) were made at low volumes. The only price information!B2000R2605 — EN — 01.12.2000 — 000.001 — 19
available to the Commission was from Eurostat, which did not
indicate the range involved, and it was, therefore, difficult to draw
conclusions concerning the level of these prices. According to the
Community industry their only concerns relating to imports from
these countries related to Indonesian exports. However, bearing in
mind the de minimis (1 451 units) volume of imports from
Indonesia in the investigation period, it is clear that they are
unlikely to have contributed significantly to the injury suffered by
the Community industry.
4.Effect of internal competition within the Community
(112) It was submitted by exporting producers that internal competition
on the Community market for REWS, arising from changes in the
structure in the Community retail sector, had a downward effect
on prices. It was, therefore, investigated whether these changes
were of such a nature that they could break the causal link between
the dumped imports and the injury suffered by the Community
industry.
(113) Throughout the Community, the market share of the multiple users
(i.e. large supermarket chains) has increased significantly,
whereas the number of smaller users has declined. This change
of structure has increased the buying power of the user industry in
general, and it is likely that this change has had some downward
effect on average prices.
(114) As mentioned at recital 59, the structure of the Community
industry has also changed substantially over the period considered.
The reduction in the number of companies and improvements in
productivity, shown in recital 90 were designed to deal with these
market changes. It was concluded that internal market competition
arising from changes in the structure of the Community retail
sector did not break the causal link between the dumped imports
and the injury suffered by the Community industry.
5.Conclusion on causation
(115) In view of the coincidence in time between, on the one hand, the
price undercutting established, the significant market share gained
by the dumped imports from the countries concerned and, on the
other hand, the corresponding loss of market share suffered by the
Community industry, as well as the reduction of its sales prices, it
is concluded that the dumped imports originating in the countries
concerned have caused material injury to the Community industry.
(116) It was, therefore, concluded that the dumped imports originating
in the countries concerned have caused material injury to the
Community industry. While other factors may have contributed,
they are not such as to break the causal link between the dumped
imports and the injury suffered by the Community industry.
F.COMMUNITY INTEREST
1.General considerations
(117) In accordance with Article 21 of the basic Regulation, it was
examined whether the imposition of anti-dumping measures
would be against the interest of the Community as a whole. The
determination of the Community interest was based on an
appreciation of all the various interests involved, i.e. those of
the Community industry, the importers and the users of the
product concerned to the extent that the relevant interested parties
submitted the information requested in this respect.
(118) In order to assess the likely impact of the imposition or
non-imposition of measures, information was requested from all
interested parties. Questionnaires were sent to the Community!B2000R2605 — EN — 01.12.2000 — 000.001 — 20
industry, importers/traders and two associations of users of the
product concerned.
(119) On this basis it was examined whether, despite the conclusions on
dumping, injury and causation, compelling reasons exist which
would lead to the conclusion that it is not in the Community
interest to impose measures in this particular case.
2.Interests of Community industry
(120) In the absence of measures against injurious dumping, the
situation of the Community industry is certain to deteriorate in
terms of market share, profitability and employment. This is
particularly true in view of the fact that the euro-effect, which to a
certain degree compensates for the effects of the dumped imports,
will soon come to an end. The dumped imports have had an
immediate impact in the low range segment which the Community
industry cannot sustain in the long term. The importance of this
segment to the Community industry is that it must continue to
offer all 3 segments for sale in order to supply major users on the
market.
(121) There has been a large scale consolidation of Community
production over the analysis period. This has continued a process
which has taken place throughout the 1990’ s involving various
mergers and acquisitions. This consolidation has helped ensure the
survival of the production of REWS in the Community and
thereby maintain weighing technology generally. This is important
because there would inevitably be knock-on effects (in terms of
reduced profitability and employment), both on the industry’ s
suppliers and on the related sectors of production within the
Community industry should measures be allowed to lapse. This is
because the technologies of REWS and a whole range of other
products are related. Any loss of technological know-how in the
REWS sector will mean a global loss of competitiveness in the
related sectors too. The Community industry also produces other
electronic scales such as those used in the industrial sector and
provides servicing of such scales. In addition the Community
industry manufactures a range of other retail equipment such as
slicers which are also sold through the same sales channels. It is
clear that employment in these areas would also be jeopardised
should injurious dumping be allowed to continue.
(122) In addition, the Community industry has made every effort to
meet the competition from the PRC, Korea and Taiwan. Examples
of such steps are:
— a progression towards greater consolidation (fewer com-
panies),
— the closure of excess capacity,— greater use of modern production techniques (e.g. production
to order, increased mechanisation and computerisation),
— improvements in productivity,— reducing costs by increasing the contracting-out of the supply
of components and making changes in the use of its
distribution channels, and
— investing in new model ranges and improved weighing
technology.
Community producers have, therefore, shown a willingness to
maintain a competitive presence on the Community market and
are capable of benefiting from anti-dumping measures should they
be imposed. All this would be put in jeopardy if the anti-dumping
measures were not imposed.!B2000R2605 — EN — 01.12.2000 — 000.001 — 21
3.Interests of other parties
(123) The cooperation of representatives of the interests of retail outlets
was sought, including multiple users of the product concerned
(supermarkets), in order to identify if there was any significant
impact on users.
(124) Only two users cooperated with the investigation. One user
expressed its support of the complainant Community industry
stating that the long-term benefits from the overall quality of
provision and service obtained from the Community industry
would outweigh any temporary benefits which could be achieved
by purchasing REWS from the exporting countries concerned at
dumped prices.
In contrast the other user pointed out that if measures were
imposed it would suffer from increased costs and reduced
competitiveness.
(125) The lack of cooperation from users is no doubt due to the very
small proportion of users’ total costs represented by REWS. The
impact of imposing measures, in what is a highly competitive
market, can be assumed to be negligible.
(126) The views of importers in the Community were also sought. Only
one incomplete questionnaire response was received. It was
concluded that, if measures were imposed, there would be an
impact on importers turnover and profits. However, it is likely that
this impact would be small given that the importers also trade in
other products.
4.Conclusion
(127) The low level of cooperation by users and importers clearly makes
it difficult to draw conclusions on the effect anti-dumping
measures would have in these sectors. It was concluded, however,
that the impact would be negligible, particularly for the retail
sector where the proportion of costs represented by REWS is very
small.
(128) It should be recalled, however, that the dumped imports from the
countries concerned have caused material injury to the Commu-
nity industry, which has made great efforts to remain competitive.
The full extent of this injury is concealed by temporary benefits
caused by the introduction of the euro. However, in the absence of
measures, and in view of the diminishing effect of the euro, it is
likely that the Community industry will deteriorate further and
may cease production of low range REWS and, thus, the viability
of the entire Community industry would be threatened.
(129) On the basis of the above the Commission finds that there are no
compelling reasons of Community interest not to impose
anti-dumping measures.
G. PROPOSED DUTIES
1.Injury elimination level
(130) In order to prevent further injury being caused by the dumped
imports, it is proposed to adopt anti-dumping measures in the
form of definitive duties. For the purpose of determining the level
of these duties, account was taken of the dumping margins found,
the amount of duty necessary to eliminate the injury sustained by
the Community industry and the market situation of the
Community industry.
(131) To this end, the representative production costs of the two basic
low range models (i.e. mono and tower) of the Community
industry were used, together with a profit margin of 10 %. The
resulting non-injurious prices based on these costs and profit!B2000R2605 — EN — 01.12.2000 — 000.001 — 22
represent the level of sales prices the Community industry is
expected to be able to achieve in the absence of dumped imports.
The two non injurious prices were compared with the prices of the
dumped imports used to establish undercutting, as outlined at
recitals 72 to 75. The differences between these prices (on a
weighted average basis and expressed as a percentage at cif level)
showed the underselling margins applicable to each company.
(132) These margins including those for non cooperating exporters are
above the dumping margins established (with the exception of
Mettler-Toledo where the injury margin was 0 %). In accordance
with the lesser duty rule in accordance with Article 9(4) of the
basic Regulation, it is proposed that the duty should be set at the
level of the lowest margins.
2.Form and level of the definitive measures
(133) In the light of the foregoing, it is considered that, in accordance
with Article 9(4) of the basic Regulation, definitive anti-dumping
duties should be imposed. An ad valorem duty is considered the
most appropriate measure in this proceeding.
(134) The residual duty rate has been set at a level which does not
reward non cooperation in each of the countries concerned. As
cooperation was high in Korea the residual duty level has been set
at the level of the highest dumping margin for cooperating
companies. As cooperation was low in the PRC and Taiwan, the
residual duty level has been set at the level of the model with the
highest individual dumping margin sold in representative
quantities.
(135) The individual company anti-dumping duty rates specified in this
Regulation were established on the basis of the findings of the
present investigation. Therefore, it reflects the situation found
during that investigation with respect to these companies. These
duty rates (as opposed to the country-wide duty applicable to ‘all
other companies’) are thus exclusively applicable to imports of
products originating in the country concerned and produced by the
company and thus by the specific legal entity mentioned.
Imported products produced by any other company not specifi-
cally mentioned in the operative part of this Regulation with its
name and address, including entities related to those specifically
mentioned, cannot benefit from this rate and shall be subject to the
duty rate applicable to ‘all other companies’.
(136) Any claim requesting the application of this individual company
anti-dumping duty rate (e.g. following a change in the name of the
entity or following the setting up of new production or sales
entities) should be addressed to the Commission forthwith with all
relevant information, in particular any modification in the
company’ s activities linked to production, domestic and export
sales associated with e.g. that name change or that change in the
production and sales entities. The Commission, if appropriate,
will, after consultation of the Advisory Committee, amend the
Regulation accordingly by updating the list of companies
benefiting from individual duty rates,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
1. A definitive anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on imports of
electronic weighing scales having a maximum weighing capacity not
exceeding 30 kg, for use in the retail trade which incorporate a digital
display of the weight, unit price and price to be paid (whether or not
including a means of printing this data) currently classifiable within CN
code ex 8423 81 50 (TARIC code 8423 81 50 10) and originating in the
People’s Republic of China, Korea and Taiwan.!B2000R2605 — EN — 01.12.2000 — 000.001 — 23
2. The duty, calculated on the basis of the net free-at-Community-
frontier price of the product, before duty, shall be:
Country Company Rate of dutyTARIC additional
code
The People’ s Republic of China Shanghai Teraoka Electronic Co. Ltd 12,8 % A207
Mettler-Toledo Changzhou Scale Ltd 0 % "C1A2153
Shanghai Y amato Scale Co. Ltd 9,0 % A209
All other companies 30,7 % A999
The Republic of Korea CAS Corporation 0 % A210
A & D Korea Co. Ltd 4,7 % A211
All other companies 4,9 % A999
Taiwan UWE-Universal Weight Enterprise Co.
Ltd, Taipei5,5 % A213
Snowrex International Co. Ltd, Taipei 5,9 % A214
All other companies 13,4 % A999
3. Unless otherwise specified, the provisions in force concerning
customs duties shall apply.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its
publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities .
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in
all Member States.!B2000R2605 — EN — 01.12.2000 — 000.001 — 24