This document is meant purely as documentation tool and the institutions do not assume any liability for its contents
"B COMMISSION DECISION No 283/2000/ECSC
of 4 February 2000
imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain flat rolled products of iron or non-alloy steel, of a
width of 600 mm or more, not clad, plated or coated, in coils, not further worked than hot-rolled, originating in
Bulgaria, India, South Africa, Taiwan and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and accepting undertakings offered
by certain exporting producers and terminating the proceeding concerning imports originating in Iran
(OJ L 31, 5.2.2000, p. 15)
Amended by:
Official Journal
No page date
"M1 Commission Decision No 2009/2000/ECSC of 22 September 2000 L 240 12 23.9.2000
Corrected by:
"C1 Corrigendum, OJ L 119, 20.5.2000, p. 39 (283/2000)2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 1
COMMISSION DECISION No 283/2000/ECSC
of 4 February 2000
imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain flat rolled
products of iron or non-alloy steel, of a width of 600 mm or more, notclad, plated or coated, in coils, not further worked than hot-rolled,
originating in Bulgaria, India, South Africa, Taiwan and the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia and accepting undertakings offered by certainexporting producers and terminating the proceeding concerning imports
originating in Iran
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel
Community,
Having regard to Commission Decision No 2277/96/ECSC of 28 November
1996 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members ofthe European Coal and Steel Community (
1), as amended by Commission
Decision No 1000/99/ECSC (2), and in particular Articles 8 and 9 thereof,
After consulting the Advisory Committee,Whereas:
A. PROCEDURE
1.Initiation
(1) On 7 January 1999, the Commission announced by means of a notice
(hereinafter referred to as the ‘Notice of Initiation’) published in theOfficial Journal of the European Communities (
3) the initiation of an
anti-dumping proceeding with regard to imports into the Community
of certain flat rolled products of iron or non-alloy steel, of a width of600 mm or more, not clad, plated or coated, in coils, not further workedthan hot-rolled, originating in Bulgaria, India, Iran, South Africa,
Taiwan and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (hereinafter referred to
as ‘Yugoslavia’).
(2) The proceeding was initiated as a result of a complaint lodged by
Eurofer on behalf of Community producers representing a major
proportion of the total Community production of the productconcerned within the meaning of Articles 4(1) and 5(4) of CommissionDecision (EC) No 2277/96/ECSC, hereinafter referred to as the ‘Basic
Decision’. The complaint contained evidence of dumping of the
product concerned and of material injury resulting therefrom, whichwas considered sufficient to justify the initiation of a proceeding.
2.Investigation
(3) The Commission officially advised the exporting producers in the
exporting countries (hereinafter referred to as the ‘exporting pro-ducers’) and importers as well as their representative associationsknown to be concerned, the representatives of the exporting countries
and the complaining Community producers of the initiation of the
proceeding. The Commission sent questionnaires to all these partiesand to those who made themselves known within the time limit set inthe Notice of Initiation. Pursuant to Article 6(5) of the Basic Decision,
the Commission also gave the parties directly concerned the
opportunity to make their views known in writing and to request ahearing.
(4) Certain exporting producers, complaining Community producers and
importers submitted comments in writing.!B
(1) OJ L 308, 29.11.1996, p. 11.
(2) OJ L 122, 12.5.1999, p. 35.
(3) OJ C 4, 7.1.1999, p. 3.2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 2
All interested parties who requested a hearing within the time limit set
and who indicated that they were likely to be affected by the result ofthe proceeding and that there were particular reasons why they shouldbe heard, were granted such a hearing.
(5) All parties were informed of the essential facts and considerations on
the basis of which it was intended to recommend
(i) the imposition of definitive anti-dumping duties on imports from
Bulgaria, India, South Africa, Taiwan and Yugoslavia,
(ii)
"C1the acceptance of undertakings offered by certain exporting
producers and 3
(iii) the termination of the proceeding against imports from Iran.
In accordance with the provisions of Article 20 of the Basic Decision
parties were also granted a period within which they could make
representations subsequent to this disclosure.
(6) The oral and written comments submitted by the parties were
considered and, where appropriate, the definitive findings have beenmodified accordingly.
(7) The Commission sought and verified all the information it deemed
necessary for the purpose of a definitive determination.
Verification visits were carried out at the premises of the following
companies:
—Complaining Community producers:
— Aceralia Corporacion Sid., Madrid, Spain
— British Steel Plc, London, United Kingdom— Cockerill Sambre SA, Brussels, Belgium— Hoogovens Steel BV , IJmuiden, Netherlands
— IL V A Spa, Genoa, Italy
— Sidmar NV , Gent, Belgium— Salzgitter AG, Salzgitter, Germany— Stahlwerke Bremen GmbH, Bremen, Germany
— SOLLAC, Paris, France
— Thyssen Krupp Stahl AG, Duisburg, Germany
—Exporting producers:
(a) Bulgaria
Kremikovtzi Corp, Sofia
(b) India
Essar Steel Ltd, Hazira
Tata Iron & Steel Company Ltd, CalcuttaSteel Authority of India Ltd, New Delhi
(c) Iran
Mobarakeh Steel Company, Esfahan
(d) South Africa
Iscor Ltd, PretoriaHighveld Steel & Vanadium Corp Ltd, Witbank
(e) Taiwan
China Steel Corp, Kaohsiung
Yieh Loong Enterprise Co., Ltd, Kaoshiung!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 3
(f) Yugoslavia
In view of the particular situation in Yugoslavia, no
investigation was carried out at the premises of Sartid a.d.,the only exporting producer in that country that made itself
known to the Commission.
—Unrelated importer — user company in the Community:
Marcegaglia Spa, Gazoldo degli Ippoliti, Italy
—Importers related to the exporting producers:
(a) Iran: Ascotec GmbH, Düsseldorf, Germany
Irasco s.r.l., Genova, Italy
Tara Steel Trading GmbH, Düsseldorf, Germany
Unitech Steel (UK) Ltd, London, United King-
dom
(b) South Africa: Macsteel International UK Ltd, London, United
Kingdom
Macsteel International Belgium NV , Antwerpen,
Belgium
Macsteel International Stahlhandel GmbH,
Düsseldorf, Germany
(8) The investigation of dumping covered the period from 1 January 1998
to 31 December 1998 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘investigationperiod’). The examination of injury covered the period from 1 January
1995 up to the end of the dumping investigation period (hereinafter
also referred to as the ‘period examined’).
B. PRODUCT CONCERNED AND LIKE PRODUCT
1.Product concerned
(9) The product concerned is certain flat rolled products of iron or
non-alloy steel, of a width of 600 mm or more, not clad, plated or
coated, in coils, not further worked than hot-rolled (hereinafter
‘hot-rolled coils’). This product is currently classifiable within CNcodes 7208 10 00, 7208 25 00, 7208 26 00, 7208 27 00, 7208 36 00,7208 37 10, 7208 37 90 (
1), 7208 38 10, 7208 38 90, 7208 39 10,
7208 39 90.
(10) Hot-rolled coils are generally obtained in steel mills by hot rolling
semi-finished steel products after the final rolling pass or after
pickling or continuous annealing. Hot-rolled coils are wound into a
regular coil.
For steel mills, which produce a great range of flat products of steel,
hot-rolled coils are used as a pre-material for manufacturing other steel
products (wide and narrow strips, all cold rolled products, tubes, etc.).
Hot-rolled coils can be of various grades and dimensions. The vastmajority of imports from third countries into the Community consist of‘structural steels’ (such as S235 and S275 according to ‘Euronorm’ EN
10025) and ‘mild steels’ (such as DD11, DD12, DD13 according to
EN 10011 and the ‘Deutsche Industrie-Norm’ DIN 1614/1). Coils areconventionally between 1.5 and 15 mm thick and from 600 to 2050 mmwide. Each of the CN codes listed above corresponds to a specific
product type as differentiated by width and thickness within the above
ranges.
(11) The product concerned is also classified into two distinct categories
according to its finishing: black hot-rolled coils (hereafter referred to
as ‘black coils’) which are the basic product and pickled hot-rolledcoils (hereafter referred to as ‘pickled coils’) which, after beinghot-rolled, go through an additional surface treatment called pickling.
The distinction between black coils and pickled coils is also reflected!B
(1) See corrigendum published in OJ C 27, 2.2.1999, p. 30.2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 4
in the structure of the combined nomenclature as coils classified under
the two categories belong to specific and separate CN codes.
(12) Although imports from the countries concerned are mainly black coils,
the investigation showed that imports cover all the CN codes and thus
all the different products listed above. Notwithstanding the fact thateach CN code corresponds to a distinguishable type of hot-rolled coil,
it was found that they all have identical or similar physical and
technical characteristics, uses and applications. Accordingly, all typesof hot-rolled coils form one single product falling under the CN codelisted in recital (9) above.
2.Like product
(13) The investigation has shown that the hot-rolled coils imported from the
countries concerned are identical to or comparable to the Community-
produced products, in particular in terms of the grades and the range ofdimensions available.
(14) Some exporting producers claimed that the product concerned which
they produce and sell is not interchangeable and not comparable assuch with the Community-produced product. They claimed that the
production process of the Community producers was more advanced
and even used different technology, thus producing a higher qualityproduct. They mentioned that users sometimes had to re-roll theimported products before they could be processed further. They
therefore claimed that their product was not a like product to that of
the complaining Community producers.
(15) Obviously, any difference in the production process resulting in surface
or chemical defects may lead to a lower market value. However, theinvestigation showed that, in general both the Community-producedproduct and the imported product still have the same basic physical
characteristics and uses, even though the products are not identical, in
particular in terms of quality, across suppliers and across shipments ofa given supplier. This, however, cannot lead to the conclusion thathot-rolled coil imported from the countries concerned is not a like
product to that produced by the Community industry and sold in the
Community.
(16) The investigation also showed that the grades and dimensions of the
product concerned imported from the countries concerned are identicalor comparable to the products sold on the domestic market of thecountries concerned.
(17) On this basis, it was concluded that hot-rolled coils produced in the
countries concerned and sold on the domestic markets of these
countries, hot-rolled coils exported to the Community from these
countries and hot-rolled coils produced and sold by the complainingCommunity producers on the Community market, are alike within themeaning of Article 1(4) of the Basic Decision.
C. DUMPING
1.Normal Value
(18) In order to establish normal value, it was first determined for each of
the cooperating exporting producers whether the total volume of thedomestic sales of the product concerned was representative in
accordance with Article 2(2) of the Basic Decision, i.e. whether these
sales represented at least 5 % of the sales volume of the productconcerned exported to the Community.
It was then examined for each exporting producer whether total
domestic sales of each product type constituted 5 % or more of thesales volume of the same type exported to the Community.
For those product types meeting the 5 % test, it was established
whether sufficient sales had been made in the ordinary course of trade
in accordance with Article 2(4) of the Basic Decision.
Where, per product type, the weighted average selling price was equal
to or higher than the weighted average unit cost and where the volume
of domestic sales equal to or above unit cost represented at least 80 %
of sales, normal value was established on the basis of the weighted!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 5
average prices actually paid for all domestic sales. Otherwise, normal
value was established on the basis of the weighted average pricesactually paid for the profitable domestic sales only unless, per producttype, the volume of profitable transactions was lower than 10 % of the
sales volume.
(19) For those product types where the volume of domestic sales was lower
than 5 % of the volume exported to the Community, or where the
volume of profitable domestic sales was less than 10 %, domestic sales
of those product types were considered insufficient within the meaningof Article 2(3) of the Basic Decision and were therefore disregarded.In these cases, normal value was based on the weighted average of the
prices charged by other exporting producers in the country concerned,
if they had representative domestic sales of the corresponding producttype made in the ordinary course of trade in accordance with Article
2(1) of the Basic Decision.
(20) Where, per product type, there were insufficient sales or no
representative domestic sales by other exporting producers in the
country concerned, normal value was constructed on the basis of the
costs of manufacturing incurred by the exporting producer concernedfor the exported product type in question plus a reasonable amount forselling, general and administrative (SG&A) costs and profits in
accordance with Article 2(3) and (6) of the Basic Decision. In general,
for each exporting producer, the SG&A were based on itsrepresentative domestic sales and the profit margin based on itsrepresentative domestic sales made in the ordinary course of trade.
However, in one case, there was only one cooperating exporting
producer in the country concerned without representative domesticsales. Therefore, the weighted average of the SG&A and profit of the
other cooperating exporting producers were used, to the extent that
these producers had representative sales and sales in the ordinarycourse of trade respectively.
2.Export price
(21) Where export sales to the Community were made directly to
independent importers export prices were established on the basis ofthe prices actually paid or payable by these importers in accordance
with Article 2(8) of the Basic Decision.
(22) Where export sales were made to importers in the Community which
were related to the exporting producer, the export prices were
constructed on the basis of the prices at which the imported products
were first resold to independent buyers in the Community, inaccordance with Article 2(9) of the Basic Decision. Adjustments weremade for all costs incurred between importation and resale, including a
reasonable margin for SG&A plus profit.
3.Comparison
(23) For the purposes of a fair comparison due allowance, in the form of
adjustments, was made for differences claimed under Article 2(10) of
the Basic Decision and demonstrated to affect price comparability. On
this basis, adjustments were made with regard to import charges andindirect taxes, discounts, rebates, transport, insurance, handling,
loading and ancillary costs, packing, credit, after-sales costs and
commissions.
(24) Two companies in India claimed an allowance for import charges.
Pursuant to Article 2(10)(b) of the Basic Decision these requests were
partially granted to the extent that it was proved that the materials onwhich import duties were payable had been physically incorporatedinto the products concerned sold on the domestic market and that the
import duties had not been collected or refunded in respect of the
product exported to the Community.
(25) One Indian company requested an adjustment for differences in
quantities on the grounds that the quantities sold per invoice on the
domestic market were smaller than the quantities sold per shipment onthe Community market. It was claimed that sales to the Community
were made at a lower price due to the larger quantities involved. Since
no link was demonstrated with discounts or rebates, as required byArticle 2(10)(c) of the Basic Decision, this request had to be rejected.!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 6
(26) The two exporting producers in South Africa contended that various
rebate schemes applied to domestic sales of the product concerned andthat the normal value should be reduced accordingly. Adjustmentscould only be made to the extent that their link with the sales under
investigation was proved.
(27) The exporting producer in Yugoslavia claimed that the value of their
exports should be calculated using the alleged market exchange rate.
However, as the rate used in the financial accounts was the officialexchange rate and as the companies were not able to present sufficient
evidence demonstrating that the correct rate to be used was the market
exchange rate, it was decided to use the official exchange rate tocalculate the export price.
4.Dumping margins
a)General method
(28) In accordance with Article 2(10) and (11) of the Basic Decision, the
dumping margins were established on the basis of a comparisonbetween the weighted average normal value per product type and theweighted average export price at ex-factory level for the same product
type and at the same level of trade.
(29) For exporting producers concerned by the proceeding who did not
reply to the Commission’ s questionnaire, did not make themselves
known or did not supply necessary information during the investi-gation, the dumping margin was determined on the basis of the facts
available in accordance with the provisions of Article 18(1) of the
Basic Decision.
A comparison of Eurostat figures with the data on the volume of
exports to the Community supplied by the cooperating exportingproducers was made in order to establish per exporting countryconcerned the level of cooperation in the current investigation. As a
result, for all countries subject to investigation, with the exception of
Taiwan, it was found that the overall level of cooperation was high.The Commission therefore considered it appropriate to set thedumping margin for the non cooperating companies at the level of
the highest individual dumping margin established for a cooperating
exporting producer in the country concerned, since there was no reasonto believe that a non cooperating exporting producer had dumped at a
level lower than the highest level found. Since for Taiwan the level of
cooperation was found to be low, in fact significantly below 50 %, thelevel of the residual dumping margin was set at the level of the highestquarterly dumping margin found in that country.
The above approach was also considered necessary in order to avoid
creating a bonus for non-cooperation and an opportunity for circum-
vention.
b)Dumping margins per country
(30) The dumping margins, expressed as a percentage of the CIF price at
Community frontier level, are:
(31)
Bulgaria
Kremikovtzi Corp 27,1 %
Residual 27,1 %
(32) India
Essar Steel Ltd 55,8 %
Steel Authority of India Ltd 56,3 %
Tata Iron & Steel Company Ltd 29,4 %Residual 56,3 %
(33) South Africa
Iscor Ltd 47,8 %!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 7
Highveld Steel & Vanadium Corp Ltd 37,8 %
Residual 47,8 %
(34) Taiwan
China Steel Corp "M1 7,1 %3
Yieh Loong Enterprise Co Ltd 2,1 %
Residual 30,3 %
(35) Yugoslavia
Sartid a.d. 56,1 %
Residual 56,1 %
(36) Iran
As set out in recital (69) below, it was found that the imports from Iran
were below the de minimis threshold foreseen in Article 5(7) of the
Basic Decision. Therefore, it was not considered necessary to carry outa dumping determination with respect to this country.
D. COMMUNITY INDUSTRY
1.Determination of the relevant Community market
(37) For the purposes of establishing whether the Community industry had
suffered injury and, in this context, for determining consumption andthe various economic indicators related to the situation of the
Community industry, it had to be examined whether production of
this industry destined for the captive market should be excluded for thepurposes of this analysis or whether injury and consumption should beassessed in relation to the entire production of the Community
industry.
(38) There are sixteen producers of hot-rolled coils in the Community.
Around 70 % of the hot-rolled coils manufactured by these producers
are used in a captive market, i.e. they are further transformed by theseproducers in an integrated process (hereinafter referred to as ‘captive
market’). These hot-rolled coils follow an internal process of transfers
to downstream processing works, for which no invoices are issuedsince the transfers occur within the same legal entity. The remainingproduction (hereinafter referred to as ‘free market’) is sold to both
related and unrelated parties.
(39) In this respect, the complainant claimed that two separate markets
should be distinguished. It claimed that the hot-rolled coils destined for
a captive market were not in direct competition with dumped imports.Consequently, the imports subject to investigation could not affect thismarket. In parallel, the complainant has claimed that the remaining
production was sold on the free market where competition with
dumped imports takes place. The main purchasers on the free marketare independent cold-rolling mills such as tube makers, steel service
centres (hereinafter referred to as ‘SSC’ s’), steel merchants and
stockholders. Only the hot-rolled coils sold on the free market aresubject to the complaint.
(40) Exporting producers and importers of hot-rolled coils onto the
Community market claimed that the definition of the productconcerned and the like product covered all hot-rolled coils. They
claimed in particular that there was no clear separation between the
captive and free markets and that the definition of the free marketmade by the complainant was arbitrary. They therefore requested thatthe assessment of the Community market should include the captive
market and the free market taken together.
(41) In support of this claim, reference was made to the Gimelec
judgment (
1) of the European Court of Justice. They stated that in!B
(1) Case No C-315-90 of 27.11.19912000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 8
the above-mentioned ruling, the Court referred to the following factors
to rule out the existence of two separate markets:
— the product concerned was sold on the same market and used for
the same purposes;
— the Community producers sold the product concerned both to
related and unrelated customers and charged more or less the sameprice;
— companies on the downstream market used to buy the product
concerned not only from related Community suppliers but alsofrom importers or other unrelated producers.
(42) Some exporting producers claimed that, in the light of the above
judgement, the legal conditions to separate the markets were not met inthe present case. They considered that Community producers couldchoose, depending on market conditions, to sell alternatively to the
free and captive markets since Community production of the two
categories of hot-rolled coils is alike. It was claimed that the allegedmovements between the two segments of the market legally preventedthe exclusion of part of Community production from the examination
of injury, and in particular from Community consumption.
(43) In this respect the Commission made the following findings:
(a) Given the high level of integration existing in the steel industry in
general and in the production of the product concerned in
particular, the Community producers of the product concernedmerely physically transferred, without invoicing, hot-rolled coils
intended for the captive market. No invoices were issued since the
parties involved did not have separate legal identities. As a result,there were, within the captive market, no prices for transferscomparable to those in the free market.
(b) The Community industry did not produce for stockpiling
hot-rolled coils which could subsequently be delivered either forcaptive use or sold on the free market. This is because all users of
hot-rolled coils, including the integrated processes of the
Community industry, have technical constraints for the productionof downstream products. As a result, movements, if any, ofhot-rolled coils between the two markets are insignificant.
(c) The investigation showed that the integrated Community pro-
ducers did not purchase the product concerned for the captivemarket from independent parties inside or outside of theCommunity. As a result hot-rolled coils intended for the captive
market were not in competition with other hot-rolled coils
available in the Community. Consequently, the captive marketcan clearly be distinguished from the free market.
(44) On this basis the Commission considers that the separation between
the free and the captive market is fully in line with the requirements ofthe Basic Decision and the Community institutions past practice.
(45) For the purposes of establishing the economic indicators relevant for
the injury analysis such as development of sales, profitability, etc., theCommission considered whether sales from Community producers torelated parties having separate legal entities, should in general be
included in the determination of the free market. It was found that such
sales were made at more or less the same prices as those charged toindependent parties. In addition, in line with claims by certainexporting producers the investigation has confirmed that these related
parties are free to source their purchases from either related or
unrelated suppliers in or outside the Community. Consequently, it wasconcluded that sales from Community producers to related partieshaving separate legal entities were in competition with sales from
independent suppliers such as those located in the countries concerned
and that these sales should therefore be included in the determinationof sales in the free market.
(46) One Community producer claimed, however, that its sales to related
parties should be considered as belonging to the captive market. It wasargued that the prices invoiced to its related parties were not the marketprices and were significantly different from those applied to indepen-
dent customers. The producer added that the parent company did not
allow any related parties to purchase hot-rolled coils from independent!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 9
parties on the free market. Consequently, hot-rolled coils sold to
related parties were not affected by any direct competition from otherhot-rolled coils. They should therefore be excluded from thedetermination of the free market.
(47) The investigation confirmed that the policy of that group was not to
allow its related parties to purchase hot-rolled coils on the free market.Furthermore, the analysis of sales prices showed that the pricesinvoiced to these related parties were in many instances significantly
different from market prices charged to independent parties. Moreover,
all the sales were made to related users who used the productscaptively without reselling them onwards, as such. Consequently, theCommission concluded that the sales of the hot-rolled coils concerned
could not be considered as being sold on the free market and should
therefore not be included in the determination of the free market.
(48) In conclusion, hot-rolled coils used by Community producers as
pre-material for further transformation in an integrated process within
one single legal entity were considered to be part of a captive market.
The same applies to sales by the aforementioned Community producerwho could demonstrate that its sales to a related customer did indeedbelong to a captive market. All other sales of the producers in the
Community were considered to be part of the free market.
Consequently, the situation of the Community industry in terms ofthe development of the various economic indicators such asproduction, sales, market share and profitability was examined with
respect to the free market.
(49) It should be noted that the above findings regarding the separation and
the determination of the above markets are reflected in the datacollected in the framework of the ECSC Treaty, in particular for the
surveillance of the steel markets. Indeed, such data differentiates the
use of the hot-rolled coils basically along the same lines.
2.Definition of the Community industry
a)Total Community production
(50) Several exporting producers claimed that a number of producers in the
Community should be excluded from the definition of Communityproduction given that they had imported hot-rolled coils from thecountries concerned.
(51) The Commission found that none of the producers investigated had
imported hot-rolled coils from the countries concerned during theperiod examined. However, certain SSC’ s and tube producers related tothese Community producers had made such imports during that period.
(52) In line with the findings on the definition of the relevant Community
markets outlined in recitals (37) to (49), the investigation confirmed,
however, that these related parties had acted independently from theproducers related to them in their operations on the free market.
Consequently, the purchases could not affect the status of the said
companies as Community producers of the product concerned.
(53) Accordingly, it was considered that there were no grounds for
excluding any producers from the definition of Community productionof hot-rolled coils. In accordance with Article 4(1) of the Basic
Decision all sixteen producers operating in the Community market
represent total Community production.
b)Community industry
(54) The complaint was lodged on behalf of eleven out of the sixteen
Community producers of hot-rolled coils while the remaining fivesupported the complaint.
(55) The Commission received ten replies to questionnaires from the
complainant Community producers. One small producer decided not toprovide the Commission with a response.
(56) Two of the ten Community producers that replied to the Commission’ s
questionnaire, were unable to provide all data requested during the
investigation in a format which would allow its aggregation with the
data available for the other Community producers.!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 10
(57) Some exporting producers claimed that at least one Community
producer included in the definition of the Community industry set outabove received preferential treatment in relation to the requirementsimposed on interested parties during anti-dumping investigations. In
particular they argued that the said Community producer did not
provide the Commission with a reply to its questionnaire within thestatutory deadlines for the imposition of provisional duties. Theyconsidered that this constitutes discriminatory treatment and violates
Article 6(2) of the Basic Decision.
(58) It should be noted that all the Community producers included in the
definition of the Community industry replied to the Commission’ s
questionnaire within the deadlines set forth in the Basic Decision andtherefore within the deadline for the imposition of provisionalmeasures. The Commission considers that all interested parties in
the present proceeding in similar situation were given equal treatment.
Consequently, any claims suggesting an infringement to Article 6(2) ofthe Basic Decision and discriminatory treatment by the Commission
are not founded.
(59) In conclusion, the eight Community producers having fully cooperated
in the investigation make up the Community industry for the purposes
of this proceeding and they accounted for around 65 % of the total
Community production of the product concerned.
(60) These producers are accordingly considered as the Community
industry and are referred to as such hereinafter as they represent amajor proportion of total Community production within the meaningof Article 4(1) of the Basic Decision.
E.INJURY
1.Apparent consumption
(61) Apparent consumption of hot-rolled coils in the Community was
established on the basis of the total sales made by the 16 Community
producers on the free market and total imports of the product
concerned into the Community as indicated in the Eurostat importstatistics and the exporting producers’ replies to the questionnaires.
(62) From 1995 up to the investigation period, apparent consumption in the
Community increased by 9 %, namely from 18,4 million tonnes to 20,1million tonnes. In 1995 the free market was characterised by
exceptionally high sales prices and good demand, particularly for
Community-produced hot-rolled coils. The following year, however,the volume of the market decreased by 11 %.
(63) Between 1996 and the investigation period, apparent consumption
increased steadily. The main growth occurred between 1996 and 1997when the market increased by 22 %. Between 1997 and the
investigation period, it increased by only 0,4 %.
2.Imports from the countries concerned
a)Negligible imports
(64) Based on the provisions of Articles 3(4) and 5(7) of the Basic
Decision, the assessment of whether or not imports were negligiblewas made in relation to apparent consumption of the product
concerned on the Community market.
(65) On the basis of Eurostat statistics imports originating in three
exporting countries, namely India, Iran and South Africa, were slightly
above the 1 % threshold foreseen in Article 5(7) of the Basic Decision.
(66) Iran claimed that it was inappropriate to use Eurostat statistics in
assessing its market share given that an on-the-spot investigation
carried out at the premises of the only exporting producer operating inthat country confirmed significantly lower export volumes to theCommunity. Accordingly, as was the case in past proceedings, they
argued that the Commission should assess the Iranian market share on
the basis of the findings made during its on-the-spot investigation.!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 11
(67) India and South Africa contested the determination of apparent
consumption, claiming that their imports were negligible and that theyshould, like Iran, be excluded from the scope of the investigation.
(68) As mentioned above, it was found that on the basis of Eurostat import
statistics the market share held by Iran was just above the de minimis
threshold, namely 1,2 %. However, it was also found that thesestatistics conflicted with the information collected and verified during
the Commission on-the-spot verification for the only exporting
producer in Iran. Accordingly, the Eurostat Statistics were thus notconsidered sufficiently precise to base the assessment of the market
share held by that country exclusively on them. These statistics were
therefore also compared with the information available from interestedparties in the proceeding, notably the only exporting producer in Iranand its related importers based in the Community. This comparison
was possible and particularly relevant in the present case because only
one producer operated in Iran. As this producer and its relatedcompanies based in the Community cooperated fully in the proceedingit was possible to verify his claim by a straightforward comparison
between the verified export transactions and Eurostat. This verification
and comparison established export levels from Iran significantly belowthede minimis threshold and concluded that any difference between
the company’ s information and Eurostat’ s was not a result of exports to
the Community from Iran via other third countries.
(69) Under these circumstances it was considered prudent that in order to
establish the market share held by Iran, duly verified data should be
used. Accordingly, it is concluded that exports from Iran are below thede minimis threshold, that any injury from imports originating in Iran
could only be negligible and that the proceeding should be terminated
with respect to Iran.
(70) With respect to the claim by the Indian and South African exporting
producers the evidence submitted provided no grounds for considering
their imports into the Community as negligible, in particular given themethodology used to determine the relevant Community market set outin recitals (37) to (49) above. Indeed, unlike in the case of Iran, the
relevant Eurostat information and the replies to the Commission’ s
questionnaire did not show imports below the de minimis threshold.
Consequently, the imports from India and South Africa wereconsidered to be above the de minimis threshold set out in Articles
3(4) and 5(7) of the Basic Decision.
b)Cumulative assessment of imports
(71) The Commission considered whether imports of hot-rolled coils
originating in Bulgaria, India, South Africa Taiwan and Yugoslavia
should be assessed cumulatively in accordance with Article 3(4) of theBasic Decision.
(72) It was therefore examined whether all criteria were met to cumulate
imports from the countries concerned. The results of the examinationshowed that:
— the margin of dumping relating to each country, as shown above,
was more than de minimis ;
— the volume of imports from each country was not negligible when
compared to Community consumption;
— the analysis of the conditions of competition between imported
hot-rolled coils and the conditions of competition between
imported hot-rolled coils and the like Community product alsoindicated that imports from the countries concerned should be
cumulated. Indeed, the exporting countries concerned mainly sold
hot-rolled coils on the free Community market directly tounrelated customers, such as cold rolling mills, tube makers,SSC’ s and steel merchants. Hot-rolled coils were also imported via
related sales companies, which subsequently sold the product
concerned to the same categories of customers mentioned above.The investigation showed that the Community industry was sellingthe like product through the same sales channels and to the same
categories of customers. Finally, it was found that a similar pricing
policy was followed for all these sales.!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 12
(73) Accordingly, contrary to the suggestion made by some exporting
producers, the Commission concluded that all conditions justifying thecumulation of the imports from the above-mentioned countries weremet.
c)V olume of the imports concerned
(74) Based on Eurostat import statistics, between 1995 and the investigation
period, the volume of imports into the Community from the countriesconcerned increased by 229 %, namely from 0,65 million tonnes to2,14 million tonnes. The increase of imports between 1995 and 1996
was very limited (+ 0,10 million tonnes). The main increase occurred
between 1997 and the investigation period (+ 1,26 million tonnes).
(75) The analysis of the developments during the investigation period
indicated that imports from all the countries concerned were made
mainly during the first half of the investigation period (1,3 million
tonnes); they subsequently dropped by 42 % in the second half of theinvestigation period but were still significantly higher than in thesecond half of 1997.
(76) As already mentioned in recital (11) above, the various types of
hot-rolled coils are commonly classified into two distinct categories:black coils and pickled coils. The investigation showed that black coils
covered around 90 % of all hot-rolled coils imported from the
countries concerned.
d)Market share of imports
(77) The market share held by the exporting producers increased from 3,5 %
to 10,7 % between 1995 and the investigation period. The actualincreases in import volume thus allowed the countries concerned to
gain 7,2 percentage points of the share of the Community market.
(78) The main increases in market share occurred between 1997 and the
investigation period, when the countries concerned gained 6,3-per-
centage points market share.
e)Price undercutting
(79) In order to evaluate any possible price undercutting, prices of
comparable types of hot-rolled coils were, as far as possible, comparedunder similar sales conditions on the Community market, in the sameMember State and to the same customers. The prices of the exporting
producer free at Community frontier were compared with the
Community industry’ s ex-factory prices. Where necessary, exportingcountries’ sales prices were adjusted to a free at Community-frontier
level, customs duty paid and including relevant import costs. Similarly,
these prices were also adjusted to ensure comparison at the same levelof trade as that of the Community industry. All adjustments were basedon the evidence collected and verified by the Commission during the
investigation.
(80) As already mentioned in recital (14) some exporting producers
suggested that the hot-rolled coils they produced and sold on theCommunity market were not of a comparable quality to that of the
Community industry. One exporting producer claimed that unlike the
Community industry’ s production process, their products were notproduced through continuous casting and this caused chemical and
surface defects which lower the yield when the coils are processed
further. In addition, the fact that they do not have an automatic ‘coiler’leads to thickness and width variations, and thus to a poorer quality.They submitted evidence to this effect and consequently requested a
price adjustment for differences in quality in the context of the price
comparisons which were made in determining price undercutting.
(81) The Commission found that, in general, a price adjustment for
differences in quality was not justified, particularly as such differences
were not apparent to users, and as it emerged from the investigation
that any alleged difference in quality does not necessarily affect the useof the product concerned. For one particular exporting producer,however, the evidence provided indicated that the requested quality
adjustment was partly justified. Although a detailed investigation of
the level of the adjustment requested revealed that the claim was!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 13
overestimated, based on the evidence available half of the requested
adjustment could be granted.
(82) Accordingly, the results of the price comparison expressed as a
percentage of Community industry prices are as follows:
— Bulgaria: 6,8 %— India: 6,7 %
— ESSAR: 6,1 %
— Tata: 6,1 % and
— SAIL: 19,1 %
— South Africa: 5,3 %
— Iscor: 4,9 % and— Highveld Steel: 27,0 %
— Taiwan: 4,3 %
— Yieh Long: 3,9 % and
— CSC: 7,5 %
— Yugoslavia: 12,4 %
3.Situation of the Community industry between 1995 and the
investigation period
a)Production
(83) The investigation showed that Community industry’ s production
peaked at 12,5 million tonnes in 1997. For the remainder of the
period examined the Community industry’ s production remained stableat around 11,4 million tonnes although a fall in consumption wasobserved in 1996. It should be noted that this production was either
sold on the free market or exported to third countries.
(84) As the production capacity of the Community industry is used for
hot-rolled coils intended for both the free and the captive market, it
was also considered necessary to analyse information on such captiveproduction in order to ascertain that any drop in the production
intended for the free market was not due to an increased need for the
captive market.
(85) It was found that between 1995 and the investigation period, this
production increased by 2 %, or by around 0,6 million tonnes. Thisindicated a relatively stable captive production. As regards the trendsin captive production between 1997 and the investigation period, these
were similar to those observed above for the production intended for
the free market.
(86) Consequently, the decrease in production intended for the free market
is not due to a greater need for captive production.
b)Capacity and capacity utilisation
(87) It is to be noted that production facilities can be used for products
destined for both the free and the captive markets, as well as for other
products not concerned by this proceeding (including other steelgrades and other steel products). Capacity utilisation related to the
product concerned has therefore been established on the basis of the
capacities officially declared to the Commission within the frameworkof the ECSC Treaty. These capacities are established according tospecific parameters and must not be confused with the gross or
nameplate capacity. The gross or nameplate capacity is the highest
possible capacity achievable without taking into account factors suchas the personnel available, holiday periods, set-up times, maintenance,etc.
(88) The capacity utilisation rate of the Community industry was 87 %
between 1995 and the investigation period, except in 1997 when the
Community industry’ s production was at its peak and the rate reached93 %. At that time, both the consumption of hot-rolled coils destined!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 14
for the free market and those destined for the captive market were
high.
(89) The high utilisation rates were found to be normal bearing in mind that
in heavy industry, particularly in the steel industry, high capacity
utilisation is necessary to reduce the impact of the high fixed costs ofproduction.
c)Orders received and sales volume
i) Orders received
(90) In order to complement the analysis on sales, the development of the
orders received by the Community industry was examined. For this
purpose, the Community industry submitted data which is alsoavailable under the framework of the surveillance of the Community
steel market under the ECSC Treaty. Although these data do not reflect
exactly the situation with respect to the product concerned butencompassed a slightly broader category of products, it was found thatthis aggregation of data could be considered representative for the
situation of the product concerned. These data showed that 1997 was a
year where the level of orders was high as compared to the situationfound during the investigation period. Contrary to the stabledevelopment of the apparent consumption between 1997 and the
investigation period shown above, orders received by the Community
industry declined by 17 % between 1997 and the investigation period.
(91) The above finding suggests that the economic activity of the
Community industry was more regular and evenly spread throughout
the year 1997 when the volume of orders received developed more inline with sales volume. Furthermore, given the existence of a time lagbetween orders and deliveries, the reduction in the orders received
indicated a reduction of the level of the economic activity, which will
be examined below.
ii) Sales
(92) During the period examined, the volume of sales slightly increased
from 9,6 million tonnes to 9,7 million tonnes, an increase of 1 %.
(93) Within that period, the trend in sales volume broadly reflected the
evolution of consumption. However, between 1997 and the investi-
gation period, the Community industry’ s sales decreased by 12 % while
consumption increased slightly.
(94) The Community industry submitted that the injury indicator concern-
ing sales set out above has been established on the basis of transactions
delivered and invoiced during the periods specified. In this context, itis important to point out that the Community industry has organised itsproduction process in such a way that users’ orders made on a given
date are delivered and invoiced and thus sold to them, with a time lag
of at least three months. Therefore, in order to make a meaningfulassessment of the development, which occurred during any givenperiod, not only the actual sales but also the orders received during
such a period have to be analysed. It is considered that any
development observed with respect to these orders is bound totranslate into corresponding developments of sales with a time lag
thereafter.
iii) Differentiation of type of sales
(95) The Community industry argued that in order to assess the actual
injury it suffered, the development of sales for different types ofhot-rolled coils under investigation, namely black coils as compared to
pickled coils, should be analysed separately. The claim was that given
the high share of dumped imported black coils in total imports, thedevelopment of the Community industry sales volume and sales prices
for that type of coils would indicate a particularly injurious situation.
(96) Investigation of this particular issue showed that from 1995 up to the
investigation period (1998), the volume of black coils sold by the
Community industry on the free market decreased by 13 %, whereas
the volume of pickled coils sold increased by 34 %. In absolute terms,this represents a decrease of around 1 million tonnes in sales of black!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 15
coils and an increase of around 0,5 million tonnes in sales of pickled
coils.
(97) It also confirmed that the share between the sales of black coils and
pickled coils for the Community industry was more balanced than that
of the exporting producers. From 1995 up to 1997 the share in salesvolume was 70 % of black coils against 30 % of sales of pickled coils.During the investigation period this share became 60 % and 40 %
respectively for black and pickled coils. This development in total
sales clearly shows that during the investigation period a shift occurredfrom black to pickled coils, i.e. from a category of products whereimports were more present to one were they were less prominent.
d)Price evolution
(98) During the period examined the Community industry’ s weighted
average sales price decreased by 10 %. In 1995 sales prices were at
their highest for ten years. They continued to follow a decreasing trend
until 1997 (- 17 % and - 3 % compared to 1995 and 1996 respectively)but recovered from 1997 up to the end of the investigation period (+9 %).
e)Market share
(99) From 1995 up to the investigation period, the market share held by the
Community industry decreased by 3,7 percentage points, dropping
from 52,0 % in 1995 to 48,3 % in the investigation period.
(100) Between 1995 and 1996 and between 1996 and 1997 the market share
held by the Community industry increased by 1,1 and 1,8 percentage
points respectively.
(101) Between 1997 and the investigation period, however, the Community
industry lost all the market share previously gained and fell to a lower
level than that in 1995. The losses amounted to 6,6 percentage points.
Further analysis of this situation indicated that market share was lostdue to a decrease in sales both to related and unrelated customers onthe Community free market.
f)Profitability
(102) The average return on sales made by the Community industry for the
product concerned from 1995 up to the investigation period decreased
by 39 %. The high profits (20,7 %) achieved in 1995 were the result of
high prices on the market at that time. In 1996, despite a downturn inthe market and a reduction in sales prices (- 15 %), the Communityindustry remained profitable. However, the recovery in sales volume in
1997 did not allow that industry to increase its profit margin since its
sales prices again decreased by 3 %.
(103) During the investigation period profitability recovered slightly from its
1997 level. The increase in sales prices during the investigation period
(9 % compared to 1997) allowed the Community industry to achieve aprofit margin of 12,9 %. The Community industry claimed that thislevel of profit was reasonable.
(104) Some exporting producers suggested that the Community industry
achieved an extremely high level of profitability during the
investigation period and that the development of this indicator alone
should have warranted immediate termination of the proceeding. Theysaid that such profit was significantly higher than that consideredreasonable by the Commission in past anti-dumping cases involving
steel products.
(105) In this respect it should be noted that the relevant provisions of the
Basic Decision and the WTO Anti-dumping agreement state that the
determination of injury shall be based on positive evidence of (a) the
volume of dumped imports and the effect of dumped imports on priceson the Community market for like products; and (b) the consequentimpact of those imports on the Community industry. Moreover, they
specify that consideration shall be given to whether there has been a
significant increase in the volume of dumped imports, either inabsolute terms or relative to consumption in the Community.
Furthermore, they also specify that consideration shall be given to
whether there has been significant price undercutting by dumpedimports or whether the effect of such imports was to depress prices to a!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 16
significant degree or to prevent price increases. No one or more of
these factors can necessarily give decisive guidance. Finally, they statethat the examination of the impact of dumped imports on the domesticindustry shall include an evaluation of all the relevant economic
factors and indices having a bearing on the state of the industry,
including the magnitude of the actual margins of dumping, actual andpotential decline in sales, profit, output, market share, productivity,utilisation of capacity, factors affecting prices, etc. The Basic Decision
specifically states that this list is not exhaustive, nor can any one or
more of these factors necessarily give decisive guidance.
(106) In the present case, the investigation has shown that imports of dumped
imports have significantly increased in absolute and relative terms. In
addition, low-priced dumped imports were found to significantlyundercut the Community industry’ s prices. All the above conditions
being met, the Commission has evaluated the potential and actual
developments of a number of relevant economic factors in itsinvestigation before reaching its definitive conclusions. Accordingly,it is considered that the suggestion by some exporting producers that
only the level of profitability should have warranted the termination of
the proceeding is clearly against the provisions of the Basic Decision.
(107) Furthermore, the economic situation of the Community industry
during the investigation period, in particular its price and profitability
situation, must be seen in the light of the structure of the hot-rolledcoils market and the developments that occurred in the economicsituation of the Community industry during the investigation period, as
set out in point 4 below.
(108) Finally, it is considered that the comparison of a specific economic
indicator pertaining to the Community industry with the same
economic indicator worldwide level is not relevant in the context ofanti-dumping proceedings.
g)Investments and employment
(109) The investigation showed that investments were made mainly in the
replacement of machinery and equipment. During the investigationperiod, the level of investment was similar to the 1995 level.Investments were increased by 32 % as compared to 1995, consistent
with the high demand in 1997.
(110) As regards employment, the Community industry manufactures
various products on the same site and with the same machinery,
notably hot-rolled coils. The investigation showed that during the
period examined employment for the production of the productconcerned decreased by 4 %.
h)Summary of the situation of the Community industry between 1995
and the investigation period
(111) Some exporting producers claimed that a determination of injury
during the investigation period could not be carried out on the basis of
a comparison of the situation of the Community industry established in
the years 1995 and 1997. They found that, in particular, price andprofitability levels in 1995, production, capacity utilisation, sales
volume and market share levels in 1997 were not representative of
what their levels should be under conditions of fair competition. Theythus argued that on the basis of the other findings over the entire periodexamined, it could not reasonably be concluded that the Community
industry suffered material injury.
(112) In this respect it should be noted that, in the above claim, interested
parties have not stated in which respect some economic indicators
established in 1995 and 1997 could not be considered representative.
They merely stated that prices and profits in 1995 and production,capacity utilisation, sales volume and market share were notrepresentative. In other words, the above claim suggests that a
significant part of the data established during the investigation carried
out by the Commission should be disregarded in the presentproceeding without any evidence or explanations indicating that the
conditions of normal competition were not met in 1995 and 1997.
Given that during its investigation the Commission found no evidenceto corroborate the allegation that normal competition was not taking!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 17
place on the Community market during the years 1995 and 1997, it is
considered that there are no grounds to disregard such information.
(113) The Commission thus examined the developments of the economic
situation of the Community industry within the period examined, and
its overall economic situation between 1995 and the investigationperiod, on a yearly basis.
(114) The investigation showed that between 1997 and the investigation
period, with a slight increase in apparent consumption, the Communityindustry increased its sales prices by 9 % but was not able to maintainits sales volume, which decreased by 12 %. Accordingly, the
Community industry lost 6,6 percentage points or 14 % of market
share. Furthermore, the Community industry production decreased by9 %, leading also to a reduced capacity utilisation. Despite these
negative developments profitability increased from 6,3 % to 12,9 %.
(115) The investigation also showed that between 1997 and the investigation
period imports from the countries concerned increased significantly in
terms of volume (+ 143 %), leading to a doubling of their market share
(+ 6,3 percentage points). Although the countries concerned increasedtheir sales prices by 7 % they were nevertheless found to beundercutting the prices of the Community industry by 8 % on average
during the investigation period.
4.Analysis of the situation of the Community industry during the
investigation period
a)Preliminary remarks
(116) The Community industry claimed that prices and thus profits remained
at a high level in the first half of the investigation period becauseapparent consumption and therefore demand was exceptionally high,even though it was not matched by a commensurate actual
consumption. This led, in the first half of the investigation period, to
an overstocking which was largely fed by the imports concerned, and,in the second half of the investigation period, to a significantde-stocking.
(117) Furthermore, the Community industry indicated that a more refined
analysis of sales by product types and sales channels for which there is
head-on competition between the Community industry and imports
would be necessary in the present case to show the full extent of theinjury suffered. This entails a differentiated analysis of sales of blackas opposed to pickled coils, and sales channels where longer-term
contracts are concluded as opposed to other sales.
(118) Finally, the Community industry claimed that a more detailed analysis
of the four quarters of the investigation period was necessary given the
existence of a time lag between orders placed by purchasers and
deliveries made to them. It was claimed that such time lags effectivelydelayed the negative impact of the imports concerned. The Communityindustry claimed that it was therefore necessary to further investigate
the development of orders received during the investigation period.
(119) All operators on the steel market agreed that business is mainly carried
out on a quarterly basis. Production is organised on the basis of
quarterly plans and prices. Both orders and deliveries are negotiated
accordingly. Therefore, the suggestion made by some exportingproducers that the partitioning of the investigation period, in particular
into quarters, did not constitute an objective evaluation of the possible
injury suffered by the Community industry was not founded. Theabove claims of the Community industry have therefore beeninvestigated and analysed as set out below.
(120) In order to have an overview of the cyclical nature of the activity of the
Community industry and to cross check the quarterly developments ofits economic situation, the Commission also collected quarterly data
for the period 1996 up to the second quarter of 1999.
b)Cyclical nature of the steel industry
(121) According to the complainant, there are seasonal fluctuations on the
steel market in that the first two quarters of each calendar year are
normally better than the last two quarters. Such seasonal fluctuationscould mainly be observed in sales activity. Sales would normally be!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 18
affected in the third quarter of the year due to the holiday period in the
user industries, but they should pick up again in the fourth quarter.Given that some of the above allegations made by the Communityindustry required a quarterly analysis it was important to ensure that
any development observed did not merely reflect normal quarterly
fluctuations. This analysis was particularly relevant as the complainantalleged that the trends observed within the investigation period werefar beyond the normal cycles.
(122) For the evaluation of the cyclical nature of the hot-rolled coil business,
the Commission found that the trends in production and sales for theCommunity industry from 1996 up to the investigation period were asfollows:
(%)
1st quarter 2nd quarter 3rd quarter 4th quarter
Production
— 1996 93 97 95 100— 1997 97 100 97 97
— IP (1998) 100 94 77 70
Sales volume
— 1996 87 90 91 100— 1997 97 100 97 97
— IP (1998) 100 87 68 61
Sales value
— 1996 100 96 89 94
— 1997 95 100 99 98
— IP (1998) 100 88 63 51
(123) With regard to production, it was found that the third quarter did not
necessarily show the lowest level of activity. In 1996 and 1997, the
greatest difference found was 7 % between the first and the fourthquarter of 1996 and the trend in production was linear in those years.During the investigation period however the levels of production in the
third and in the fourth quarter were far lower when compared to the
first quarter, indicating that the fluctuations observed in that periodwere far beyond the normal seasonal fluctuations.
(124) Concerning sales volume, the downturn observed in the third and
fourth quarters was even more pronounced during the investigation
period. Sales activity in the second half of the investigation period wasexceptionally low and far beyond the normal seasonal fluctuations.
(125) The above quarterly analysis covering the years 1996 and 1997 as well
as the investigation period, shows that the trends observed during this
latter period are far beyond the normal fluctuations linked to the
cyclical nature of the hot-rolled coil business.
c)Apparent consumption and overstocking
(126) As indicated in recital (61) above, the development of apparent
consumption on a yearly basis was quite stable, in particular between1997 and the investigation period. It should be underlined that
apparent consumption, by definition, does not reflect actual use, i.e.
actual consumption of the product concerned by its users. Thedifference between apparent consumption and actual consumption isbasically the quantity of stocks kept at various levels of the distribution
chain, i.e. in the present case by importers, traders, dealers, SSCs and
users.
(127) The examination of this particular issue showed that apparent
consumption was significantly higher in the first two quarters of theinvestigation period than in the last two quarters. In addition, the
comparatively steady development in apparent consumption found
throughout 1997 did not occur during the investigation period. This!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 19
difference in trends was particularly obvious when comparing the end
of 1997 and the beginning of the investigation period, as there was aconsiderable increase in apparent consumption between these two timeperiods. This suggests an increase in stocks, whereas the reverse was
true if the fourth quarter of 1997 is compared with the fourth quarter of
the investigation period, indicating a significant decrease in stocks inthe last two quarters of the investigation period.
(128) As it has been alleged that these stocks played a particularly important
role in the development of the market during the investigation period,it was considered necessary to establish the quarterly apparentconsumption not only for the investigation period but also for 1997.
(129) To confirm these findings, the relevant development should also have
been established for actual consumption. However, its determinationwas hampered by the fact that cooperation of the various relevant
interested parties in the distribution chain and at user level was not
complete. Nevertheless, the Commission was able to establish thestocks held at trader’s level on the basis of Eurostat informationgathered in the framework of the ECSC Treaty.
(130) In line with the above findings on apparent consumption, this
information showed that there was a considerable build-up of stockat trader level between the end of 1997 and the beginning of theinvestigation period. An increase of 29 % between fourth quarter 1997
and first quarter of the investigation period and a further increase of
11 % between the first quarter of the investigation period and thesecond quarter of the investigation period were observed.
(131) This information also confirmed a considerable decrease in stocks
towards the end of the investigation period (- 22 %). The use of stocksbecame clear when comparing the level of stocks at the end of both thefirst and second semesters of the investigation period. A comparison of
the quarterly development of stocks in 1997 with the quarterly
development during the investigation period also confirms the abovefindings.
(132) This trend of overstocking in the first two quarters of the investigation
period was confirmed in a submission received by an exportingproducer under investigation and by the information from a major userof the product concerned on the Community market. This user held
stocks which in the middle of the investigation period were more than
double those held at the beginning of this period, while there was noindication of a significant difference in the underlying activity betweenthe beginning and the end of the investigation period by this user.
(133) The investigation thus confirmed the Community industry’ s claim that
considerable overstocking occurred at the beginning of the investi-gation period. In the first two quarters of the investigation period
apparent consumption was significantly higher than actual consump-
tion, while for the third and fourth quarters of the investigation periodthe difference was reversed.
(134) In absolute terms, it was found that apparent consumption during the
first half of the investigation period exceeded apparent consumption inthe first half of 1997 by around 1,5 million tonnes.
(135) Some interested parties claimed that the Community industry largely
contributed to the overstocking observed during the first half of the
investigation period. In this respect it should be noted that, as shownbelow, the Community industry’ s sales started to decline right from thebeginning of the investigation period. This suggests that the
Community industry did not play an important role in feeding the
overstocking observed.
d)Production and capacity utilisation
(136) On a quarterly basis, production decreased by 23 % in the third quarter
and by 30 % in the fourth quarter of the investigation period as
compared to the first quarter of the investigation period.
(137) In line with the decrease in production, the rate of capacity utilisation
also decreased by 12 % in the third quarter of the investigation period
and by 17 % in the fourth quarter as compared to the first quarter of
the investigation period.!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 20
(138) Similarly, it was found that production and capacity utilisation were
declining when compared with the relevant quarterly activity in 1997.In the third and fourth quarters of the investigation period as comparedto the third and fourth quarter of 1997, production decreased by 20 %
and 11 % respectively, capacity utilisation by 12 % and 18 %.
e)Sales volume, sales prices and profitability
i) Sales volume
(139) The Community industry sales volume decreased by 32 % in the third
quarter of the investigation period and by 39 % in the fourth quarter ascompared to the first quarter.
(140) Furthermore, as already mentioned in the year-to-year analysis, the
Community industry claimed that a more refined and differentiated
analysis of its various types of sales and sales channels should bemade, as this would show that the sales competing directly with theimports concerned are more affected than other sales. In addition to the
differentiation between sales of black coils and pickled coils, that
industry claimed that a proportion of its sales were the result oflong-term delivery and sales contracts, concluded, for example, with
the automobile industry. These contracts typically cover a period of up
to one year, during which delivery quantities and prices are fixed. Theexporting producers concerned do basically not supply the customersunder such contracts.
(141) In order to carry out a detailed analysis the above mentioned types of
sales were grouped and are referred to as ‘long-term’sales as comparedto ‘other’ sales. Similarly, the development of sales, sales prices andprofitability of black and pickled coils during the investigation period
were also analysed.
(142) The sales volume of long-term sales was much more stable throughout
the quarters of the investigation period than the rest of the salesactivity. Indeed, the decrease in long-term sales was 20 % in the third
quarter and 22 % in the fourth quarter as compared to the first quarter
of the investigation period. The decrease in other sales was much morepronounced namely 35 % and 43 % in the third and the fourth quarterrespectively, as compared to the first quarter of the investigation
period.
(143) The same was true when analysing the sales volume of black compared
to pickled coils. During the investigation period the volume of pickled
coils sold developed in a smoother way than that of black coils. The
decrease in the sales volume of black coil was as high as 39 % in thethird quarter and 44 % in the fourth quarter as compared to the firstquarter of the investigation period whereas the decrease in pickled
coils was limited to 21 % and 29 % respectively.
ii) Sales prices of the Community industry
(144) During the first two quarters of the investigation period sales prices of
hot-rolled coils were by and large stable, namely at a level of ECU 306and 308 per tonne respectively. Subsequently they fell down to
ECU 286 per tonne during the third quarter and to ECU 254 per tonne
during the fourth quarter of the investigation period. Overall thisrepresents a decrease of 17 % during the investigation period.
(145) The analysis of prices differentiated by types of sales showed that
prices for long-term sales largely remained stable in the first three
quarters of the investigation period, only decreasing from ECU 320 pertonne to ECU 312 per tonne, namely a decrease of 2 %. The decreasewas limited to 10 % when comparing the first and the fourth quarter of
the investigation period. By contrast, prices for other sales had already
decreased by 10 % between the first and the third quarter of theinvestigation period and by 21 % between the first and the fourthquarter of the investigation period.
(146) The comparison between the development of prices of black coils and
pickled coils showed that prices of the former decreased much morethan those of the latter. The result of these differing trends was thatprices across categories differed significantly more at the end of the
investigation period than at the beginning. Indeed, prices for pickled
coils, only decreasing from ECU 328 per tonne to ECU 316 per tonne,!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 21
namely a decrease of 4 %. The decrease was limited to 12 % when
comparing the first and the fourth quarter of the investigation period.By contrast, prices for black coils had already decreased by 10 %between the first and the third quarter and by 22 % between the first
and the fourth quarter of the investigation period.
iii) Profitability
(147) On a quarterly basis, it emerged that profitability was very good during
the first half of the investigation period. Given the precipitation of
price decreases throughout the subsequent quarters, profitabilitycontinued to decrease, namely from 16,8 % during the first quarterof the investigation period to - 2,6 % in the fourth quarter.
(148) The differentiation in sales showed significant decreases in profit-
ability from the very start of the investigation period for the sales ofblack coils and sales other than the long term sales.
(149) The investigation showed that profitability for the long term sales was
very good in the first half of the investigation period (around 21 %)and remained positive throughout the investigation period, namely 8 %
in the fourth quarter of the investigation period. Similarly other sales
were also profitable at around 16 % in the first half of the investigationperiod. In line with the development of demand for hot-rolled coils, it
subsequently collapsed in the third and the fourth quarter of the
investigation period to become negative (- 7 %) in the fourth quarter ofthe investigation period.
(150) The same observations were made on profitability differentiated for
black coils and pickled coils where profitability for both types wasgood in the first half of the investigation period. Subsequently,profitability for pickled coils remained positive throughout the
investigation period (4,5 % in the fourth quarter) whereas profitability
in black coils sales significantly decreased in the third quarter of theinvestigation period and reached a level of losses as high as - 16,5 % inthe fourth quarter of the investigation period.
(151) In conclusion, overall sales, prices and profitability all fell during the
investigation period. This trend was significantly less pronounced forsales made in market segments where fewer dumped imports were
present. In terms of prices and resulting profitability, the situation of
the Community industry remained relatively stable during the time inwhich apparent consumption boomed. The investigation has also
shown that the Community industry did not increase its sales volume
in line with the increase in the apparent consumption. By contrast,price levels and profitability remained at a high level at a time ofstrong and increasing demand.
(152) The investigation also showed that the purchase prices of major cost
items in the cost of production decreased during the investigationperiod. Notably, the price of iron ore decreased by up to 12 % and
scrap by up to 40 % and the price of oil dropped to the level of 1970.
Accordingly, the cost of raw material decreased limiting the level ofthe losses incurred, particularly during the investigation period.
(153) In order to complete the above analysis on sales volume, sales prices
and profitability, it was found that these economic indicators were alsodeclining when compared with the relevant quarterly activity in 1997.
In the third and fourth quarter of the investigation period as compared
to the third and fourth quarter of 1997, sales volume decreased by 24 %and 27 % respectively, sales prices were 6 % and 19 % lower. Asregards profitability, it was found that it was 15 percentage points
lower in the fourth quarter of the IP as compared to the fourth quarter
of 1997.
(154) As shown in the chapter below, in assessing the developments in sales
volume, sales prices and profitability it is important to note that there
is a time lag between price negotiation with customers and invoicingand delivery by the Community industry. Thus, when considering inparticular the developments in other sales the prices applied during the
first quarter of the investigation period were in fact negotiated during
the fourth quarter of 1997 and so on.!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 22
f)Time lag between the situation of the Community industry and the
market developments
(155) As already mentioned in the year-to-year analysis above, the
Community industry alleged that, in assessing its price and profit-
ability development, the existence of a time lag between the sales of
the goods and price negotiation with customers related to such salesshould be considered. In practice, it was claimed, the negotiations
preceded the sales by at least one quarter.
(156) The investigation has shown that smooth production planning for an
effective capacity utilisation resulted in a time lag between the orderand the sale. This time lag was indeed found to be around one quarter.In other words sales in the first quarter of the investigation period are
the result of orders negotiated and concluded in the fourth quarter of
1997.
(157) Given the existence of this time lag, the quarterly trend established in
the orders received by the Community industry showed a significant
decrease during the investigation period. In line with the claim by the
Community industry, this negative trend is pronounced right from thefirst quarter of the investigation period compared to the trenddetermined for sales volume and production. The volume of the
orders received in the second quarter of the investigation period were
17 % lower than those received in the first quarter. Furthermore, itemerged that a relatively high level of orders was received in the fourthquarter of 1997, corresponding to deliveries/sales effected in the first
quarter of the investigation period.
(158) These findings are thus consistent with the claim by the Community
industry that the relatively positive economic situation during the firsthalf of the investigation period merely reflects a healthy level of orders
received during the last quarter of 1997 and the first quarter of the
investigation period, namely when demand was still high.
g)Conclusion on the situation of the Community industry in the
investigation period
(159) The quarterly analysis indicated that the economic situation of the
Community industry deteriorated significantly during the investigation
period, in particular in the second half. This deterioration went far
beyond the seasonal fluctuations observed during the previous years ona quarterly basis.
(160) In particular, it was found that in the third quarter of the investigation
period as compared to the average activity of the period, all the injury
indicators followed a negative trend: production decreased by 10 %,
capacity utilisation by 6 %, sales volume by 14 %, sales prices by 2,4 %and profitability decreased by 2,1 percentage points.
(161) Furthermore, the developments observed during the fourth quarter of
the investigation period indicated that the situation of the Community
industry only deteriorated further: as compared to the average activityof the investigation period, production decreased by 18 %, capacityutilisation by 10 %, sales volume by 22 %, prices by 13 % profitability
became negative (- 2,6 % on net turnover), a decrease of 15,5
percentage points.
5.Developments after the investigation period
(162) As mentioned above, the overstocking which occurred during the first
half of the investigation period led to a relatively positive marketsituation reflected in the good level of prices on the Community
market during this time period. Accordingly profitability of the
Community industry was still good. However, in view of the fact thatthis situation was not supported by an underlying positive developmentin the user markets but was likely to lead to negative developments
after a certain time lag it was considered necessary also to confirm this
scenario by analysing developments after the end of the investigationperiod.
(163) As pointed out by some exporting producers it was found that a certain
degree of recovery occurred in the volume produced and sold by the
Community industry at the beginning of 1999. However, it should be
noted that the level of production and sales were significantly lower!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 23
than those at the beginning of the investigation period and those of
1997. In this respect, the investigation showed that the economicsituation of the Community industry continued to deteriorate after theinvestigation period, in particular in terms of a decrease in sales price
and profitability during the two first quarters of 1999.
(164) This confirmed the negative effect of the massive overstocking which
occurred at the beginning of the investigation period and the
de-stocking which began during the third quarter of the investigationperiod and continued, despite a decrease in actual imports, throughoutthe first half of 1999. Apart from the effect of overstocking, the delay
with which the negative development of the Community industry
occurred was also due to the time lag under which the Communityindustry operates with its customers. This is apparent not only from thedevelopment of the injury indicators such as production, sales, prices
and profitability, but also from the development of the orders received
by the Community industry.
(165) Some parties have claimed that the imposition of anti-dumping
measures in the present proceeding was unnecessary as the importsconcerned ceased after the investigation period.
(166) The investigation showed that, based on generally available or
unverified information, imports, in particular for some of the countriesconcerned by the present proceeding, have fallen since the beginning
of the investigation period. However, this is not an unusual phenom-
enon in anti-dumping investigations as market participants, inparticular importers, take into account the fact that investigationsrequire prudent assessment of the market insofar as they can lead to the
imposition of anti-dumping measures. The reaction of market partici-
pants can be more or less pronounced. In any event, taking intoaccount the decrease in imports, which may be limited in time, tojustify the non-imposition of anti-dumping measures would allow the
exporting producers concerned to adopt a stop-and-go policy for their
exports. It is considered that this would have highly disruptive effecton the Community market for any product and therefore can not in thepresent circumstances serve as a justification for not imposing
anti-dumping measures.
(167) Finally, it has been claimed that the phenomenon of high imports
concentrated in the investigation period was only short-lived. In the
meantime market prices in the Community have reached levels whichensure a quick recovery of the economic situation of the Communityindustry.
(168) It should be noted that detailed analysis demonstrates that Community
industry prices continued to deteriorate and reached very low levels
during the first two quarters of 1999. This price decrease triggered
considerable financial losses, which the Community industry incurredduring a considerable period of time.
6.Conclusion on injury
(169) On the one hand, the year-to-year analysis of the situation of the
Community industry in the period from 1995 to the investigation
period showed a number of negative developments. In addition, the
quarterly analysis indicated that the economic situation of theCommunity industry significantly deteriorated throughout the inves-tigation period. Contrary to the suggestion made by some exporting
producers and taking into account the special characteristics of the
Community market in terms of oversupply and time lag between ordersand deliveries these developments are representative of the economicsituation of the Community industry during the whole investigation
period.
(170) The investigation has also shown that these negative developments
continued and even worsened after the end of the investigation period,
a development which is particularly relevant in view of the functioningand the situation of the Community market. It has been ascertainedthat this deterioration went far beyond the seasonal fluctuations
observed in previous years on a quarterly basis.
(171) To summarise, it was found that, during the third and fourth quarters of
the investigation period, all the injury indicators followed a negative
trend compared to the average activity of the investigation period:
production decreased by 11 % and 18 % respectively, capacity!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 24
utilisation by 6 % and 10 %, sales volume by 14 % and 22 %, sales
prices were negotiated 2,4 % and 13 % below the average price of theinvestigation period and profitability decreased by 2,1 and 15,5percentage points respectively.
(172) Similarly it was found that these economic indicators were also
declining when compared with the relevant quarterly activity in 1997.
In the third and fourth quarter of the investigation period as comparedto the third and fourth quarter of 1997: production decreased by 20 %and 11 % respectively, capacity utilisation by 12 % and 18 %, sales
prices were 6 % and 19 % and profitability was positive both in 1997
and during the investigation period but it was 15 percentage pointslower in the fourth quarter of the IP as compared to the fourth quarter
of 1997. All these trends were confirmed during the two quarters after
the investigation period.
(173) The investigation then revealed that the above trends would have been
even more negative without specific sales such as those under longterm contracts or those of pickled coils, which are less affected by the
imports concerned. The orders received by the Community industry for
delivery in the fourth quarter of the investigation period were 31 %lower than those received for delivery in the first quarter of theinvestigation period.
(174) On the other hand, the year-to-year analysis has shown that average
profit rates increased from 1997 to the investigation period, reaching a
level of 12,9 %. Profits and sales prices remained stable during thefirst quarters of the investigation period.
(175) Regarding these findings, which could at first sight appear to be
contrary to a finding of injury, the investigation has shown that they
were in line with a high level of apparent consumption during the firstsemester of the investigation period which, the investigation hasconfirmed, was not matched by actual consumption. As a consequence,
the prices and profits of the Community industry (whose sales did not
develop in line with the overstocking) remained stable but were boundto deteriorate thereafter in view of the fact that the significant apparentconsumption was not met by a commensurate actual consumption.
Indeed, during the second part of the investigation period, apparent
consumption tumbled as the massive stocks were used, which in turnprovoked a significant price and profit decrease.
(176) The subsequent analysis of the economic situation of the Community
industry in the first two quarters of 1999 confirmed that these negative
trends were not confined to the investigation period and were the directresults of the developments during the investigation period. Whileproduction and sales volume improved somewhat compared to the
second half of the investigation period, sales prices and profitability
continued to decrease. It should be noted that the Basic Decision asconfirmed by the jurisprudence of the Court permits the informationpertaining to the time period after the end of the investigation period to
be taken into account, in particular in order to establish whether trends
observed during the investigation period continue.
(177) Based on the developments in the situation of the Community industry
during the period from 1995 to the investigation period and during the
investigation period in particular, the Commission has concluded that
the Community industry has suffered injury during the investigationperiod. Contrary to the suggestion that the economic indicatorsshowing injury are largely outweighed by other indicators showing
lack of injury, the above detailed investigation showed that all
economic indicators developed negatively, in particular profits andsales prices with a time lag of a few months. The magnitude of theinjury suffered enables it to be classified as material in accordance
with the provisions of Article 3(6) of the Basic Decision.
F.CAUSATION
1.Introduction
(178) In the present analysis it should be borne in mind that the product
concerned is a very price sensitive product. In addition, the market for
this product, as shown above, has a number of particular char-
acteristics: the relationship between the Community industry and!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 25
certain users is long-term; production set up and planning entails a
certain time lag between order and delivery; and the Communityindustry operates more in certain market segments than the exportingproducers concerned. Nevertheless, these characteristics do not call
into question the fact that the products produced and sold by the
Community industry and those imported by the countries concernedare like products. It only indicates that certain sales channels andcertain types of product are more prone to competition from the
imports concerned than others.
(179) In order to reach its conclusions on the cause of the injury suffered by
the Community industry, the Commission examined the impact of the
dumped imports from the countries concerned. At the same time, theimpact of other known factors and their possible consequences on thesituation of that industry were also analysed. Such analysis ensured
that any injury caused by other factors than dumped imports would be
identified and not attributed to these imports.
(180) The other factors examined were: the development of consumption,
the oversupply of the Community market, the impact of hot-rolledcoils imported into the Community from other third countries, thebehaviour of other Community producers not included in the definition
of the Community industry, the export performances of the
Community industry and the world-wide situation of the steel business.
2.Impact of dumped imports
a)Impact of the volume of dumped imports and stockpiling
(181) The investigation showed that the imports concerned increased
considerably, in particular between 1997 and the investigation period.
While in 1995, only 0,65 million tonnes of hot-rolled coils entered theCommunity market from the countries concerned, representing 17 %of total imports, in 1997, this rose to 0,88 million tonnes. During the
period between 1995 and 1997, the increase in the volume of hot-rolled
coils imported from the countries concerned was limited to 0,2 milliontonnes. During the investigation period the volume of dumped importsreached 2,1 million tonnes and covered 45 % of all imports, this
represents an overall increase of 229 % for the period examined.
(182) Consequently, the major increase in imports occurred during the period
1997 to the investigation period and particularly during the first two
quarters. The investigation showed that over 1,3 million tonnes weredelivered onto the Community market during this six-month period.This represents more than three times the import volume of the second
semester 1997. Between 1997 and the investigation period, the imports
in question increased by 143 % and the market share held by thecountries concerned more than doubled, namely an increase of 6,3
percentage points.
(183) During the period from 1995 to the investigation period while
Community consumption increased by 9 %, the Community industry’ s
sales volume increased by only 1 % and it thus lost 3,7 percentage
points of its market share.
(184) As far as the period of the import surge (1997 to the investigation
period) is concerned, it coincided with the deterioration of theCommunity industry’ s situation. Production decreased by 9 % andsales volume by 12 %. The loss in market share amounted to 6,6
percentage points and orders by 17 %.
(185) In addition, the development of import volumes, taken together with
the development of apparent consumption shown earlier, indicates that
the dumped imports concerned mainly fed the increase in stocks, andthus the increase in apparent consumption in the first two quarters ofthe investigation period, whereas the sales of the Community industry
decreased from the very beginning of the investigation period.
(186) The investigation revealed that contrary to the exporting producers in
question the Community industry is not very present in the traders’
sales channel. As regards certain large operators, it showed that theseordered few or no hot-rolled coils from the Community industry duringthe third and the fourth quarter of the investigation period. This
resulted in a significant drop in sales which started during the third
quarter of the investigation period (- 28 %) and which continued!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 26
(- 12 %) during the fourth quarter. This in turn had a significant
negative influence on prices and profitability of the Communityindustry during the last two quarters of the investigation period.
(187) In order to fully assess this development it should be borne in mind
that the development of the situation of the Community industry wasparticularly negative, pronounced and immediate in sales channels and
for product types in which the exporting producers are mainly active.
Indeed, these producers are not very active in sales channels wherelong-term sales contracts are concluded The Community industry hasfared relatively better in these sales channels than in others, where
competition from imports is more pronounced. It has also been shown
above that the Community industry’ s sales of black coils, whichaccount for around 90 % of the imports concerned, have beendeveloping very negatively throughout the investigation period.
b)Impact of the import price level and functioning of the steel
market
(188) The investigation showed that the situation of the Community industry
remained stable in terms of prices and therefore overall profitabilityduring the first two quarters of the investigation period, althoughimport prices from the countries concerned continuously decreased
during the whole investigation period. In this respect the investigation
has shown that the development of prices and profits of theCommunity industry were due, on the one hand, to the generalfunctioning of the market in terms of the time lag between orders made
by and deliveries to clients and, on the other hand, by the development
of stocks and thus apparent consumption during the investigationperiod.
(189) Concerning the general functioning of the market, it has been found
that given the time lag between orders and deliveries (namely onequarter), the situation of the Community industry during the first
quarter of the investigation period, basically reflected the situation of
orders placed during the fourth quarter of 1997, when imports startedto increase.
(190) In terms of the development of apparent consumption, it has been
found that the situation of the Community market in general and of theCommunity industry in particular during the first quarter of the
investigation period corresponded to a time period of spectacular
growth in stocks — and thus apparent consumption. This allowedprices and profits to remain high despite the increase in imports whichoccurred at the same time. The dumped imports thus had the biggest
impact on the economic situation of the Community industry when it
became clear that the growth in stocks and thus in apparentconsumption was not matched by a growth in actual consumption.Indeed, given the considerable fall in demand for hot-rolled coils at the
end of the investigation period, Community industry prices decreased
by 17 % and profitability became negative.
(191) The complainant claimed that at the end of 1997 and during the entire
investigation period the exporting producers adopted a policy ofsystematic price decrease and were continually undercutting theCommunity industry’ s prices. This precipitated and hastened the fall in
sales prices on the Community market during that period.
(192) The investigation showed that the exporting producers indeed, reduced
their price during the last quarter of 1997 while the Community
industry attempted to maintain its price level until June 1998. In July1998, the Community industry reduced its sales prices. Their salesprices, which were over 300 ECU/tonne in January 1998, fell to around
250 ECU/tonne in December 1998.
(193) This dramatic decrease in prices is explained by the fact that the
exporting producers continued to undercut the Community industry’ s
prices throughout the investigation period. It is to be noted that thelevel of the undercutting was lower at the beginning of theinvestigation period and became increasingly more significant
throughout the investigation period. The Community industry had to
reduce its prices in order to continue participating in the market, inparticular from the middle of the investigation period onwards.
(194) In this respect it is to be noted that steel is a major commodity product
and the indicative base price of hot-rolled coils is published daily in!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 27
specialised newspapers and is well know by all operators present on the
market. The products produced and sold by the Community industryand those imported by the countries concerned are highly sensitive toprice movements which are quickly transmitted through the market.
The above thus suggests that overall the findings of the investigation
show that the imports concerned caused the negative development in
the economic situation of the Community industry.
c)Conclusion on the impact of dumped imports
(195) It is considered that the high volumes of dumped imports, which
accumulated in the Community market within a very short period,depressed prices and led to a reduced market share of the Community
industry. These high import volumes allowed certain large Commu-
nity-based users to accumulate stocks with negative repercussions onprice negotiation with the Community industry as early as in thesecond quarter of the investigation period and to extend the period over
which such imports depressed prices. Moreover, given the general
transparency of the market, users and purchasers in the Communitymarket became quickly aware of the low price policy applied by the
exporting producers. This precipitated and hastened the fall of sales
price on a market with negative results on market share andprofitability of the Community industry.
(196) Consequently, it is concluded that the presence of low-priced dumped
imports played an important role in the deteriorating situation of theCommunity industry and thus to the material injury suffered by that
industry during the investigation period.
3.Impact of other factors
a)Development of consumption
(197) During the period examined apparent consumption on the Community
market increased continuously by 9 %. During the period between
1997 and the investigation period apparent consumption increased by
0,4 %.
(198) Consequently, given the continuous positive development in con-
sumption volume since 1996, it is considered that it cannot be linked tothe injurious situation suffered by the Community industry during theinvestigation period.
b)Oversupply of the Community market
(199) Certain exporting producers claimed that there was an oversupply of
the Community market at the beginning of the investigation period.They argued that the Community industry was continuously increasingits deliveries on the market and was thus the main contributing factor
in the oversupply. Accordingly, they argued that the high rate of
capacity utilisation of the Community producers resulting from highdeliveries should exclude any injury to be attributed to imports fromthe countries concerned.
(200) The detailed analysis of the development in apparent consumption in
1997 as compared to the investigation period showed that during the
first two quarters of the investigation period apparent consumption was1,4 million tonnes higher than in the corresponding quarters of 1997.This comparison should be seen in the light of the fact that 1,3 million
of dumped hot-rolled coils were imported from the countries
concerned in the first two quarters of the investigation period whereasthe corresponding volume imported in the same period in 1997 wasabout 0,3 million tonnes. This represents an increase of 1 million
tonnes during the first half of the investigation period.
(201) Furthermore, it is recalled that traders significantly increased their
stocks in the first half of the investigation period, thus participating to
the oversupply of the Community market. The investigation revealedthat the Community industry is not very active in the traders saleschannel whereas the exporting producers sold significant quantities via
traders. Accordingly, the Community industry did not feed the stocks
piled by traders during the investigation period.!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 28
(202) In conclusion, the investigation has shown that the increase in dumped
imports was considerable (in terms of market share imports more thandoubled) during the investigation period while it was found that theCommunity industry lost sales and experienced a drop in production
resulting in a fall in market share. Accordingly, the increase in
low-priced-dumped imports largely contributed to the oversupply.
c)Imports of hot-rolled coils from other third countries
(203) In addition to the countries concerned by the present investigation,
other countries exported hot-rolled coils to the Community market.
During the investigation period the main exporters were Russia,
Slovakia, Romania, Hungary, South Korea and Indonesia.
(204) Some exporting producers argued that they have been unduly
discriminated against in comparison to some other third countries
mentioned above which were excluded from the scope of theinvestigation.
(205) In this respect it is pointed out that no complaint against the above
third countries was lodged and that therefore no prima facie evidence
of dumping and injury justifying the initiation of an antidumping
investigation was received. As furthermore, the investigation has notbrought to light any evidence of injurious dumping practices by suchthird country exports the allegation of discrimination is not founded.
(206) During the period examined, other third countries’ share of total
imports of the product concerned onto the Community market while
remaining significant showed a decreasing trend. The import volume
decreased from 3,1 million tonnes in 1995 to 2,6 million tonnes in theinvestigation period, namely a decrease by 17 % in terms of volume.The share of these imports represented 83 % of total import volume in
1995 but only 55 % during the investigation period. Accordingly,
throughout the period examined, the share of the Community marketheld by the other third countries decreased by 22 %.
(207) Import prices from other third countries followed the general
downward tendency in the Community market and decreased by 9 %.
(208) Based on the above facts and considerations it was found that imports
from other third countries remained significant and enjoyed acontinued presence in the Community market during the period
examined. However, it also emerged that while the situation of the
Community industry only deteriorated in particular from 1997 to theinvestigation period, namely when the imports concerned surged
massively, the increase in imports from other third countries was very
limited.
(209) Accordingly, the suggestion by some exporting producers that the
imports of hot-rolled coils from other third countries are the cause ofthe injury suffered by the Community industry cannot be taken intoconsideration.
d)Other producers in the Community
(210) During the investigation period, the producers in the Community not
included in the definition of the Community industry represented 35 %
of total Community production.
(211) Based on the information available, during the period examined, the
economic situation of the other producers of hot-rolled coils in theCommunity was similar to that of the Community industry. During theinvestigation period their sales volume increased by 5 %, namely an
increase below the increase in consumption. Accordingly, their share
of the market in terms of volume decreased by 4 %. Furthermore, theseproducers also suffered from price depression as the decrease in sale
value by 6 % indicates and their sales prices were in line with those of
the Community industry.
(212) Consequently, the impact of the other producers in the Community on
the deteriorating economic situation of the Community industry was
limited.!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 29
e)Export activity of the Community industry
(213) Certain exporting producers claimed that the situation of the
Community industry deteriorated because of the decrease in its export
activity during the period examined.
(214) The investigation showed that the sales volume destined for exports to
third countries decreased by 536 000 tonnes between 1995 and theinvestigation period and by 299 000 tonnes between 1997 and theinvestigation period. This represents a decrease of 4,8 % and 2,9 %
respectively of the total sales of the Community industry. On this basis,
the Commission does not exclude that such a decrease in the exportsales affected the overall economic situation of the Community
industry. However, it is recalled that the present investigation
exclusively covered the economic situation of the Community industryas regards the Community free market. Consequently, the injurysuffered by the Community industry has been demonstrated on the
basis of Community market indicators. Accordingly, prices and
revenues from export sales were irrelevant and therefore excludedfrom the injury analysis.
f)Community industry’s preference to supply captive market
(215) A number of users of the product concerned on the Community market
stated that the Community industry had attempted to increase the
integration of its activities over the period examined. At the end of
1997, the Community industry had allegedly given priority tosupplying related parties in the captive market before supplyingindependent parties on the free market with the result that the users
were forced to obtain their supplies from outside the Community.
Therefore, injury could not be caused by the development of imports.
(216) The Commission found that between 1997 and the investigation period
the evolution of sales volume to both related and unrelated customers
showed decreasing trends. The fact that the supply to the captive
market followed a similar trend indicates that production capacity wasavailable. This decline in sales volume indicated that there was noshortage of supply of the product concerned, which could have led to a
decrease in the sales volume to unrelated parties.
g)World-wide situation in the steel business
(217) Several exporting producers claimed that the situation of the
Community industry, in particular in the second part of theinvestigation period, was largely due to the deterioration of theworldwide situation of the steel business.
(218) Based on the information available it emerged that a worldwide
downturn occurred during the investigation period. Sales pricesdecreased in the USA, Japan and South Korea. However, it was foundthat sales prices in these countries were 15 %, 24 % and 7 %
respectively, higher than those in the Community at the end of the
investigation period.
(219) Consequently the worldwide situation of the steel industry and in
particular the situation in Southeast Asia, cannot explain the
deterioration of the economic situation of the Community industry
during the period examined.
4.Conclusion on causation
(220) The above analysis indicates that factors other than dumped imports
from the countries concerned may have contributed to the difficultstate of the Community industry during the investigation period.
However, the investigation has shown that the sudden increase in
imports, the price depression and price undercutting practised by theexporting producers had significantly negative consequences on thesituation of the Community industry. Therefore, it is concluded that
these imports, taken in isolation, had caused material injury to the
Community industry.!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 30
G. COMMUNITY INTEREST
1.Preliminary remarks
(221) The purpose of anti-dumping measures is to remedy unfair trading
practices having an injurious effect on the Community industry and
re-establish a situation of effective competition on the Communitymarket. In addition to dumping, injury and the cause of this injury, theCommission examined whether any compelling reasons existed which
could lead to the conclusion that it is not in the Community interest to
impose measures. For this purpose, and in accordance with Article21(1) of the Basic Decision, the impact of possible measures on allparties involved in this proceeding and the consequences of taking or
not taking measures, were considered on the basis of the evidence
available.
2.Interest of the Community industry
(222) In case of injurious dumping caused by low-priced dumped imports,
the interest of a Community industry is that conditions of effectivecompetition are restored.
(223) The investigation has shown that the Community market of hot-rolled
coils was characterised by the presence of products originating in the
countries concerned which were sold at prices undercutting those of
the Community industry. The resulting injurious situation could becontained as long as the volume imported was limited. However, thehigh volume of dumped imports, which suddenly flooded on the
Community market in a very short time during the investigation period,
caused a price depression, which had a significant impact on thefinancial situation of the Community industry. This situation leaves the
Community industry in a seriously weakened position and this industry
has an interest in it being corrected.
(224) During the period examined, the Community industry, as well as other
producers located in the Community, undertook important rational-
isation and restructuring projects that are still going on at present. Therealisation of these projects is important in view of the globalisation of
the steel market. This activity of the Community industry at a
worldwide level demonstrates its adaptability, its competitiveness andviability.
(225) With anti-dumping measures in force, employment, which increased
during the period examined, could be maintained and possiblyincreased, depending on the evolution of consumption. The results of
the investigation have shown that the Community industry lost
significant sales volume and saw its prices decrease, in particulartowards the end of the investigation period. The proposed anti-dump-ing duties, which amount to around 8 % for cooperating exporting
producers on a weighted average level, should allow the Community
industry to recover from its injurious situation by either increasing itsown prices and/or sales quantities.
(226) In view of the inadequate profitability in 1996 and 1997 and the
material injury suffered during the investigation period, it is highlyprobable that the financial situation of the Community industry will
deteriorate further in the absence of any measures to correct the
negative effects of dumped imports. This may ultimately lead to cuts inproduction or closures of certain facilities and therefore threaten
employment in the Community.
3.Interest of users and related activities in the Community
(227) In order to evaluate the impact on users of taking or not taking
measures, the Commission sent questionnaires to the known users on
the Community market. An on-the-spot investigation took place at thepremises of a major user in order to verify the information submitted.
The following conclusions are based on the responses received from
users.
(228) Users were found to have themselves imported 40 % of total imports of
hot-rolled coils from the countries concerned. They employ 4 000
people in the Community.!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 31
(229) Users claimed that in the event of the imposition of measures, they
would no longer have a choice in their sources of supply and theyfeared that they would become entirely dependent on the goodwill ofthe Community producers. In particular it was claimed that these
producers had to supply a large captive market and that they already
held a share of 75 % of the Community free market. They recalled thatthese producers’ sales on the captive market as well as a large share oftheir sales on the free market was destined for related companies,
whose downstream products were in direct competition with their own
products. The users in question also indicated that the Communityindustry supplied independent users only after the requirements of
their related companies had been fully satisfied. They also claimed
that the related user companies already bought the product concernedbelow the market price. Under these circumstances, the users were ofthe opinion that the imposition of anti-dumping measures would give
the Community industry a decisive and unjustified competitive
advantage in the downstream markets which would not be in theinterest of the Community.
(230) Finally, these users claimed that the imposition of anti-dumping duties
was likely to cause shortage of supply for independent buyers, as wasthe case in the Community market at the end of 1997. This situation
would clearly be an infringement to the ECSC Treaty.
(231) It is to be noted that the purpose of the imposition of anti-dumping
measures is not to prevent users from importing hot-rolled coils from
the countries concerned, rather to ensure that these imports are made at
non-injurious prices. Even with the imposition of anti-dumpingmeasures, these products will always be present in the Community
market and will ensure that the choice of supply is maintained for users
companies.
(232) The Commission estimated that a weighted average anti-dumping duty
of 8 % on hot-rolled coils imported from the countries concerned may
prompt at maximum an increase of around 1.6 % in the overall cost ofthe user companies’ raw materials. This extra cost would cause anestimated increase in the full cost of production of about 1.1 %, given
the mix of various sources of purchases and the average value added in
the downstream products.
(233) This estimated extra cost of pr oduction incurred by the user
companies, either charged or not to the subsequent purchasers, is notsuch as to endanger the profitability of the user industries. Moreover,this cost should be seen in the light of expected positive developments
in the hot-rolled coils markets when governed by effective trade
conditions.
(234) Concerning the level of sales price in the free market, it is recalled that
no significant differences were found between the prices applied by theCommunity industry to related and unrelated customers. Moreover, theclaim purporting that the Community industry did not supply or had
set up priorities for its supplies of hot-rolled coils depending on the
relationship with the purchaser during the period examined cannot betaken into consideration as no evidence in this respect has been madeavailable. More to the contrary, it has been found that certain sales
contracts concluded with the Community industry were cancelled.
(235) Based on the foregoing, it is considered that any negative effects on
users from taking measures against dumped imports from the countries
concerned cannot outweigh the positive effects from which all theother operators active on the Community market will benefit.
4.Consequences on competition in the Community market
(236) Some parties claimed that anti-dumping measures would reduce
competition on the Community market, encouraging the creation of
big steel groups. They argued that in the recent past major steel
companies, such as British Steel and Sollac, had increased in size bymerging with or by purchasing other steel companies. These groups arealso in competition in the downstream products with independent
users, mostly small and medium size enterprises. The consequences of
such a concentration may be the disappearance of many independentusers resulting in the reduction of employment in the Community.
(237) Concerning the alleged restriction in competition, it is recalled that
there are a number of alternative sources of supply such as Russia,!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 32
Indonesia, Hungary, Romania, South Korea, Slovakia, Brazil, etc,
exporting hot-rolled coils to the Community. There are also severalhundred SSC’ s, stockholders and dealers selling the product concernedmainly to small and medium size users. Finally, there are several
Community steel producers, in addition to the Community industry,
located in Finland, France, Austria and Greece.
(238) Furthermore, given that the level of the measures proposed is not such,
from an economic point of view, to foreclose the Community market to
the countries concerned there appears to be no risk of restricting
competition in the Community market.
5.Shortage of supply on the Community market
(239) Certain exporting producers from the countries concerned and users in
the Community claimed that the imposition of anti-dumping measureswould cause a shortage of supply, in particular for independent users
industries. This claim was based on the fact that the Community
industry alone is not able to supply the whole Community free marketin particular given its current high capacity utilisation levels.
(240) Other interested parties claimed that the Community industry does not
have the capacity to supply its own related companies in the free
market and, is therefore not in the position to compensate for anydecrease in imports caused by the imposition of anti-dumpingmeasures.
(241) In this respect it should be noted that as the producers in the
Community cannot supply the whole of the free market, imports fromthird countries will always be needed and the Community market willalways been open to such imports, provided they are made in respect of
the provisions of the Basic Decision.
(242) In any event, the Community industry, other producers in the
Community and exporting producers in other third countries will beable to continue to supply the Community market. The exporting
producers in the countries concerned will also be able to continue to
supply the Community market given that the measures proposed arenot such as to close the market to them.
(243) Based on the above facts and considerations, the claim that the
imposition of anti-dumping measures will entail a shortage of supply is
not considered to be founded.
6.Conclusion on the Community interest
(244) The Commission considers that the imposition of anti-dumping duties
is necessary to prevent further imports of low-priced dumped imports
and avoid the situation of the Community industry to deteriorate
further. Moreover, the imposition of measures in the present case willre-establish effective competitive conditions for all operators in theCommunity. Furthermore, having examined the various interests
involved in the present proceeding, no compelling reasons were found
to exist against the imposition of definitive anti-dumping measures.The imposition of definitive anti-dumping measures is therefore notagainst the Community interest.
H. DEFINITIVE MEASURES
(245) Having established that the dumped imports originating in Bulgaria,
India, South Africa, Taiwan and Yugoslavia have caused materialinjury to the Community industry and that there are no compellingreasons not to take action, definitive anti-dumping measures should be
adopted.
1.Injury elimination level
(246) For establishing the level of duty, account has been taken of the
dumping margins found and of the amount of the duty necessary toeliminate the injury caused by dumped imports to the Community
industry. The necessary price increase was determined on the basis of a
comparison of the weighted average import price, as established for theundercutting calculations, with the non-injurious price of the different!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 33
types of hot-rolled coils sold by the Community industry on the
Community market.
(247) It was considered that the amount of duty necessary to remove the
effects of injurious dumping should allow the Community industry to
cover its costs of production and obtain a reasonable profit on sales. Inthis respect, it was considered that the profit margin before tax of12,9 % on turnover claimed by the Community industry was an
appropriate basis, regard being given to the need for long-term
investments and for a rate of return, which the Community industrycould reasonably expect in the absence of injurious dumping.
(248) Accordingly and given the profit rate realised by the Community
industry during the investigation period, injury elimination levels weredetermined on a type by type basis as the difference between the actual
net sales price of the Community industry and the actual net sales price
of the comparable imported models. The difference was then expressedas a percentage of the CIF import price at the Community frontiercustoms duty unpaid.
2.Level of definitive duties
(249) In the light of the foregoing, it is considered that a definitive
anti-dumping duty should be imposed at the level of the dumping
margin found, but should not be higher than the injury margin set out
above in accordance with Article 9(4) of the Basic Decision.
(250) As far as the parallel anti-subsidy proceeding regarding imports from
India, South Africa and Taiwan is concerned it should be noted that, in
accordance with Article 12 (
1) of Commission Decision No
1889/98/ECSC, the countervailing duty rate should correspond to thesubsidy margin unless the injury margin is lower.
(251) In accordance with Article 24(1) of the above Decision No
1889/98/ECSC and Article 14(1) of the Basic Decision, no product
shall be subject to both antidumping and countervailing duties for the
purposes of dealing with one and the same situation arising fromdumping or from export subsidisation. As anti-dumping duties shouldbe imposed on imports of the product concerned it is necessary to
determine whether, and to what extent, the subsidy and the dumping
margin arise from the same situation.
(252) In the case in question all of the schemes investigated in India have
been found to constitute export subsidies within the meaning of Article
3(4)(a) of the above Decision No 1889/98/ECSC. As such, thesubsidies can affect the export prices of the Indian exportingproducers, thus leading to increased margins of dumping. In other
words, the dumping margins established are wholly or partly due to the
existence of export subsidies. In these circumstances it is notconsidered appropriate to impose both countervailing and anti-dump-
ing duties to the full extent of the relevant subsidy and dumping
margins established. Therefore, in the case of India, the anti-dumpingduties need to be adjusted to reflect the actual dumping marginsremaining after the imposition of the countervailing duties offsetting
the effect of the export subsidies.
(253) In the case of Taiwan, the schemes investigated do not constitute
export subsidies. Accordingly, duties may be imposed at the rates of
the full amount of dumping and subsidy margins established, subject to
the injury margins not being exceeded.
(254) In the case of South Africa, as the level of subsidisation was found to
bede minimis , no countervailing duties are imposed at the present
stage. In these circumstances, anti-dumping duties at the full rate of theinjury margins are imposed given that these are lower than the
dumping margins.
(255) The rates of duty applicable to the free-at-Community-frontier price,
before duty and taking into account the results of the anti-subsidy
proceeding, shall be:!B
(1) OJ L 245, 4.9.1998, p. 3.2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 34
Country/CompanyDumping
margin %Injury mar-
gin %Export sub-
sidy margin
%Proposed
countervail-
ing duty %AD duty to
be imposed
%
Bulgaria 27,1 7,5 7,5
Kremikovtzi 27,1 7,5 7,5
India 56,3 23,8 14,8 14,8 9,0Essar 55,8 6,4 4,9 4,9 1,5
SAIL 56,3 23,8 12,3 12,3 11,5
TISCO 29,4 6,4 8,7 6,4 0South Africa 47,8 38,3 0 0 37,8Iscor 47,8 5,2 0 0 5,2
Highveld & Vanadium 37,8 38,3 0 0 37,8
Taiwan 30,3 29,3 0 4,4 24,9
CSC 7,1 8,9 0 4,4 2,7
Yieh Loong 2,1 3,9 0 0 2,1
Yugoslavia 56,1 15,4 15,4
Sartid 56,1 15,4 15,4
(256) The individual company anti-dumping duty rates specified in this
Decision were established on the basis of the findings of the presentinvestigation. Therefore, they reflect the situation found during thatinvestigation with respect to the above 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 thecountry concerned and produced by the companies and thus by the
specific legal entities mentioned. Imported products produced by any
other company not specifically mentioned in the operative part of thisRegulation with its name and address, including entities related tothose specifically mentioned, cannot benefit from these rates and shall
be subject to the duty rate applicable to ‘all other companies’.
(257) Any claim requesting the application of these individual company
anti-dumping duty rates (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 (
1) 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 theAdvisory Committee, amend the Decision accordingly by updating
the list of companies benefiting from individual duty rates.
3.Undertakings
(258) Exporting producers in Bulgaria, India, South Africa have offered a
price undertaking in accordance with Article 8(1) of the BasicDecision.
(259) One exporting producer in Yugoslavia expressed its willingness to give
a price undertaking. However, in view of a number of problemsrelating to the product code number and the fact that a majority of
sales to the European Union were made via related companies, it was
considered that the Commission would be unable to monitor theundertaking properly. The exporter‘s offer was therefore rejected and!B
(1) European Commission Directorate-General Trade Directorate C DM 24 - 8/38 Rue
de la Loi/Wetstraat 200 B - 1049 Brussels/Belgium!M1
!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 35
the company was informed accordingly, in accordance with Article
8(3) of the Basic Decision.
(260) The Commission considers that the undertaking offered by the
exporting producers in Bulgaria, in India, and in South Africa can
be accepted. The acceptance of the price undertaking should be
conditional on the presentation to the Member States’ customs servicesof a valid undertaking invoice clearly identifying the producer andcontaining the information listed in the Annex. Where no such invoice
is presented, the appropriate rate of anti-dumping duty will be payable.
(261) It should be noted that in the event of a breach or withdrawal of the
undertaking an anti-dumping duty may be imposed, pursuant toArticles 8(9) and 10 of the Basic Decision.
I.TERMINATION OF THE PROCEEDING
(262) In view of the findings on the level of imports originating in Iran, the
proceeding with respect to this country should be terminated,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
1. A definitive anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on imports of certain
flat rolled products of iron or non-alloy steel, of a width of 600 mm or more,
not clad, plated or coated, in coils, not further worked than hot-rolledoriginating in Bulgaria, India, South Africa, Taiwan or the Federal Republicof Yugoslavia falling within CN codes 7208 10 00, 7208 25 00, 7208 26 00,
7208 27 00, 7208 36 00, 7208 37 10, 7208 37 90, 7208 38 10, 7208 38 90,
7208 39 10, 7208 39 90.
2. The rates of duty for products manufactured by the companies listed in
the table below applicable to the free-at-Community-frontier price, before
duty, shall be:
Country CompanyRate of AD duty
(%)TARIC additional
code
Bulgaria All companies 7,5 A999
India Essar Steel Ltd, 27th KM, Surat Hazira Road, Hazira 394270,
Dist: Surat, State: Gujarat1,5 A076
"M1 The Steel Authority of India Limited, Central Marketing
Organisation, Transport & Shipping Department, Ispat Bhawan40, Jawaharlal Nehru Road, Calcutta — 700 071 311,5 A077
Tata Iron & Steel Company Limited, 43 Chowringhee Road,
Calcutta-700 0710 A078
All other companies 9 A999
South Africa Iscor Limited, Roger Dyason Road, Pretoria West, and Saldanha
Steel (Pty)Ltd, Private Bag X11, Saldanha 73955,2 A079
All other companies 37,8 A999
Taiwan China Steel Corp., 1 Chung Kang Road, Hsiao Kang, Kaohsiung
81233"
M1 2,73 A080
"C1Yieh Loong Enterprise Co., Ltd, 3317 Yu Liao Road,
Chiao Tou Hsiang, Kaohsiung Hsien2,1 A081
All other companies 24,9 A999
Federal Republic
of YugoslaviaAll companies 15,4 —
3. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, the definitive duty shall not apply to
imports realised for free circulation in accordance with the provisions of
Article 2.!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 36
4. Unless otherwise specified, the provisions in force concerning customs
duties shall apply.
Article 2
1. The undertakings offered in connection with this anti-dumping proceed-
ing by
Company CountryTARIC additional
code
Kremikovtzi Corporation, 1870 Sofia, Botunetz Bulgaria A082
Essar Steel Ltd, 27th KM, Surat Hazira Road, Hazira 394270,
Dist: Surat, State: GujaratIndia A083
"M1 The Steel Authority of India Limited, Central Marketing
Organisation, Transport & Shipping Department, Ispat Bhawan40, Jawaharlal Nehru Road, Calcutta — 700 071 3India A084
Highveld Steel & Vanadium Corporation Limited, PO Box 111,
Witbank 1035South Africa A085
are hereby accepted.
2. Imports pursuant to these undertakings, when released for free
circulation, shall be exempted from the anti-dumping duty set in Article
1(2) when they are manufactured and directly exported and invoiced to an
importing company in the Community by a company listed in the table ofparagraph 1 and declared under the appropriate TARIC additional code.
The exemption shall be conditional upon presentation to the relevant Member
State’s customs services of a valid undertaking invoice issued by the exporting
company containing the essential elements listed in the Annex.
Article 3
Pursuant to Article 14(6) of Decision (EC) No 2277/96/ECSC, Member
States’ reports to the Commission shall indicate for each release for free
circulation, the year and month of import, the CN code, Taric and Taricadditional codes, the type of measure, the country of origin, the quantity, thevalue, the anti-dumping duty, the Member State of import and, where
appropriate, the serial number of the production certificate.
Article 4
The anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of certain flat-rolled
products of iron or non-alloy steel, of a width of 600 mm or more, notclad, plated or coated, in coils, not further worked than hot-rolled originatingin Iran is hereby terminated.
Article 5
This Decision shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the
Official Journal of the European Communities .
This Decision shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all
Member States.!B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 37
ANNEX
Elements to be indicated in the undertaking invoice referred to in Article 2(2)
1. The product reporting code number (PRC) (as established in the undertaking
offered by the exporting producer in question), including type and CN code.
2. The exact description of the goods, including:
— invoice number,
— invoice date,— the ‘company product code’ (CPC),
— the TARIC additional code under which the goods on the invoice may be
customs-cleared at Community borders (as specified in the Decision).
— quantity (to be given in kilos),
— minimum price applicable.
3. The description of the terms of the sale including:
— price per kilo,
— the applicable payment terms,
— the applicable delivery terms,— total discounts and rebates.
4. Name of the importer to which the invoice is issued directly by the company.5. The name of the official of the company that has issued the undertaking invoice
and the following signed declaration:
‘I, the undersigned, certify that the sale for direct export to the European
Community of the goods covered by this invoice is being made within the scope
and under the terms of the undertaking offered by… [name of the company] and
accepted by the European Commission through Decision (EC) No 283/2000/ECSC. I declare that the information provided in this invoice is complete andcorrect.’!
B2000S0283 — EN — 06.02.2000 — 000.001 — 38