2001R1824 — EN — 31.01.2003 — 001.001 — 1
This document is meant purely as a documentation tool and the institutions do not assume any liability for its contents
►B COUNCILREGULATION(EC)No1824/2001
of12September2001
imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of gas-fuelled, non-refillable pocket flint
lighters originating in the People's Republic of China and consigned from or originating inTaiwan and on imports of certain refillable pocket flint lighters originating in the People's
RepublicofChinaandconsignedfromororiginatinginTaiwan
(OJ L 248, 18.9.2001, p. 1)
Amended by:
Official Journal
No page date
►M1Council Regulation (EC) No 155/2003 of 27 January 2003 L 25 27 30.1.2003
▼B
COUNCILREGULATION(EC)No1824/2001
of12September2001
imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of gas-fuelled,
non-refillable pocket flint lighters originating in the People'sRepublic of China and consigned from or originating in Taiwanandonimportsofcertainrefillable pocketflintlightersoriginating
in the People's Republic of China and consigned from or origi-
natinginTaiwan
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December
1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries notmembers of the European Community (
1), and in particular Article
11(2) and (6) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal submitted by the Commission, after
consulting the Advisory Committee,
Whereas:
A.PREVIOUSPROCEDURESANDEXISTINGMEASURES
(1)In 1991, the Council, by Regulation (EEC) No 3433/91(2),
imposed, inter alia , a definitive anti-dumping duty of 16,9 %
on imports of gas-fuelled, non-refillable pocket flint lighters(‘non-refillable lighters’) originating in the People's Republic of
China (‘China’).
(2)In 1995, by Council Regulation (EC) No 1006/95 (3), the original
ad valorem duty was replaced by a specific duty of ECU 0,065
per lighter.
(3)By Regulation (EC) No 192/1999 (4) the Council, further to an
anti-circumvention investigation, extended the above measuresto (a) imports of gas-fuelled non-refillable pocket flint lightersconsigned from or originating in Taiwan and (b) imports ofcertain refillable lighters originating in China or consigned from
or originating in Taiwan witha free-at-Community frontier, duty
unpaid value per piece lower than EUR 0,15.
B.PRESENTINVESTIGATION
1.Requestforareview
(4)Following the publication of a notice of impending expiry (5)o f
the anti-dumping duties imposed by Council Regulation (EC) No
1006/95 as extended by Council Regulation (EC) No 192/1999(‘existing measures’), the Commission received a request toreview the existing measures pursuant to Article 11(2) ofCouncil Regulation (EC) No 384/96 (‘the basic Regulation’).
(5)The request was lodged on 3 February 2000 by the EuropeanLighters Manufacturers Federation (‘ELMF’ or ‘the applicant’),
on behalf of Community producers representing a major propor-
tion of the Community production of non-refillable lighters (‘theapplicant Community producers’).2001R1824 — EN — 31.01.2003 — 001.001 — 2
(1) OJ L 56, 6.3.1996, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No
2238/2000 (OJ L 257, 11.10.2000, p. 2).
(2) OJ L 326, 28.11.1991, p. 1.
(3) OJ L 101, 4.5.1995, p. 38.
(4) OJ L 22, 29.1.1999, p. 1.
(5) OJ C 318, 5.11.1999, p. 3.
▼B
2.Noticeofinitiation
(6)Having determined, after consulting the Advisory Committee,
that sufficient evidence existed for the initiation of an expiryreview, the Commission initiated an investigation (
1) pursuant to
Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation.
3.Periodofinvestigation
(7)The investigation into the continuation and/or recurrence of
dumping and injury covered the period from 1 January 1999 to31 March 2000 (the ‘investigation period’ or ‘IP’). The examina-tion of the trends relevant for the assessment of the likelihood of
a continuation and/or recurrence of injury covered the period
from 1 January 1996 to the end of the IP (the ‘period underreview’).
4.Parties concernedbytheinvestigation
(8)The Commission officially advised the Community industry, the
exporters and producers in China and their representatives, theChinese authorities and the importers and users known to beconcerned, of the initiation of the review. The Commission sentquestionnaires to all these parties and to those who made them-selves known within the time limit set in the notice of initiation.
In addition, the producer in the analogue country was contacted
and received a questionnaire. The parties directly concernedwere given the opportunity of making their views known inwriting and of requesting a hearing.
(9)The applicant Community producers replied to the question-naires. Further information was received from one non-applicantCommunity producer who did not oppose the proceeding.
(10)The exporting producers in China did not reply to the Commis-sion's questionnaire and did not cooperate in the investigation.
(11)Out of the 72 unrelated importers and users contacted, only 13replied and claimed not to have imported or to have discontinued
imports of the product concerned originating in China. Of those
13, two importers replied fully to the questionnaire.
5.Verification ofinformationreceived
(12)The Commission sought and verified all information deemed
necessary to determine whether or not there is a likelihood of a
continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury and whether ornot the continued imposition of the measures would be againstthe Community interest. Verification visits were carried out atthe premises of the following companies:
(a) Community producers:
BIC SA, Clichy Cedex, France
Flamagas SA, Barcelona, SpainTokai Europe GmbH, Mönchengladbach, Germany
Swedish Match Lighter BV, Assen, the Netherlands.
(b) Producers in the analogue country
Swedisch Match Philippines INC., Manila, Philippines.
(c) Unrelated importers in the Community
Daalgo, SL, Valencia, Spain.2001R1824 — EN — 31.01.2003 — 001.001 — 3
(1) OJ C 127, 5.5.2000, p. 15.
▼B
C.PRODUCTUNDERCONSIDERATIONANDLIKEPRODUCT
(13)The product under consideration is the same as in the original
investigations, i.e. gas-fuelled, non-refillable lighters falling
under CN code 9613 1000 (TARIC code 961310 00*19) (1).
(14)As shown in the previous investigations, it has been establishedthat non-refillable lighters produced and sold by the applicantCommunity producers and those imported from China are in all
respects identical or share at least the same basic physical and
technical characteristics and that no differences in usage existamong them. The same is true for those produced and sold inthe Philippines which served as an analogue country. Therefore,they are considered to be like products within the meaning ofArticle 1(4) of the basic Regulation.
D.LIKELIHOODOFACONTINUATIONORRECURRENCEOF
DUMPING
1.Preliminaryremarks
(15)The findings on dumping set out below should be viewed in the
light of the fact that the Chinese exporting producers did notcooperate in the investigation and that findings therefore had tobe based on facts available, i.e. Eurostat and Chinese export
trade data, pursuant to Article 18 of the basic Regulation. The
market share represented by the imports concerned was signifi-cant at the time of the original investigation, when itrepresented around 11 % of the total Community consumption.In the period following the imposition of the anti-dumpingmeasures, this market share decreased to 9 % in 1995, and
went down substantially thereafter to around 1,3 % during the
IP.
2.Likelihoodofacontinuationofdumping
(a)Analogue country
(16)The existing measures provide for a single countrywide duty on
all imports into the Community of non-refillable lighters origi-nating in China. In accordance with Article 11(9) of the basicRegulation, the Commission employed the same methodology
as in the original investigation. Accordingly, normal value was
determined on the basis of information obtained in a marketeconomy third country (‘the analogue country’).
(17)Thailand had served as an analogue country in the originalinvestigation. In the subsequent review the Philippines had been
used as an analogue country as the Thai producers refused to
cooperate and since it was found that, taking into account thesize of its domestic market, the openness of its market and itsdegree of access to parts and components, the Philippines wasan appropriate and not unreasonable choice of analogue country.
In the notice of initiation of this expiry review it was therefore
envisaged to choose the Philippines again as analogue countryfor the purpose of establishing normal value. Since it was foundthat the findings of the previous review investigation were stillvalid, as no interested party commented on this choice ofanalogue country and since the Filipino producer which was
contacted agreed to fully cooperate, the Philippines was, there-
fore, in accordance withArticle 2(7) of th e basic Regulation,considered to be an appropriate and not unreasonable choice of2001R1824 — EN — 31.01.2003 — 001.001 — 4
(1) This TARIC code was added to the original code 9613 1000*11 as of 1 July
2000. It is recalled — see recital 3 — that the measures were extended to
non-refillable lighters originating in or consigned from Taiwan (TARIC
codes 96131000*19 and *11) and to certain refillable lighters originating
in China and Taiwan, or consigned from Taiwan, falling under CN code
ex 9613 2090 (TARIC code 9613 2090*21).
▼B
analogue country for establishing normal value in respect of
China for the product concerned.
(b)Normal value
(18)Firstly, it was established that the domestic sales of the Filipino
producer were made in sufficient quantities and thus consideredrepresentative within the meaning of Article 2(2) of the basic
Regulation.
(19)It was subsequently examined whether the domestic sales of the
cooperating Filipino producer to independent customers could beconsidered to have been made in the ordinary course of trade, inaccordance withArticle 2(4) of th e basic Regulation. It was
found that the weighted average selling price of all domestic
sales during the investigation period was above the weightedaverage unit cost of production, and that the volume of indivi-dual sales transactions below unit cost of production was lessthan 20 % of the sales being used to determine normal value;
therefore all domestic sales were regarded as having been made
in the ordinary course of trade.
(20)Normal value was therefore determined, as set out in Article 2(1)of the basic Regulation, on the basis of the price paid or payable,in the ordinary course of trade, by independent domestic custo-mers of the cooperating Filipino producer during the
investigation period, i.e. the weighted average of prices of all
domestic sales per model made during the IP irrespective ofwhether these sales were profitable or not.
(c)Export price
(21)As regards the exports to the Community, given that exporting
producers in China did not cooperate, findings had to be basedon the facts available, in accordance with Article 18(1) of thebasic Regulation. The export price was thus determined on the
basis of documented offers since the level of prices found in
them was confirmed by Chinese export trade data.
(d)Comparison
(22)For the purpose of a fair comparison, and in accordance with
Article 2(10) of the basic Regulation, due allowance in theform of adjustments was made for differences in respect oftransport and credit costs, which were demonstrated to affectprices and price comparability.
(e)Dumping margin
(23)In accordance with Article 2(11) of the basic Regulation, the
weighted average normal value, on an ex-works Philippinesbasis, was compared to the weighted average export price on an
ex-works China basis, at the same level of trade. The above
comparison showed the existence of very significant dumping.The dumping margin found was substantially higher than the80,3 % found in the previous investigations.
(24)The investigation did not reveal any reason why the level of
dumping would disappear or decrease if the measures were to
be repealed. It was therefore concluded that there is a likelihoodof continuation of dumping. However, given the low level ofimports originating in China during the IP, it was consideredappropriate to also examine whether there would be a recurrenceof dumping in increased export volumes should the existing
measures be repealed.
3.Likelihoodofrecurrence ofdumping
(25)For the purposes of the examination of a likelihood of recurrence
of dumping in significant quantities the following factors wereassessed: existence of dumping and the background of circum-2001R1824 — EN — 31.01.2003 — 001.001 — 5
▼B
vention, the evolution of production and capacity utilisation in
China, and the evolution of world-wide Chinese lighter exports.
(a)Existence of dumping and background of circumvention
(26)The dumping margin established in the previous investigations
was high. The investigation carried out under the present reviewindicates that dumping has not been eliminated and was evensubstantially higher than during the previous investigations.
(27)Furthermore, there is a record of circumvention of the anti-dumping measures imposed. This took place by way of trans-shipment through Taiwan and modification of the productwhose only purpose was to avoid the payment of the anti-dumping duty. Consequently, as stated in recital 3, the measureswere extended in 1999 to Taiwanese imports and to imports of
certain refillable lighters from China.
(28)The results of the anti-circumvention investigation as well as the
current relatively low level of imports into the Community fromChina of the product concerned appear to demonstrate that whileChinese exporting producers continued to have a strong interestin selling to the Community, they could not compete on the
Community market withth eir products at a non-dumped level.
(b)Evolution of production and capacity utilisation in China
(29)The only data on domestic production and consumption of
lighters in China were made available to the Commission by
the applicant in its request for this review and during the inves-
tigation, as Chinese exporting producers did not cooperate.While the available data could not be confirmed by independentsources, no reason was found to dismiss them.
(30)Chinese production of flint lighters alone has been estimated at2,5 billion, more than twice the Chinese domestic consumption
of the product concerned, estimated at 1,1 billion to 1,4 billion
units including piezo lighters, which are not the productconcerned. However, these figures are clearly underestimated ifcompared to the Chinese export statistics (see recital 33).
(31)According to the website www.globalsources.com there are 786suppliers of cigarette lighters in China, of which 140 for non-
refillable and 161 for refillable lighters. The self-proclaimed
biggest lighter manufacturer lists a monthly capacity of 45million lighters. Also, three random companies, among the 20biggest known, claim to produce or to have the capacity ofproducing 1 billion lighters a year; slightly less than the totalCommunity consumption of refillable and non-refillable lighters.
(32)Consequently, the enormous production capacity available inChina combined with the size of the Chinese domestic marketgives Chinese exporting producers considerable flexibility toswitchbothbetween markets and product types. Th ese producersare therefore able to quickly increase production and direct it toany export market, including, were the measures to be repealed,
the Community market.
(c)Evolution of Chinese exports to third countries
1. General trend of increasing exports
(33)On the basis of Chinese export trade data, it was established that
Chinese worldwide exports increased from 1,9 billion units of
non-refillable lighters and 0,2 billion units of refillable lighters
in 1996 to 2,7 billion and 0,7 billion units in 2000.
(34)Furthermore, a significant fall in prices was observed, fromUSD 0,06 in 1996 to USD 0,03 in 2000 for non-refillablelighters and from USD 0,31 in 1996 to USD 0,14 in 2000 forrefillable lighters.2001R1824 — EN — 31.01.2003 — 001.001 — 6
▼B
2. Possible deflection of Chinese exports due to the
introduction of restrictions in third countries
(35)According to the available information, Canada and the UnitedStates of America have imposed import restrictions on Chineselighters because of safety concerns. The American market is
closed for non-child-resistant lighters and at the end of 1999
Canada forbade the entrance of Asian lighters for safety reasons.This shows that there is pressure on Chinese exporting producersto find alternative export markets.
3. Chinese exports to other representative export
markets
(36)It is important to note that, after the Council imposed anti-dumping duties in 1995, exporting producers from China easilypenetrated other large export markets such as, for instance, Indo-nesia and, to a lesser extent, Russia and Japan, by chargingexport prices at similarly low levels as those to the Community.
4.Conclusion
(37)The investigation has clearly shown that while the volume of
non-refillable lighters imported into the Community from Chinaduring the investigation period was relatively small, the level ofdumping found for these imports was even higher than inprevious investigations.
(38)The investigation has also shown that the volume of Chinesenon-refillable lighter exports to the Community would in allprobability reachsubstantial levels if th e existing measureswere to be repealed. This conclusion was reached in view ofthe substantial spare capacity available in China and the degree
of circumvention found. This illustrates the strong continued
interest of Chinese exporting producers in selling to the Commu-nity.
(39)It was also concluded that such substantially increased exports tothe Community would most likely be made at dumped prices.This is demonstrated by the low prices found for Chinese exports
to other main third country markets. It is unlikely that Chinese
exporting producers could resume significant exports to theCommunity without charging similarly low export prices, inparticular since the current exports to the Community, even ifnot significant in terms of volume, are already dumped.
(40)In summary, it is highly probable that imports to the Communityfrom China will resume in significant quantities and at signifi-cant dumped prices, should measures be repealed.
E.DEFINITIONOFTHECOMMUNITYINDUSTRY
(41)The applicant Community producers represent about 95 % of the
Community production of non-refillable lighters and thereforeconstitute the Community industry within the meaning of Article4(1) and Article 5(4) of the basic Regulation. The other Commu-nity producer was not considered to form part of the Community
industry since it did not fully cooperate but only gave certain
information necessary to establishth e consumption of non-refill-able lighters in the Community.
F.ANALYSIS OF THE SITUATION OF THE COMMUNITY
MARKET
1.General remark
(42)To ensure comparability of annual trends, all parameters exam-
ined in the 15-month IP were annualised by multiplying theverified data by 12/15.2001R1824 — EN — 31.01.2003 — 001.001 — 7
▼B
2.ConsumptionontheCommunitymarket
(43)The apparent consumption in the Community of the product
under consideration was established on the basis of:
— the units sold by the Community industry of its own-
produced, non-refillable lighters,
— the units sold by the non-applicant Community producer,
— the imports of non-refillable lighters into the Community
from China based on Eurostat data,
— the imports of non-refillable lighters into the Community
from all other third countries based on Eurostat data.
(44)On this basis, the consumption of non-refillable lighters on the
Community market decreased from about 873 million units in1996 to about 770 million in the IP. Consumption decreasedbetween 1996 and 1998 by 14,3 %, and subsequently increased
in 1999 and during the IP. The overall contraction of the
Community consumption during the period under review was11,8 %.
Communityconsumption
1996 1997 1998 1999 IP∆ 1996to
IP
(%)
Volume
(million units)872,881 785,833 747,784 761,478 769,551
1996 = 100 100,0 90,0 85,7 87,2 88,2 – 11,8
Sources: Questionnaire replies from the Community industry and the other Community
producer, extrapolations from Eurostat.
(45)These figures are however underestimated since they do not
include certain refillable lighters which amounted to around 153million in 1997 and 104 million in the IP.
3.EvolutionofimportsoriginatinginChina
(a)Import volumes and market shares
(46)Given that the specific duty of ECU 0,065 per unit was estab-
lished in 1995, import figures are also given for that year andthe trend is calculated accordingly. Imports went down fromalmost 80 million units in 1995 to fewer than 10 million in theIP. Their market share dropped accordingly. Consumption in1995, estimated at 882 million, was marginally different from
that in 1996.
ImportsfromChina
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 IP
Volume
(million units)79,569 12,244 7,721 18,956 10,345 9,789
Market share
in %9,0 (1) 1,4 1,0 2,5 1,4 1,3
(1) Calculated on the 1996 consumption (1995 not available).
Source:Eurostat.2001R1824 — EN — 31.01.2003 — 001.001 — 8
▼B
(b)Price evolution of the imports
(47)After the imposition of an anti-dumping duty against non-refill-
able lighters originating in China, prices, according to the bestevidence available gathered from Eurostat, Chinese statisticsand documented offers by Chinese operators still remained lower
than the Community industry's prices. On the basis of the find-
ings for the IP, the price difference, at the same level of trade,was around 48 %, even including the anti-dumping duty.
4.EconomicsituationoftheCommunityindustry
(a)General comment
(48)At first sight, the measures seem successful with respect to the
developments of certain economic indicators. However, thesituation of the Community industry must also be judged in thelight of the circumvention that was found to take place andwhich led to the extension of the anti-dumping duty in 1999.
(b)Production
(49)As shown in the table below, the Community industry's produc-
tion of non–refillable lighters decreased from 1 038 million to
912 million, i.e. by about 12 %, during the period under review.
The Community industry undertook important restructuringduring the same period to face the competition of low-pricedimports. Production was adapted to obtain economies of scaleand competitiveness was improved to respond to the evolutionof demand, suchas th e increasing consumption and imports of
piezo lighters. It should be pointed out that two manufacturing
plants, in Greece and France, were closed down during theperiod under review.
Production
1996 1997 1998 1999 IP∆ 1996to
IP
Million units 1 038,3 1 015,8 943,9 890,3 911,7
1996 = 100 100,0 97,8 90,9 85,8 87,8 – 12,2 %
Source:Questionnaire replies from Community industry.
(c)Capacity and capacity utilisation rates
(50)Production capacity of the Community industry decreased from
1 221 million units in 1996 to 1 195 million units in the IP, or2,1 %. Capacity utilisation decreased from 85 % to 76 %.
Capacity
1996 1997 1998 1999 IP∆ 1996to
IP
Million units 1 220,6 1 249,0 1 277,9 1186,5 1 195,4
1996 = 100 100,0 102,3 104,7 97,2 97,9 – 2,1
Capacity utili-
sation rate in %85,1 81,3 73,9 75,0 76,3 – 10,3
Source:Questionnaire replies from the Community industry.2001R1824 — EN — 31.01.2003 — 001.001 — 9
▼B
(d)Sales in the Community
(51)The sales volume of the Community industry in the Community
during the period under review increased by 4,9 %: from around
555 million units in 1996 to around 582 million units in the IP.
TotalCommunitysales
1996 1997 1998 1999 IP∆ 1996to
IP
(%)
Units (million) 555,070 585,924 587,301 583,180 582,292
1996 = 100 100,0 105,6 105,8 105,2 104,9 4,9
Source:Questionnaire replies from the Community industry.
(e)Market share
(52)The Community industry's market share increased from around
64 % to around 76 %.
Communityindustriesmarketshare
1996 1997 1998 1999 IP∆ 1996to
IP
(%)
In per cent 63,6 74,6 78,5 76,6 75,7
1996 = 100 100 117,3 123,4 120,4 119,0 19,0
Source:Questionnaire replies from the Community industry and Eurostat.
(f)Sales prices in the Community
(53)The investigation showed that the Community industry's average
sales price of the product concerned dropped by 8 % during theperiod under review, from 0,237 ECU/unit in 1996 to 0,217 EUR/
unit in the IP. These average prices, after falling in 1997 and in
1998, slightly increased and stabilised in 1999 and the IP.
Averagesalesprice
1996 1997 1998 1999 IP∆ 1996to
IP
(%)
Community
industry
(ECU/EUR/
unit)0,237 0,228 0,216 0,218 0,217
1996 = 100 100 96,2 91,1 92,0 91,6 – 8,4
Source:Questionnaire replies from the Community industry.
(g)Profitability
(54)Weighted average profit of the Community industry, expressed
as a percentage of net sales, for non-refillable lighters, decreasedfrom 11,1 % in 1996 to 6,9 % in the IP. It should be noted thatthe profitability varies considerably among the members of theCommunity industry. In addition, one major company main-2001R1824 — EN — 31.01.2003 — 001.001 — 10
▼B
tained that profitability between its flint and electronic lighters
could not be separated and that the latter were more profitable.With this background, the profitability figures listed below could
be overstated. Another member of the Community industry
attributed the marked deterioration of its profitability during1998 and 1999 to important setbacks of its exports to third coun-tries; hence reduced production and higher overall productioncosts. In conclusion, the Community industry did not achieve
the 15 % profit deemed appropriate in the original Regulation
(EEC) No 3433/91 (recital 16) and in Regulation (EC) No1006/95 (recital 63) or the 10 % profit deemed appropriate inRegulation No 423/97 (
1) on imports of non-refillable lighters
originating in Thailand, the Philippines and Mexico (recital 81).
(55)The profitability of the Community industry on the Communitymarket for the product under consideration developed as follows:
Profitrate
1996 1997 1998 1999 IP∆ 1996to
IP
(%)
In per cent 11,1 10,3 7,5 6,2 6,9
1996 = 100 100,0 92,8 67,6 55,9 62,2 – 37,8
Source:Questionnaire replies of the Community industry.
(h)Employment
(56)Employment for the product under consideration in the Commu-
nity industry declined from 1 716 employees in 1996 to 1 496
employees in the IP, i.e. by 13 %. The reduction is due in
essence to the Community industry's effort to increase competi-tiveness. It entailed closing two production sites as alreadymentioned, heightened automatisation in the manufacturing andassembling process and centralisation of sales activities.
The employment situation of the Community industry developed
as follows:
Personnel(Non-refillable lighters)
1996 1997 1998 1999 IP∆ 1996to
IP
(%)
Manufacturing 1 467 1 428 1 395 1287 1 270
Other 249 243 241 230 226
Total number 1 716 1 671 1 636 1517 1 496
1996 = 100 100,0 97,4 95,3 88,4 87,2 – 12,8
Source:Questionnaire replies from the Community industry.
(i)Productivity
(57)Measured on the yearly number of lighters produced by the
manufacturing personnel, productivity increased slightly fromabout 707000 units in 1996 to around 718000 in the IP, i.e. byaround 2 %.2001R1824 — EN — 31.01.2003 — 001.001 — 11
(1) OJ L 65, 6.3.1997, p. 1.
▼B
(j)Stocks
(58)The closing stocks of the Community industry for non-refillable
lighters decreased from 166 million units in 1996 to 160 millionunits in the IP, i.e. by around 4 %.
Stocks developed as follows:
Closingstocks
1996 1997 1998 1999 IP∆ 1996to
IP
(%)
Units (millions) 166,4 178,9 168,3 162,8 159,3
1996 = 100 100,0 107,5 101,1 97,8 95,7 – 4,3
Source:Questionnaire replies from the Community industry.
(k)Investments
(59)Total investments of the Community industry for non-refillable
lighters decreased from around ECU 15 million in 1996 toaround EUR 12 million in the IP. The level of investment bythe Community industry reflects its efforts to streamline itsproduction. These investments developed as follows:
Investments
1996 1997 1998 1999 IP∆ 1996to
IP
(%)
Million ECU/
EUR15,158 15,494 9,066 13,893 12,016
1996 = 100 100,0 102,2 59,8 91,6 79,3 – 20,7
Source:Questionnaire replies from the Community industry.
(l)Return on investments
(60)Return on investments of the Community industry decreased
from 41 % in 1996 to 14 % in the IP. It developed as follows:
Returnoninvestments
1996 1997 1998 1999 IP∆ 1996to
IP
(%)
In per cent 41 34 17 16 14
1996 = 100 100,0 82,9 41,5 39,0 34,2 – 65,8
Source:Questionnaire replies from the Community industry.
(m)Cash flow
(61)Cashflow of th e Community industry progressed favourably
during the period under review, although it started to decreaseduring the IP. It developed as follows:
Cashflow
1996 1997 1998 1999 IP∆ 1996to
IP
(%)
Million ECU/
EUR15,575 24,116 17,217 22,397 21,1022001R1824 — EN — 31.01.2003 — 001.001 — 12
▼B
1996 1997 1998 1999 IP∆ 1996to
IP
(%)
1996 = 100 100,0 154,8 110,5 143,8 135,5 35,5
Source:Questionnaire replies from the Community industry.
(n)Wages
(62)Wages paid by the Community industry increased per year on a
pro-capita basis from ECU 33069 in 1996 to EUR 34 828 in the
IP, an increase of about 5 %.
Wages
1996 1997 1998 1999 IP∆ 1996to
IP
(%)
ECU/EUR/
person/year33069 33553 33649 34597 34828
1996 = 100 100,0 101,5 101,8 104,6 105,3 5,3
Source:Questionnaire replies from the Community industry.
(o)Ability to raise capital
(63)During the period under review the Community industry did not
experience problems in raising funds, either through the groupssome of the members belong to or through short-term bank
credits.
(p)Magnitude of dumping
(64)As concerns the impact on the situation of the Community
industry of the magnitude of the actual margin of dumping foundduring the investigation period, it should be noted that themargin found for China is significantly higher than that foundin the original investigation. The situation of the Communityindustry improved to a certain extent after the imposition of
measures, but it has not completely recovered. Therefore, should
measures be repealed, the impact of the dumping margin foundin the current investigation would be significant.
5.Exportactivity oftheCommunityindustry
(65)The Community industry's exports of non-refillable lighters to
third countries amounted to 359 million units in the IP comparedto 495 million in 1996. The overall decrease, about 27 % duringthe period under review, is to be seen in the context of theexports from China to markets other than the Community afterthe anti-dumping measures in 1995 came into force, as well as
serious economic downturns suffered by certain importing third
countries.
(66)In detail, the development during the period under review was asfollows:
ExportvolumesoftheCommunityindustry
1996 1997 1998 1999 IP∆ 1996to
IP
(%)
In million units 494,775 477,459 432,232 376,281 359,0312001R1824 — EN — 31.01.2003 — 001.001 — 13
▼B
1996 1997 1998 1999 IP∆ 1996to
IP
(%)
1996 = 100 100,0 96,5 87,4 76,1 72,6 – 27,4
Source:Questionnaire replies from the Community industry.
6.Importvolumesandpricesfromotherthirdcountries
(67)The total import volumes of non-refillable lighters from all third
countries other than China decreased during the period underreview from about 292 million units in 1996 to 165 million inthe IP, corresponding to market shares of 33,5 % and 21,4 %respectively. Taiwan, a major exporter in 1997, exported only
minor quantities in the IP, following the adoption of Regulation
(EC) No 192/1999. Since then the major exporters into theCommunity have been Indonesia, Malaysia and Vietnam. Indeedimports from these three countries increased from about 17million units in 1996 to 109 million in the IP; and their corre-sponding market shares went from 2,0 % to 14,2 %. Average
import prices from these three countries decreased over the
period under review and were on average as low as 0,067 EUR/unit in the IP. Thus, they were significantly lower than those ofthe Community industry, but higher than the available prices ofthe Chinese imports.
7.Conclusion
(68)Since the measures originally imposed were amended in 1995
and extended in 1999, the situation of the Community industryhas improved in respect of a number of economic indicators.
(69)Certain economic factors in the Community, such as salesvolumes and market share, as well as stocks, have shown posi-tive developments for the Community industry during the
period under review. Sales volumes rose by 4,9 % and the corre-
sponding market share by 19 %; during the same period stockvolumes decreased by about 4 %. Meanwhile, the Communityindustry's profitability decreased from 11 % in 1996 to about7 % in the IP, far below the profit margins of 15 % and 10 %deemed appropriate in the earlier investigations. This investiga-
tion established that the generally positive factors except
profitability were made possible because of the introduction ofmore effective anti-dumping measures during the previous yearsand as a result of the restructuring of the Community industry'sfacilities. However, it also made clear that competition fromimported non-refillable lighters, especially resulting from
circumvention activities, forced the Community industry to
lower its selling prices by more than 8 %, thus negativelyaffecting profitability.
(70)It has appeared that the market share once held by the Chineseexporters was replaced by low-priced imports from other thirdcountries not subject to anti-dumping duties and by increased
sales by the Community industry. The Chinese market share
was reduced from about 9 % in 1996 to slightly above 1 % inthe IP. At the same time the Community industry improved itsown market share to around 76 % in the IP compared with lessthan 64 % in 1996. Together with the anti-dumping measures,
the in-depth restructuring prompted these favourable effects:
two factories were closed down and the remaining facilitiesstreamlined; notably at the expense of personnel, which wasreduced by almost 13 % during the period under review. Capa-city was reduced by 2 %; but at the same time production wasreduced by 12 % and capacity utilisation went down by 10 %.2001R1824 — EN — 31.01.2003 — 001.001 — 14
▼B
(71)In conclusion the investigation established that, although the
situation of the Community industry has improved, it is likely
to deteriorate if the measures were to be repealed.
G.LIKELIHOODOFRECURRENCEOFINJURY
(72)In order to assess the likely effect of the expiry of the measures
in force, a number of factors were examined, in particular the
availability of unused capacity in China, the exporters' behaviour
on the Community market and on other third markets, the pricesthe exporters might charge if the duty were allowed to expireand the likely impact of these factors on the Communityindustry.
(73)The information available, already reviewed in recitals 30 to 34,
as well as the history of the past years demonstrate that there is a
huge disproportion in China between consumption on the onehand and capacity and production on the other hand. Consideringthe attractiveness of the Community market, together with thesafety rules limiting access to certain third country markets, the
export potential of China at low prices towards the Community
is very high. Chinese export prices to third countries in the year2000 were, on average, even lower than those to the Community.Moreover, the lapsing of measures against Chinese importswould entail the lapsing of the circumvention measures withregard to certain refillable lighters from China and Taiwan. The
imports of lighters covered by these measures, even if declining
in volume (from almost 200 million units in 1998 at ECU 0,065per unit according to Eurostat) were still high in 2000 withalmost 52 million units.
(74)In conclusion, in the absence of measures, there is likelihood ofrecurrence of injury and, having also regard to the situation on
dumping, there is likelihood of recurrence of injurious dumping.
H.COMMUNITYINTEREST
1.Introduction
(75)According to Article 21 of the basic Regulation, the Commission
examined whether a prolongation of the existing anti-dumping
measures would be against the interest of the Community as a
whole. The determination of the Community interest must bebased on an appreciation of all the various interests, such as theCommunity industry, the importers and users of the productconcerned.
(76)In the preceding investigations the adoption, amendment and
extension of the measures against dumped non-refillable lighters
were considered not to be against the interests of the Commu-nity. Furthermore, in the context of an expiry review, thescrutiny of a situation in which anti-dumping measures havebeen in place allows assessment of any negative, undue impactof the anti-dumping measures in force on the parties concerned.
(77)In order to assess the likely impact of a continuation of themeasures, the Commission requested information from all inter-ested parties mentioned above. In addition to the Communityindustry, questionnaires were sent to 72 importers. Togetherwith the two meaningful replies mentioned, few other commentswere received. All of them were taken into account to examine
whether, despite the findings of the likelihood of recurrence of
injurious dumping, there were compelling reasons which wouldlead to the conclusion that it is not in the Community interestto maintain the existing measures.
2.InterestoftheCommunityindustry
(78)If the anti-dumping measures were repealed, dumped and low-
priced imports on the Community market would massively2001R1824 — EN — 31.01.2003 — 001.001 — 15
▼B
increase and the situation of the Community industry would start
deteriorating again.
(79)The Community industry is structurally viable; it has undergonein-depth restructuring of its operations and has invested heavilyin recent years to enhance its competitiveness. However, it canbe concluded that, without the continuation of anti-dumping
measures, its situation will most likely deteriorate.
3.Interestsofimportersandtraders
(80)The few replies obtained from the importers/traders seem to
indicate only a small interest for this review investigation,
notably because of the availability of alternative sources abroad.
(81)The importers who made themselves known consider that theexisting measures should not be prolonged. Their main concern
is that imports of non-refillable lighters could be completely
excluded from the Community market, thus reducing freecompetition in the Community and triggering excessive pricesand the switch to cheaper advertising gadgets, other thanlighters, on the part of the users, who distribute such gadgets tofinal consumers buying their main products or services. One
importer stated that the imposition of anti-dumping duties
prompted him to stop trading in imported lighters. Consideringthe flow of imports during the period under review, his decisionappears to be the result of other considerations than any shortageof available lighters not subject to duties.
(82)It is true that imports of flint lighters from China and Taiwanhave diminished, however the imports originating in otherexporting countries, together with the existence of five knownCommunity producers, have guaranteed competition on the
Community market. It is therefore confirmed that importers and
traders have enjoyed easy access to the product under considera-tion from third sources other than the Community industry andthe imports concerned. Finally, these operators have also increas-ingly been relying on piezo lighters. In other terms, the impactof a prolongation of the existing measures on these imports is
likely to be minimal.
(83)The available data indicate that profitability of the cooperating
importers has not been negatively influenced by the impositionof the anti-dumping measures and is likely not to suffer future,
adverse effects if the existing measures are maintained.
4.Interestsofconsumers
(84)Given the above, it is concluded that there are no compelling
reasons on the grounds of Community interest against the conti-nuation of the measures.
5.ConsequencesforcompetitionontheCommunitymarket
(85)Considering that competition has remained strong on the
Community market amongst Community producers, the importsconcerned and imports originating in third countries, it can beconcluded that the continuation of the existing measures will
not adversely affect the future competitive environment for the
product under consideration on the Community market.
6.ConclusiononCommunityinterest
(86)Given the above, it is concluded that there are no compelling
reasons on the grounds of Community interest against the conti-nuation of the measures.
I.ANTI-DUMPINGMEASURES
(87)All parties were informed of the essential facts and considera-
tions on the basis of which it is intended to recommend the2001R1824 — EN — 31.01.2003 — 001.001 — 16
▼B
maintenance of the existing measures. They were also granted a
period to make representations subsequent to this disclosure. Nocomments which were of a nature to change the above conclu-
sions were received.
It follows from the above that, as provided for by Article 11(2)
of the basic Regulation, the anti-dumping measures applicable toimports of gas-fuelled, non-refillable pocket flint lighters ,and tocertain refillable lighters, originating in China or consigned fromor originating in Taiwan, imposed by Regulation (EEC) No
3433/91 as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1006/95 and as
extended by Regulation (EC) No 192/1999, should be main-tained,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
1. A definitive anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on imports of
gas-fuelled, non-refillable pocket flint lighters falling within CN code9613 10 00 (TARIC code 9613 10 00*19) originating in the People'sRepublic of China.
2. The rate of the duty, applicable to the net, free-at-the Community
frontier price, before duty, shall be set at EUR 0,065.
Article 2
The anti-dumping duties extended by Regulation (EC) No 192/1999 on
imports of certain refillable pocket flint lighters originating in the
People's Republic of China or consigned from or originating in Taiwan,falling within CN code ex 9613 2090 (TARIC codes 9613 20 90*21and 9613 20 90*29) and to imports of non-refillable lighters consignedfrom Taiwan and falling within CN code 9613 10 00 (TARIC code
9613 10 00*11) or originating in Taiwan and falling within CN code
9613 10 00 (TARIC code 9613 1000*19) are maintained.
Article 3
1. In cases where goods have been damaged before entry into free
circulation and, therefore, the price actually paid or payable is appor-tioned for the determination of the customs value pursuant to Article145 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93, the amount of theanti-dumping duty, calculated on the basis of the amounts set above,
shall be reduced by a percentage which corresponds to the apportioning
of the price actually paid or payable.
2. Unless otherwise specified, the provisions in force concerning
customs duties shall apply.
Article 4
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publica-
tion in the Official Journal of the European Communities .
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable
in all Member States.2001R1824 — EN — 31.01.2003 — 001.001 — 17
▼M1
▼B