COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 21.02.1997 
COM(97) 62 final 
Proposal for a 
COUNCIL REGULATION fEC) 
amending Regulation (EEC) N° 3433/91 in respect of imports originating 
in Thailand and imposing definitive anti-dumping duties on imports 
of gas-fuelled, non-refillable pocket flint lighters originating in Thailand, 
the Philippines and Mexico 
(presented by the Commission) 

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 
(1) By Regulation (EEC) N° 3433/911, the Council imposed a definitive anti-dumping 
duty on imports of gas-fuelled, non-refillable pocket flint lighters originating, inter 
alia, in Thailand. 
(2) In March 1995, following receipt of a request for a review containing sufficient 
evidence that the measure in force in respect of the above Thai imports was no 
longer sufficient to counteract the injurious dumping, the Commission initiated a 
review2 of Council Regulation (EEC) N° 3433/91. 
(3) Simultaneously, in March 1995, as a result of complaints containing sufficient 
evidence of dumping and material injury resulting therefrom, the Commission 
initiated an anti-dumping proceeding3 concerning imports of the same products 
originating in the Philippines and Mexico. 
(4) Since it was considered appropriate to cumulatively assess the effects of the imports 
from the three countries concerned, it has been decided to proceed directly to 
definitive measures rather than to pass through the provisional stage. In view of 
this, the Commission, prior to drafting its proposal on these cases, provided all 
interested parties with details of its calculation and gave them sufficient time to 
comment and correct material errors. 
1 OJNoL 326, 28.11.1991, p. 1 
2 OJNoC67, 18.3.1995, p. 4. 
3 OJNoC67, 18.3.1995, p. 3. 
lb 
(5) The review investigation showed that the dumping margin for Thai exports had 
increased significantly. Expressed as a percentage of the CIF Community frontier 
value of the imports, the dumping margin for the sole Thai exporter having exported 
during the period of investigation was found to be 51.9%. As far as Filipino exports 
are concerned, dumping margins ranging from 36.7% to 52.6% were established, 
while the dumping margin for the sole Mexican exporter was found to be 27.1%. 
(6) The investigation also showed that the injury suffered by the Community industry 
was material since, in a growing market, the Community producers concerned had 
lost market share and their profitability deteriorated. 
The analysis of the causal link between this injury and the dumped imports from the 
countries concerned (set out in recitals 60 to 71* of the attached proposal), led to the 
conclusion that although other elements may have had a negative impact on the 
Community industry, dumped imports from Thailand, the Philippines and Mexico 
, have by themselves caused material injury to the Community industry. 
(7) As explained in recitals 75 to 78 of the attached proposal, the adoption of measures 
in this context is considered to be in the interest of the Community. Since one Thai 
producer, the sole Mexican producer and two Filipino producers offered 
undertakings concerning their exports of the product concerned to the Community 
which were found to be acceptable and, given the high level of co-operation 
obtained in all three cases, the definitive measures proposed to the Council should 
act as a "safety net" additional to the accepted undertakings. 
(8) The proposed measures should therefore take the following form: 
- As far as Thailand is concerned, the measures in force should be repealed but the 
5.8% duty rate currently applicable to imports from the company Politop should, as 
explained at recitals 83 to 86 of the attached proposal, be retained as the individual 
duty rate for that company in the future. A residual duty should be imposed at the 
level established for the co-operating company with the highest dumping margin, 
namely 51.9% (based on the company's dumping margin as this was lower than its 
injury margin); 
- As far as the Philippines are concerned, an individual duty should be imposed in 
respect of imports from Swedish Match Philippines (which did not offer any 
undertaking ) at the level of its injury margin, namely 17%, which was found to be 
lower than its dumping margin. A residual duty should be imposed at the level 
established for the co-operating company with the highest dumping margin, namely 
43.0% (based on the company's injury margin as this was lower than its dumping 
margin); 
- As far as Mexico is concerned, the residual duty should be imposed at the level 
established for the sole co-operating company whose undertaking was accepted, 
namely 27.1% (based on the company's dumping margin as this was lower than its 
injury margin). 
Council Regulation (EC) N° 
of... 
amending Regulation (EEC) N° 3433/91 in respect of imports originating 
in Thailand and imposing definitive anti-dumping duties on imports 
of gas-fuelled, non-refillable pocket flint lighters originating in Thailand, 
the Philippines and Mexico 
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, 
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, 
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) N° 3 84/96, of 22 December 1995 on protection 
against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community1, and in 
particular Articles 9, 11 and 23 thereof, 
Having regard to the proposal submitted by the Commission after consulting the Advisory 
Committee, 
WHEREAS: 
A. PROCEDURE 
1. Measures in force 
(1) By Regulation (EEC) N° 3433/912, the Council imposed a definitive anti-dumping 
duty on imports of gas-fuelled, non-refillable pocket flint lighters (hereinafter 
referred to as "disposable flint lighters") originating, inter alia, in Thailand. The 
rate applicable to products originating in that country was set at 14.1%, with the 
exception of the company Politop Co., Ltd. ("Politop"), whose duty rate was 5.8% 
and the company Thai Merry Co., Ltd. ("Thai Merry"), which was exempted from 
the duty since it had offered an undertaking, accepted by Commission Decision 
No 91/604/EEC3. 
1 OJ No L 56, 06.03.1996, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 2331/96 (OJ 
No L 317, 6.12.1996, p. 1). 
2 OJNoL 326, 28.11.1991, p. 1. 
? OJNoL326, 28.11.1991, p. 31. 
(2) Further to the withdrawal of its undertaking by Thai Merry and the subsequent 
imposition of a provisional anti-dumping duty on its exports to the Community, the 
Council, by Regulation (EC) N° 398/944, amended Regulation (EEC) N° 3433/91 in 
order to remove the exemption from the duty originally granted to this company. 
Thai Merry's exports to the Community have since then been subject to the 
definitive anti-dumping duty at the rate of 14.1%. 
2. Request for a review 
(3) On 18 March 1995, the Commission announced, by a notice published in the 
Official Journal of the European Communities5 the initiation of a review of 
Regulation (EEC) N° 3433/91 in respect of imports of disposable flint lighters 
originating in Thailand and commenced an investigation under Article 11 (3) of 
Regulation (EC) No 3283/946 which was replaced during the investigation by 
Regulation (EC) No 384/96, hereinafter referred to as "the Basic Anti-dumping 
Regulation". This interim review was initiated as a result of a request lodged in 
March 1994 by the European Federation of Lighter Manufacturers (EFLM), on 
behalf of its members representing almost the totality of Community production of 
the like product (namely the BIC Group, producer in France, Greece and Spain, the 
Swedish Match Group, producer in France and the Netherlands, Tokai Seiki GmbH, 
manufacturer in Germany and Flamagas, producer in Spain). This request, which 
alleged that the measure in force in respect of Thai imports was no longer sufficient 
. to counteract the injurious dumping, contained sufficient evidence to justify the 
initiation of a review. 
4 OJ No L 54, 25.02.1994, p. 1. 
5 OJNoC67, 18.3.1995, p. 4. 
6 OJ No L 349, 31.12.1994, pi. 
(4J Since the interim review in respect of imports originating in Thailand was likely not 
to be concluded before the end of the five year period of application of the measures 
concerned (i.e. on 30 November 1996), the interim review has also covered, in 
accordance with the provisions of Article 11 (7) of the Basic Anti-dumping 
Regulation, the circumstances set out in Article 11 (2) of the said Regulation (i.e. 
the circumstances due to be examined in the context of an expiry review). 
3. Complaints 
(5) On 18 March 1995, the Commission announced, by a notice published in the 
Official Journal of the European Communities1 the initiation of an anti-dumping 
proceeding concerning imports of disposable flint lighters originating in the 
Philippines and Mexico and commenced an investigation pursuant to Article 5 of the 
Basic Anti-dumping Regulation. This proceeding was initiated as a result of two 
'complaints lodged in August 1994 in respect of imports of disposable flint lighters 
originating respectively in the Philippines and in Mexico. 
The complaint concerning imports originating in the Philippines was lodged by the 
BIC Group, the Swedish Match Group and Tokai Seiki GmbH, representing more 
than 90% of total Community production of the like product. Immediately before 
initiation, the Spanish producer Flamagas became party to the complaint. 
The complaint concerning imports originating in Mexico was lodged by the BIC 
Group and the Swedish Match Group only. The complaint remained however 
admissible since the complaining producers represented a major proportion of total 
Community production of the like product. Immediately before initiation, the 
Spanish producer Flamagas also became party to this complaint. 
OJNoC67, 18.3.1995, p. 3. 
It was considered that the relevant complaints contained sufficient evidence of 
dumping by the Filipino and Mexican imports and of material injury resulting 
therefrom to justify the initiation of anti-dumping proceedings. It was however 
considered appropriate that the relevant investigations be carried out in the 
framework of a single proceeding, given that both complaints, lodged almost at the 
same time, contained similar allegations concerning imports of the same product. 
4. Initiation of investigations 
(6) The Commission officially advised the exporters and importers known to be 
concerned, the representatives of the exporting countries and the complainant 
Community producers about the initiation of the review and the initiation of the new 
proceeding. Interested parties were given the opportunity to make their views 
known in writing and to request a hearing. 
(7) A number of importers and producers in the countries concerned made their views 
known in writing. All parties who so requested were granted hearings. 
(8) The investigation of dumping in respect of the three exporting countries concerned 
covered the period 1 April 1994 to 31 December 1994 (hereinafter referred to as 
"the investigation period"). For the purpose of the dumping, injury and Community 
interest determinations, the geographical scope of the investigation was the 
Community as composed at the time of initiation, therefore including all fifteen 
Member States. 
(9) The Commission sent questionnaires to all parties known to be concerned and 
received detailed replies from the complainant Community producers, from two 
producers in Thailand, one producer in Mexico and its related exporter in the United 
States as well as from another related company which was selling the like product 
on the Mexican market, from three producers in the Philippines and a related 
company in Japan, and from four importers in the Community related to the 
producers in the exporting countries concerned and one independent importer in the 
Community. 
(10) The Commission sought and verified all the information it considered necessary for 
a determination of dumping and injury and carried out investigations at the premises 
of the following firms: 
(a) complainant Community producers: 
Producing companies: 
- BIC S.A., Redon, France 
- Feudor S.A. (Swedish Match), Rillieux-la-Pape, Prance 
Producing companies and sales offices: 
- Flamagas S.A., Barcelona, Spain 
- LaforestBIC S.A., Tarragona, Spain 
- ViolexBIC S.A., Athens, Greece 
Sales companies: 
- BIC Deutschland GmbH, Ettlingen, Germany 
- BIC S.A., Clichy, France 
- Biro BIC Limited, London, United Kingdom 
- Cricket S.A.(Swedish Match), Rillieux-la-Pape, France 
- Ebas Nederland (Poppell B. V. - Swedish Match), Eindhoven, Netherlands 
(b) producers/exporters: 
From Thailand: - Politop Co., Ltd. Bangkok, Thailand 
- Thai Merry Co., Ltd. Samutsakorn, Thailand 
From the Philippines: 
From Mexico: - Iwax Philippine, Inc., Rosario, Cavité, Philippines (the 
investigation having also covered the related company 
Iwahori Philippines, Inc., Mariveles, Bataan, Philippines) 
- Iwax Inc., Shizuoka, Japan (in respect of exports from its 
subsidiaries Iwax Philippine, Inc. and Iwahori Philippines, 
Inc.) 
- Swedish Match Philippines, Inc., Manila, Philippines 
- JMP Mexico, S.A. de C.V., Tijuana, Mexico (in respect of 
its production of disposable flint lighters in Mexico) 
- Tokai de Mexico, S.A. de C.V., Cuernavaca, Mexico (in 
respect of its domestic sales of disposable flint lighters in 
Mexico) 
- Scripto Tokai Corp., Fontana, USA (in respect of its 
exports to the Community of disposable flint lighters 
manufactured by JMP in Mexico) 
(c) importers related to producers/exporters: 
- Iwax (U.K.) Ltd8, Ballymoney, United Kingdom 
- Poppell B.V. (Swedish Match), Eindhoven, Netherlands 
- Tokai Seiki GmbH, Mônchengladbach, Germany 
- Tokai Seiki B.V., Hoofddorp, Netherlands 
8 This importer became independent after the period of investigation. 
(d) independent importers: 
- Pollyflame International B.V., Roelofarendsveen, Netherlands 
5. Subsequent procedure 
(11) It has to be noted that a number of considerations (detailed below at recitals 40 to 
44) have led the Commission to the conclusion that a cumulative assessment of the 
effect of the dumped imports from both the country subject to a review (Thailand) 
and the two countries subject to a new proceeding (the Philippines and Mexico), 
was warranted. 
As a result, from a procedural point of view/ it was considered that definitive 
measures, if any, should be directly adopted in respect of all three countries 
concerned, without resorting to the intermediate step of provisional duties (an 
approach which also implied that the measures in force in respect of Thai imports 
would have to be simultaneously repealed). 
(12) The Commission accordingly continued to seek and verify all information it deemed 
necessary for its definitive findings. 
(13) Parties were informed of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of which 
it was intended to recommend the imposition of definitive anti-dumping duties. 
They were also granted a period within which to make representations (and/or offer 
undertakings) subsequent to the disclosure. 
(14) The parties either did not submit any written comments or submitted comments 
which did not justify any alteration of the preliminary conclusions. Within the 
specified time limit, three producers/exporters offered undertakings. 
(15) The establishment of findings which, without resorting to the intermediate step of 
provisional duties, could be considered as final, made it necessary to provide all 
parties involved with preliminary and final disclosure and grant them sufficient time 
to submit their views. This, together with the setting up of appropriate 
undertakings, proved to be time-consuming and accordingly, the investigation 
overran the normal duration provided for in Articles 6 (9) and 11 (5) of the Basic 
Anti-dumping Regulation. 
B. PRODUCT UNDER CONSIDERATION AND 
LIKE PRODUCT 
1. Product under consideration 
(16) The product subject to the definitive anti-dumping duty referred to at recital 1 as 
well as the product subject to the proceeding initiated in respect of imports 
originating in the Philippines and Mexico is gas-fuelled, non-refillable pocket flint 
lighters. This product falls within CN code ex 9613 10 00. 
It should be recalled in this respect that there are other disposable lighters on the 
market (piezo lighters) the technical characteristics of which are quite different from 
those of the above mentioned product. They were therefore not considered to be 
identical to the product concerned in the original investigation concerning Thailand, 
were not covered by the original investigation and were excluded from the scope of 
the measures. No reasons have emerged in the course of the current review and 
new proceeding which would justify a departure from this approach. Accordingly, 
piezo lighters were kept outside the scope of the current investigations. 
In their representations made further to the final disclosure, the Thai authorities 
have argued that there are two distinct segments in the Community's disposable flint 
lighter market, the high end served by high quality Community produced lighters 
and the low end served by imports, including those from Thailand. This view, 
expressed in previous cases concerning disposable flint lighters, cannot be shared for 
the reasons already given in the past, which can be summarised as follows: 
For the market of a product to be divided into segments requires at least that 
differences in physical characteristics be perceptible to, and actually perceived by, 
consumers and that clearly separate channels of sale exist. These conditions are not 
met in the case of disposable flint lighters since all such products, which are globally 
perceived as being "non-piezo and disposable" lighters, are sold without distinction 
in the same kind of shops to customers having the same expectations (namely to buy 
a disposable product belonging to a single category of utility goods). 
Finally, it has to be noted that although the product under consideration is 
'manufactured in different sizes and models, all these disposable flint lighters have 
the same basic technical characteristics, the same basic application and perform the 
same function. Accordingly, as in previous investigations, the whole range of 
models of disposable flint lighters was considered as forming one single category of 
product. 
10 
2. Like product 
(17) As regards the disposable flint lighters produced and sold domestically in the three 
countries concerned where such sales had taken place and information in their 
respect had been made available, the investigation showed that such products were 
either alike in all respects to, or closely resembling, those exported to the 
Community from the countries in question. 
(18) The investigation also established that the disposable flint lighters produced by the 
Community industry and sold in the Community market and those imported from 
the three countries concerned possess similar basic physical and technical 
characteristics and are intended for the same use. While there may be some minor 
differences between the product imported from the countries concerned and the 
Community production, these differences (for instance in the presentation or the 
technique used for the assembly of the lighter) do not affect the substantial 
characteristics and properties of the product. The disposable flint lighters produced 
and sold by the Community industry and those imported from the three countries 
concerned should therefore be regarded as like products. 
(19) Accordingly, it is concluded that disposable flint lighters produced and sold in the 
Community, as well as those produced and sold in Thailand, the Philippines and 
Mexico and those exported to the Community from these three countries should be 
regarded as "like products", within the meaning of Article 1 (4) of the Basic Anti­
dumping Regulation. 
11 
C. DUMPING 
1. Normal value 
(a) Thailand 
(20) One Thai co-operating exporter, whose exports represented almost 100% of total 
Community imports from Thailand during the investigation period, had sold 
disposable flint lighters on its domestic market. For 2 models, normal value was 
based on domestic selling prices, since after exclusion, in accordance with the 
provisions of Article 2 (4) of the Basic Anti-dumping Regulation, of non profitable 
sales, the remaining profitable sales of comparable models were found to represent 
at least 5% of the sales volume of the models concerned to the Community. For a 
third model, in the absence of sufficient profitable sales of a comparable model, 
normal value was constructed on the basis of the company's costs of manufacture, 
selling, general and administrative expenses (hereinafter referred to as "SG&A") and 
profit. These SG&A and profit were established on the basis of the above 
mentioned profitable sales. 
(21) For the other Thai exporter no dumping calculation could be made due to the fact 
that the company had ceased to export in 1992. 
(b) Mexico 
(22) The sole Mexican co-operating exporter, whose exports represented almost 100% 
of total Community imports from Mexico during the investigation period, was fully 
export oriented but was nevertheless able to provide information regarding sales of 
the like product on its domestic market, as another company in the same group was 
producing and selling disposable flint lighters on the Mexican market. However, the 
sales in question, which were the only domestic sales of the like product available in 
Mexico, proved to be partly made at a loss, the remaining profitable sales 
representing less than 5% of the quantities exported to the Community. 
12 
(23) Accordingly, the Commission constructed normal value for this exporter by adding 
to the cost of manufacture of each exported model, the domestic SG&A available in 
Mexico, i.e. those of its related company selling disposable flint lighters in Mexico. 
As regards profit, given the lack of representative profitable sales in Mexico for 
disposable flint lighters and the non-availability of reliable data in respect of sales of 
the same general category of products in this country, a reasonable alternative 
solution had to be sought. 
(24) To this end, it was examined whether Thailand, for which representative and reliable 
data were available, could be considered as a comparable market to Mexico in the 
sector concerned and, thus, an appropriate reference for the profit determination. 
This examination led to the conclusion that the conditions prevailing on both 
markets were similar. Moreover, the exporter concerned acknowledged that the 
profit margin achieved in Thailand was not exceeding the one normally realised on 
the Mexican market in the same business sector. Therefore, for the purpose of 
constructing normal value for each model exported by the Mexican co-operating 
exporter, the profit margin established in Thailand was, in accordance with the 
provisions of Article 2 (6) (c) of the Basic Anti-dumping Regulation, added to the 
above mentioned Mexican cost of manufacture and domestic SG&A. 
(c) Philippines 
(25) The comparison of import statistics, after exclusion, on the basis of available data, 
of certain lighters which are outside the scope of the investigation (see above, recital 
16, considerations concerning piezo lighters) with quantities reported by the three 
Filipino co-operating exporters for the period of investigation, showed a level of co­
operation close to 100%. 
13 
(26) In the Philippines, two co-operating exporters (belonging to the same group) were 
fully export oriented. The third co-operating exporter was selling on its domestic 
market through a related selling company during the investigation period, but the 
latter, recently become independent, refused to co-operate. Therefore, no 
information regarding sales of the like product (or of the same general category of 
products) on the Filipino market could be collected and normal value had to be 
constructed on the" basis of data available. 
(27) To this end, it was examined whether Thailand, for which representative and reliable 
data were available, could be considered as a comparable market to the Philippines 
in the sector concerned and, thus, an appropriate reference for the SG&A and profit 
determination. This examination led to the conclusion that the conditions prevailing 
on both markets were similar. Moreover, the exporters concerned admitted that 
both the SG&A incurred and the profit margin achieved in Thailand were not 
exceeding those normally encountered on the Filipino market in the same business 
sector. Therefore, for the purpose of constructing normal value in the case of the 
three Filipino co-operating exporters, the Commission added to their respective cost 
of manufacture for each exported model, in accordance with the provisions of 
Article 2 (6) (c) of the Basic Anti-dumping F.egulation, an amount for SG&A and 
for profit based on the respective amounts established in Thailand. 
2. Export price 
(28) Practically all export transactions made by the exporters concerned during the 
investigation period were considered (only a few models sold in very small 
quantities were disregarded in agreement with the representatives of the companies 
concerned). 
14 
(29) Where export sales were made directly to unrelated importers, export prices were 
established on the basis of the prices actually paid or payable for the product sold 
for export to the Community. 
(30) Where exports were made to related companies which imported the product 
concerned into the Community, export prices were constructed on the basis of 
resale prices to the first independent buyer, adjusted to take account of all costs 
incurred between importation and resale including customs duties and a reasonable 
profit margin (namely 5%). The latter was established on the basis of the profit 
margins considered reasonable in thii; business sector for unrelated importers. 
Where cost allocations for importers' SG&A were necessary in the construction of 
export prices, these were generally made on the basis of turnover with the exception 
of those cases where the importers provided sufficient evidence to justify another 
method of allocation. These allocations included all the general administration and 
selling costs related to the sales under consideration, whether financed by the 
exporter or by the related importer. Discounts and rebates given in connection with 
sales of the related importer to independent buyers were taken into account in 
constructing export prices. 
3. Comparison 
(31) The weighted average normal value by model, as determined above, was compared 
at an ex-factory level with the export price, on a weighted average basis in the case 
of Thailand and on a transaction-by-transaction basis in the case of the Philippines 
and Mexico. Indeed, in the latter cases, the export price had to be constructed on 
the basis of resale prices to the first independent buyer. These resale prices and the 
corresponding constructed export prices showed patterns of pricing differing 
significantly among different purchasers, regions oi time periods, which would have 
resulted in that the full degree of dumping being practised would not have been 
reflected had the method based on weighted-average export prices been used. 
15 
(32) As far as differences affecting price comparability are concerned, adjustments were 
granted in accordance with Article 2 (10) of the Basic Anti-dumping Regulation, 
where satisfactory evidence was therefor supplied. Such adjustments concerned 
differences in costs for level of trade (calculated on the basis of advertising costs, 
incurred on the domestic market but not on exports), transport, insurance, handling, 
packing and credit. 
4. Dumping margins 
(33) The examination of the facts showed the existence of dumping for all the co­
operating exporters for which calculations could be made, the dumping margins 
being equal to the difference between normal value and export price duly adjusted. 
t 
(34) The weighted average dumping margins expressed as a percentage of the free at 
Community frontier price are as set out below: 
Thailand: Thai Merry: 51.9% 
Mexico: production by JMP Mexico 
and exports by Scripto Tokai Corp. USA: 27.1% 
Philippines: - production by Iwax Philippine Inc., and 
Iwahori Philippines Inc. and exports by 
Iwax Inc. Japan (single dumping margin): 52.6% 
- Swedish Match Philippines, Inc. 36.7% 
16 
D. COMMUNITY INDUSTRY 
(35) The investigation confirmed that the complainant Community producers, either 
represented by the EFLM (on whose behalf the request for an interim review in 
respect of Thai imports had been lodged) or acting separately in two distinct groups 
(one having lodged the complaint concerning imports originating in the Philippines 
and the other one the complaint concerning imports originating in Mexico), 
accounted in all cases for a major proportion of total Community production of the 
like product. 
(36) During the course of the investigation carried out in respect of the above 
companies, it became apparent that two producers or groups of producers, namely 
Tokai Seiki GmbH, together with one of its sales subsidiary in the Community, and 
the companies belonging to the Swedish Match Group, were related respectively to 
the sole Mexican exporter and one Filipino exporter and were also importing the 
dumped product from the countries concerned. 
In these circumstances, the Commission examined whether, in the light of the 
provisions of Article 4 (1) (a) of the Basic Anti-dumping Regulation, these 
companies should be excluded from "the Community industry". In this respect, it 
should be recalled that Article 4 (1) (a) does not provide for the automatic exclusion 
of producers who are related to exporters and/or themselves importing the dumped 
products, but rather obliges the Commission to examine on a case by case basis 
whether the exclusion of any producer in this situation is warranted. 
17 
(37) As far as Tokai Seiki GmbH is concerned, it has firstly to be noted that this 
company had made it clear that it only supported the action against the Philippines 
and Thailand and that its co-operation as a potential Community producer was 
restricted to the investigations in respect of these two countries. Secondly, the 
investigation showed that this producer was not only related to the sole Mexican 
exporter but also responsible for a very large proportion of the total imports into the 
Community of disposable flint lighters declared as originating in Mexico. 
In this respect, it should be recalled that the investigations concerning Mexican and 
Filipino imports were carried out in the framework of a single proceeding (see 
recital 5) and that a cumulative assessment of the effect of the dumped imports from 
Thailand, the Philippines and Mexico was found to be warranted (see recitals 40 to 
44). In this context, it was considered that taking into account the situation of 
Toka> Seiki GmbH in the overall injury assessment was not appropriate since, given 
the importance of the Mexican imports concerned, it would have led to unreliable 
results. Accordingly, it was considered appropriate to exclude Tokai Seiki GmbH 
* from "the Community industry". 
(38) As regards the companies belonging to the Swedish Match Group, which are related 
to the Filipino exporter Swedish Match Philippines, Inc., it appeared appropriate to 
determine whether those companies (which were complainants in all three cases and 
fully co-operated in all three investigations) were primarily producers with an 
additional activity based on imports and merely supplementing their Community 
production, or whether they were importers with relatively limited additional 
production in the Community. 
18 
The investigation revealed that the import activity of the companies belonging to the 
Swedish Match Group in respect of the product concerned originating in the 
Philippines was extremely limited, thus underlining that the core of their operations 
relating to the product concerned firmly remained in the Community. Accordingly, 
it was considered appropriate to maintain the companies concerned within "the 
Community industry". 
(39) The injury findings set out below are therefore based on the information submitted 
by the co-operating companies other than Tokai Seiki GmbH, namely the producers 
belonging to the BIC Group and to the Swedish Match Group, and the Spanish 
company Flamagas. 
E. INJURY 
1. Cumulation 
(40) The Basic Anti-dumping Regulation requires, as a precondition of cumulation, that 
the countries concerned be subject to simultaneous investigations, that the margin of 
dumping established in relation to the imports from each country be more than de 
minimis (i.e. more than 2%) and that the volume of imports from each country be 
not negligible. Where such conditions are met, the conditions of competition should 
• then be examined, in particular to determine whether imported products originating 
in the countries concerned are interchangeable, are sold at similar price levels, have 
common or similar channels of distribution and are simultaneously present in the 
same geographical markets. 
19 
(41) In this respect, it has to be noted that the disposable flint lighters exported from all 
three countries concerned are subject to simultaneous investigations which have 
established dumping margins ranging from 27.1% to 52.6%. In addition, none of 
the exporting countries concerned delivered to the Community quantities 
representing a market share beneath 1%, which could then have been considered as 
negligible. 
As regards their conditions of competition, the imported products originating in the 
three countries concerned were found to be interchangeable and sold at similar price 
levels, to have similar channels of distribution and to be simultaneously present in 
the same geographical markets. 
. In this context, the following arguments were raised by interested parties: 
(42) The two related Filipino producers questioned the appropriateness of cumulation in 
the case of Filipino and Mexican imports on the grounds that differences in volume 
and progression of imports between these two countries would be such as to affect 
the above conclusion that Filipino and Mexican disposable flint lighters were 
competing under similar conditions on the Community market. 
In support of this assertion, they claimed that the actual rate of increase of Filipino 
imports was not, by far, as sharp as that of Mexican imports and that the difference 
was such as to warrant a separate assessment of the impact of the imports 
concerned on the Community market. Information was provided showing that the 
actual progression of Filipino imports was less marked than the one reported by 
Eurostatistics. Reference was also made to a previous case9 where the Commission 
had decided not to cumulate imports from Korea and China because the 
investigation had shown "diametrically opposed progressions"10 as regards import 
volume and market share as well as marked differences in these two countries' 
respective pricing policies. 
9 Commission Regulation (EEC) No 763/90 of 26 March 1990 (OJ. No L 83 of 30.3.90), imposing a 
provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of tungsten carbide and fused tungsten carbide originating 
in the People's Republic of China and terminating the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports 
of those products from the Republic of Korea. 
10 Recital 42 of Regulation (EEC) No 763/90. 
20 
However, while the progression of Filipino imports (corresponding to an increase in 
market share from 2% in 1990 to 3.3% in 1994) is less marked than that registered 
in the case of Mexican imports, of which the starting point was lower (the Mexican 
market share, 0.1% in 1990 reached 9.2%. in 1994), it must be noted that both 
countries achieved a significant market share during the investigation period and 
exports were made at prices significantly undercutting those of the Community 
industry. In addition, it is worth noting that both Filipino and Mexican imports have 
increased in absolute terms as well as in market share and the levels of price 
undercutting practised were very similar. 
It was therefore considered that the respective positions of Filipino and Mexican 
imports on the Community market were not sufficiently different so as to justify a 
finding that the conditions of competition between Filipino and Mexican lighters 
were different. Accordingly, the above claim could not be accepted. 
(43) The representative of one of the Thai exporters also claimed that the injury caused 
by Thai imports should not be cumulatively assessed with the one attributable to 
Mexican/Filipino imports for the following reasons: Although Article 3 (4) of the 
Basic Anti-dumping Regulation allows cumulation in case of simultaneous 
investigations, cumulation of Thai imports, which are the subject of an interim 
review, with Mexican/Filipino imports would be inappropriate because the legal 
standards (and the consequent legal tests) which apply in such a review would be 
different from those applicable to a new proceeding. 
21 
As regards the appropriateness of a global assessment of the impact of imports 
already subject to measures together with imports which are investigated for the 
first time, it is considered that since the Basic Anti-dumping Regulation does not 
preclude such a methodology, in particular where a full scale injury investigation has 
been carried out, any decision in this respect should be made for each case on its 
own merits, i.e. by examining the impact of the respective behaviour of the 
exporting countries concerned. 
In this respect, it should be noted that the anti-dumping measures applicable to Thai 
imports did not prevent this exporting country, after the withdrawal by the main 
Thai exporter of its undertaking in 1993, to resort again to injurious dumping, with 
the result that Thailand appears to have then adopted a very similar behaviour to 
that of the Philippines and Mexico. 
This similarity of behaviour means that, notwithstanding the measures in force 
(likely to have, ipso facto, become insufficient to counteract the injurious dumping), 
'imports from the country being reviewed may have contributed, on a par with 
imports from the countries subject to the new proceeding, to any injury which may 
prove to be attributable to the dumped imports under investigation. 
(44) Therefore, it was considered that the similarity of behaviour of the three exporting 
countries concerned (with the consequent impossibility to assess separately their 
respective contribution to injury), together with the fact that the above criteria 
concerning conditions of competition are met, was such as to make cumulation 
warranted. 
22 
This approach was criticised by the Thai authorities on the grounds that it would 
lead to a confusion of the issue of whether to impose anti-dumping duties in the first 
instance (i.e. in respect of Filipino and Mexican imports) with the separate, allegedly 
higher standard of whether existing duties (applicable to Thai imports) should be 
continued (in an amended form, in the context of an interim review having also 
covered the circumstances due to be examined in an expiry review). 
This view could not be accepted in 'particular because the argument of the Thai 
authorities that the standards of injury applicable to reviews of the present kind 
would be higher than the one applicable to new proceedings does not appear to be 
correct, notably in the light of the combined provisions of Article 3 and Article 11 of 
the Basic Anti-dumping Regulation. Indeed, in the context of a review of the 
present kind, the Institutions have to take account of the fact that the existing 
measures may have limited the injurious effects of the dumped imports under 
examination. The latter may have either remained injurious or become such as to 
support a finding that the injury is likely to recur in the absence of measures. 
On the basis of all the above considerations, the appropriateness of the cumulative 
assessment of the similar and simultaneous effect of the dumped imports from the 
three countries concerned was therefore confirmed. 
23 
2. Total Community consumption 
(45) In order to calculate total apparent consumption of the product in question on the 
Community market, Community producers' sales in the Community of disposable 
flint lighters were added to the total imports into the Community, as declared under 
CN code 9613 10 00 (excluding however, as far as the Philippines are concerned, 
disposable piezo lighters, on the basis of reliable data made available during the 
investigation). On this basis, the total apparent consumption of disposable flint 
lighters has grown between 1990 and 1994 by 21%. 
(46) It is however known that this high rate of increase has to be qualified. Indeed, 
importers (which were anticipating an increased anti-dumping duty on Chinese 
disposable flint lighters) imported large quantities from the P.R. of China at the end 
of 1994. Part of these quantities (around 65 million units), which could not be put 
on the market before 1995, were kept in stock and this situation artificially increased 
total apparent consumption in 1994. 
• Thus, in order to assess the actual rate of increase of Community consumption, the 
Commission has estimated that the share of Chinese imports cleared through 
customs in 1994 (amounting in total to 176.7 million units) likely to have been 
resold (by importers to wholesalers or retailers) in the same year amounted to +/-
110 million units. On this basis, the increase in total consumption is 11% (instead of 
21%). Such a rate of increase would appear to reflect fairly the actual trend of 
Community consumption. 
24 
3. Factors relating to the dumped imports 
(a) Imports'increase rate 
(47) The overall rate of increase of imports from the countries concerned was found to 
be very significant (more than + 280%). Indeed, between 1990 and 1994, 
quantities: 
- were multiplied by more than 120 in the case of Mexico (even though from an 
admittedly extremely low starting point); 
- increased by more than 95 % in the case of the Philippines; 
- increased by 18 % in the case of Thailand. In the context of a review, such an 
increase rate remains significant, as it appears likely that the imposition of anti­
dumping measures in 1991 (and their amendment in 1994), has had an impact on the 
rate of increase of Thai imports, even if limited by the decrease in Thai selling prices 
following the withdrawal of its undertaking by the main Thai exporter. 
(b) Market share 
(48) Imports from the three countries concerned, considered together, have captured 
between 1990 and 1994 an additional 10% of the Community market for the 
product in question (their share of the market indeed increased from 4.6% to 15%). 
In the meantime, in a growing market, the Community producers have lost a 
substantial share of the market, namely more than 8.5 percentage points, from 
57.3% in 1990 to 48.6% in 1994. This means that, globally, the position of other 
third countries has also been slightly eroded (a more detailed examination however 
showed, as explained at recital 70, that the P.R. of China substantially increased its 
share of the Community market to the detriment of exporting countries other than 
those subject to the current investigations). 
25 
(c) Prices of imports 
(49) For the model comparison, as in all previous investigations concerning disposable 
flint lighters, it was considered appropriate that only those lighters with an equal or 
almost equal amount of gas, and therefore a similar number of ignitions, be taken as 
a basis for the calculation of undercutting. 
(50) Where sales were made to unrelated importers, the comparison was made between 
the CIF import price, adjusted to duty paid, customer delivered level and the selling 
price in the EC of the Community producers at the same level of trade. Where sales 
were to a related importer, the price comparison was made on the basis of the sales 
to the first independent customer. 
The average level of price undercutting, expressed as a percentage of the 
Community industry's average price, was found to be more than 30% in all cases but 
one (namely the Filipino company related to the Swedish Match Group, whose 
exports to the Community, in extremely limited quantities, cannot be considered as 
representative of Filipino exports of disposable flint lighters). This means that 
prices of the disposable flint lighters imported from the countries concerned were 
significantly below the prices practised by the Community producers during the 
investigation period. 
26 
4. Situation of Community industry 
(a) General 
(51) The lighter market is very price sensitive. In order to be able to sell or to keep 
market share, the numerous producers and buyers on the market tend to adjust their 
prices to the lowest level or» offer. This means that faced with low priced dumped 
imports, the Community industry is either forced to lower its prices in order to try 
to maintain market share, production level and capacity utilisation, or led to lose 
market share if it tries to maintain its prices. 
(b) Capacity, production and sales 
(52) Between 1990 and the investigation period, capacity remained stable while 
production very slightly increased. Sales slightly increased in volume and very 
slightly increased in value. 
(c) Market share 
(53) The Community industry's market share decreased from 57.3% in 1990 to 48.6% in 
the investigation period. 
27 
(d) Prices 
(54) Prices, on average, slightly improved until 1992, then slightly decreased. It has to 
be noted in this respect that, in an attempt to keep its market share, the Community 
industry has, over the period examined, sold increasing quantities of products with 
special executions (such as "sleeved" and "printed" lighters, which would have 
normally justified price levels higher than those of "standard" lighters). The 
investigation thus showed that such higher price levels, which would normally be 
associated with more sophisticated products, could not be maintained, with a 
consequent impact on the Community industry's profitability. 
(e) Profitability 
(55) The Community industry's average return on sales of the like product, negative in 
1990, improved and became slightly positive in 1991. It deteriorated again, but 
remained positive, in 1992. In 1993, the average return was, again, negative. 
^During the investigation period, the average sales price was slightly above the 
average cost of production. 
(f) Employment 
(56) In an effort to reduce its costs, the Community industry continued to reduce the 
number of its employees (an 8% reduction between 1990 and 1993 was partly 
compensated for in 1994, but the number of employees remained, in 1994, 4% 
below its level of 1990). 
28 
5. Conclusion on injury 
(57) Prices of imports very substantially undercut the Community industry's average 
price, namely by more than 30% (with the exception of the Filipino company related 
to a Community producer whose exports were too limited to be considered as 
representative of Filipino exports). 
(58) Injury to the Community industry over the period under examination mainly took 
the following form: 
- Loss of market share: The Community producers have lost an 8.5 percentage 
point share between 1990 and 1994 (or even a 15 percentage point share if 1994 is 
compared with 1992). Given that, in terms of volume, their sales remained stable, 
this means that Community producers have been totally prevented from benefiting 
from the market expansion. 
- Insufficient profitability: The Community industry's overall profitability remained 
very low (particularly for an industry requiring substantial investments to innovate). 
This results from the fact that its prices, heavily undercut, could not be increased, 
even slightly, over the last five years (despite the fact that the share of the products 
with special executions, normally more expensive, increased). The Community 
producers' very low level of profitability reached in 1994, if allowed to continue, 
will not be sustainable. This creates a serious risk to see Community producers, in a 
relatively short time, relocating their production outside the Community. 
(59) In summary, the Community industry, which appeared to be in the process of 
recovering from the effects of past dumping, is still in a very precarious financial and 
market situation and on this basis, it is concluded that it has been adversely affected 
and has suffered injury which is sufficient for it to be classified as material. 
29 
F. CAUSATION OF INJURY 
(60) For the purpose of determining whether the injury suffered by the Community 
industry was caused by the Thai, Mexican and Filipino dumped imports and whether 
other factors caused or contributed to that injury, the following elements were 
examined: 
1. Effect of the dumped imports 
* 
(61) In examining the effects of the dumped imports, it was found that the increasing 
volume and decreasing prices of the dumped imports coincided with the loss of 
market share and the deterioration in the financial situation of the Community 
industry. 
(62) Indeed, between 1990 and the investigation period, the market share held by the 
dumped imports from the three countries concerned has significantly increased, 
namely from 4.6% to 15%, i.e. by more than 10% of total consumption, while the 
'• Community industry's market share decreased by more than 8.5% of total 
Community consumption. In addition, during the investigation period, prices of the 
disposable flint lighters imported from Thailand, the Philippines and Mexico were 
significantly below the prices practised by the Community producers (on average by 
more than 30%). 
Given that the market in question is highly price sensitive, as already explained at 
recital 51, it is clear that this significant price undercutting by Thai, Filipino and 
Mexican dumped imports, with consequentialy increased market share, has 
significantly affected the Community industry, even more so as the imported 
products were sold through the same sales channels and to the same customers as 
those of the Community industry. 
30 
2. Effect of other factors 
(a) Volume and prices of imports not sold at dumping prices 
(63) Imports from third countries other than those subject to anti-dumping measures or 
to the current investigations were found to have increased by 34% between 1990 
and 1994. However, this increase is not very significant in terms of market share 
(from 10% in 1990 to 11.3% in 1994). 
(64) As to the price levels of these imports, it has to be stressed that Eurostatistics data, 
based on a mix of different lighters, cannot be considered as a suitable basis for the 
purpose of establishing accurate unit prices. In any case, no substantiated evidence 
which would show that the actual price levels of these imports were significantly 
undercutting the Community industry's prices was submitted by any interested party. 
(b) Evolution of demand and pattern of consumption 
(65) As can be seen from the above (recitals 45 and 46) no contraction in demand or any 
other negative changes in the patterns of consumption took place during the period 
under examination. 
(c) Trade practices of, and competition between, third countries 
and Community producers 
(66) No evidence concerning the existence of restrictive trade practices of third 
countries, which could have been a source of injury to the Community industry, has 
been submitted. As far as competition between other third countries and 
Community producers is concerned, no other case than that of Chinese imports, 
examined below, appeared to warrant special consideration. 
31 
(d) Developments in technology, export performance 
and productivity of the Community industry 
(67) The ability of the Community industry to follow, or even- get ahead of, its 
competitors as regard technological developments is not in question (Community 
producers have indeed registered several valuable " patents concerning the 
manufacture of disposable flint lighters). 
(68) The Community industry's ability to compete on export markets outside the 
Community is also clearly established (Community producers' sales of disposable 
flint lighters to third countries rose by 14% between 1990 and 1994). 
(69) The same applies to the Community industry's productivity per worker, which has 
slightly improved between 1990 and 1994. 
(e) Impact of other imports sold at dumping prices 
(70) The case of the P.R. of China was found to warrant special consideration in this 
context. This country indeed appeared to have substantially increased its share of 
the Community lighter market over the period 1990 to 1994. Quantities exported 
from the P.R. of China to the Community were very substantial and prices not only 
dumped but also very low. By Council Regulation (EC) No 1006/95n, these 
imports were subjected to an increased anti-dumping duty. 
OJ No L 101, 04.05.1995, p. 38. 
32 
All co-operating exporters have claimed that they were forced to follow the trend 
set by the Chinese in order to continue to sell. Although tliis argument is not totally 
unfounded, it is considered that the fact that the P.R. of China has become one of 
the major players on the market (largely through dumping) cannot exempt other 
exporting countries, delivering quantities which are far from being negligible, from 
their responsibility for resorting to injurious dumping. 
In addition, this does not detract from the fact that severe competition of low priced 
dumped imports from Thailand, the Philippines and Mexico has significantly 
participated to the downward pressure put on disposable flint lighter prices in the 
Community. 
3. Conclusion on causation 
(71) Notwithstanding the fact that another element, namely the dumped imports from the 
P.R. of China, may have had a negative impact on the Community industry, it is 
considered that dumped imports from Thailand, the Philippines and Mexico have by 
themselves caused material injury to the Community industry. This conclusion is 
based on the various elements set out above and especially the level of price 
undercutting and the quantities concerned which resulted in a significant downward 
price pressure. 
33 
G. CONTINUATION OR RECURRENCE OF DUMPING AND INJURY 
(THAILAND) 
(72) Since, as explained at recital 4, the interim review in respect of imports originating 
in Thailand was likely not to be concluded before the end of the five year period of 
application of the measures concerned, the interim review concerning this country 
has also covered the circumstances due to be examined in the context of an expiry 
review as set out in Article 11 (2) of the Basic Anti-dumping Regulation. 
(73) In the course of this examination, carried out with a view to determining, in the 
assumption that the measures against Thailand would be due to expire, whether 
such expiry "would be likely to lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping and 
injury", the following elements were found to be relevant: 
- since, already before any foreseeable expiry, the Thai imports concerned have 
continued to be dumped (moreover at a higher level than the one originally 
.established), it is considered highly unlikely that the expiry of the measures could 
result in, or even coincide with, the disappearance of dumping; 
- similarly, as regards the injury analysis, it should be noted that, had the conclusion 
on cumulation not been reached and therefore had Thai imports been examined in 
isolation, they would still have been found injurious to such an extent (given the 
results of the investigation as to the volume and prices of such imports) that an 
increase in the level of the applicable anti-dumping duty would have been 
warranted. This finding, made in consideration of the existence (and level) of the 
current measures, would be strengthened, if anything, in the light of their possible 
expiry. 
34 
(74) Accordingly, it is considered that, since the persistent injurious dumping is such as 
to make the amendment of the existing measures against Thailand warranted, it 
follows that the expiry of the measures would be likely to lead to a continuation of 
dumping and injury and that the measures against Thailand should not be allowed to 
lapse. 
H. COMMUNITY INTEREST 
(75) In assessing whether it is in the Community's interest to take or modify anti­
dumping measures in respect of imports of disposable flint lighters from the 
countries concerned which have been dumped and have caused injury to the 
Community industry concerned, the views of all parties involved in the proceeding 
were considered. This examination was carried out with a view to determining 
whether compelling reasons existed which would make anti-dumping measures 
unwarranted. 
1. Community industry 
(76) Unless measures are taken in respect of Mexican and Filipino imports and the 
current measures in respect of Thailand amended in such a way that causes the 
Mexican, Filipino and Thai lighter prices to increase significantly, it is considered 
that the Community industry will have to lower further its prices or will lose market 
share at an increased rate. In both situations, the financial situation of the 
Community industry will worsen. As a consequence, production in the Community 
will no longer be viable and might have to cease, resulting in loss of jobs in both the 
industry itself and related sectors. 
35 
Also, the revenues required for investment in research and development of products 
in line with lighter safety standard and more sophisticated production techniques, 
which are vital in maintaining competitiveness in a highly competitive sector, will be 
drastically reduced. Consequently, the Community industry could then, after a 
relatively short period of sustained losses, do nothing but withdraw from production 
in the Community. 
It is therefore justified to give the disposable lighter industry, which has a long 
history of investment and resultant innovation in the Community, the chance to 
survive by removing the distortion effects of dumping and thus securing 
employment and future investment. 
2. Consumer interest 
(77) No information relating to the Community interest issue has been received from 
consumer organisations. The disposable lighter is an inexpensive product which, in 
general, is bought without special preference. Although differences in prices appear 
to have a determining effect on consumers' choice between different lighters, the 
absolute level of prices does not seem to have any influence on the decision to buy 
or not to buy such a disposable product. Therefore, a price increase, at the level of 
the importer and partly or wholly reflected throughout the distribution chain, will be 
likely to have no material impact on the total consumption of disposable flint 
lighters. 
It should also be stressed that, given the usual mark up between the CIF import 
price and the retail price, the lighter distribution chain is likely to be able to absorb 
most of the impact on the consumer of price increase which would result from anti­
dumping measures. Additionally, it should be noted that price increases, if any, will 
not have a major impact on the budget of the consumer due to the low unit price of 
this item and the very limited amount spent on it per individual. 
36 
3. Conclusion 
(78) Having examined the various interests involved, it is concluded that it is in the 
Community interest to impose anti-dumping measures to eliminate the injurious 
effects of the dumped imports under consideration and that, conversely, no 
compelling reasons exist which would make such measures unwarranted. 
Indeed, failure to take action could mean disappearance of production in the 
Community and, consequently, loss of employment and lack of investment. The 
price increase and the consequent relatively little extra cost for the consumer can by 
no means be considered to be of the same magnitude as the cost of the total 
disappearance of a Community industry. 
I. ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES 
1. Injury elimination level 
(79) In accordance with the relevant provisions of the Basic Anti-dumping Regulation, it 
was examined whether the measures should be. less than the dumping margins 
found, if such lesser measures would be adequate to remove the injury to the 
Community industry. For that purpose, it was considered that the selling prices of 
each exporter to unrelated importers, adjusted to duty paid, customer delivered 
levels (or, where sales were to a related importer, the resale price to the first 
independent customer) should be compared to selling prices established at the same 
level of trade and reflecting the Community producers' cost of production together 
with a reasonable amount of profit. 
37 
(80) For that purpose, it was considered that only those lighters with an equal or almost 
equal amount of gas, and therefore a similar number of ignitions, should be taken 
into account. As to the amount of profit considered as reasonable, it was examined 
whether the amount of profit used in the previous proceedings concerning 
disposable flint lighters, namely a margin of 15% on turnover, could be expected to 
be attained in the absence of the dumped imports concerned. 
(81) In this respect, it has to be recalled that the dumped imports from the P.R. of China 
may also have had a negative impact on the Community industry during the period 
under examination. Accordingly, in order to ensure that the remedy sought in 
respect of the dumped imports from the three countries concerned remains 
proportionate, it was considered appropriate and not unreasonable that the amount 
of profit used in the current injury elimination level calculations be limited to 10%. 
This limitation of the profit margin to 10% was considered appropriate in order to 
take account of the other factor of injury which may have affected the situation of 
the Community industry during the period currently under examination. It should 
not, therefore, be interpreted as entailing a global reconsideration of previous 
findings in respect of the lighter industry's reasonable profitability. 
(82) The injury elimination level calculations carried out on the above basis resulted in 
the average underselling margins, expressed as a percentage of the free at 
Community frontier price, to be higher than the corresponding dumping margins in 
the case of the Thai exporter Thai Merry, as well as in the case of the Mexican 
producer JMP (whose products are exported by Scripto Tokai Corp. USA). 
38 
For the Filipino co-operating producers, the average underselling margins, 
expressed as a percentage of the free at Community frontier price, found to be 
lower than the corresponding dumping margins, were: 
- production by Iwax Philippine Inc., and Iwahori Philippines 
Inc. and exports by Iwax Inc. Japan (single margin): 43% 
- Swedish Match Philippines, Inc. 17% 
2. Case of the Thai company Politop 
(83) As mentioned above, at the end of the original investigation concerning Thailand, 
the company Politop had an individual anti-dumping duty based on its dumping 
margin (namely 5.8%) imposed. On the occasion of the current review, this 
producer also co-operated but was unable to provide any data on the basis of which 
new dumping and injury margins could be calculated. Indeed, this producer only 
exported small quantities to the Community in 1992 and did not export to the 
Community any disposable flint lighters since then. 
(84) From the documents examined (notably the company's commercial 
correspondence), it emerged that this situation came about as a result of Politop's 
refusal to sell at prices below cost. Arguing that its behaviour had been consistently 
fair over the past four years, Politop claimed that the increased residual duty likely 
to be established for Thailand should not apply to its exports to the Community and 
requested to be granted a 0% duty rate, or at least that the current 5.8% duty rate 
be maintained. 
39 
(85) In seeking an appropriate solution, it was found that since Politop entirety ceased to 
export to the Community, the best available information in its case could not be 
considered to be the residual dumping margin determined during the investigation 
period. 
(86) In these circumstances, the best available information appeared to be Politop's own 
data from the previous investigation. It was therefore considered that the 
maintaining of Politop's current duty rate (5.8%) should constitute the most 
appropriate solution to its very specific situation. 
3. Undertakings 
(87) Having been informed of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of which 
it was intended to recommend the repealing of the existing measures concerning 
Thai imports and the imposition of definitive anti-dumping duties in respect of 
imports originating in the three countries concerned, one Thai producer, the sole 
^Mexican producer and the two related Filipino producers offered undertakings 
concerning their exports of the product concerned to the Community. 
After examination of these offers, the Commission considered the undertakings as 
acceptable since they would eliminate the injurious effects of dumping pursuant to 
Article 8 (1) of the Basic Anti-dumping Regulation. Furthermore, given in 
particular the type of sales channels of the exports concerned (which are made either 
to related parties or sole importers in the Community), it was considered that these 
undertakings could be monitored effectively. 
40 
(88) The Commission consulted the Advisory Committee on the acceptance of these 
undertakings and no objections were raised. The undertakings offered were 
accepted by Commission Decision 97/.. ./EC12. 
4. Individual and residual duties 
(89) Notwithstanding the acceptance of the undertakings offered by certain Thai, 
Mexican and Filipino producers: 
- the measures in force in respect of Thailand should be repealed; 
- individual duties should be imposed in respect of imports from the Thai company 
Politop (at the rate of 5.8%, as explained at recitals 83 to 86) and the Filipino 
company Swedish Match Philippines, Inc., which did not offer any undertaking (at 
the level of the lesser margin mentioned at recital 82, namely 17%); 
- residual duties should be imposed on imports of the product concerned originating 
in Thailand, the Philippines and Mexico, in order to underpin the undertakings by 
avoiding their circumvention. 
12 See page xx of this Official Journal. 
41 
Given the level of co-operation obtained from the three countries concerned (close 
to 100%), the residual definitive duties should be imposed, for each country, at the 
level established for the co-operating company with the highest dumping margin, 
(i.e. on the basis of the latter company's dumping margin or, where appropriate, 
underselling margin). On this basis, the residual duties should be set at 51.9% in the 
case of Thailand, 43.0% in the case of the Philippines and 27.1% in the case of 
Mexico, 
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 
Article J 
Regulation (EEC) No 3433/91, as amended by Regulation (EC) N° 398/94, imposing a 
definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of gas-fuelled, non-refillable pocket flint lighters 
originating, inter alia, in Thailand, is hereby amended as follows: 
1. at Article 1 (1), in fine, the words "and Thailand" shall be deleted; 
2. paragraph (d) of Article 1 (2) shall be repealed. 
Article 2 
1. Definitive anti-dumping duties are hereby imposed on imports of gas-fuelled, non-
refillable pocket flint lighters falling within CN Code ex 9613 10 00 (Taric code 
9613 10 00*10) originating in Thailand, the Philippines and Mexico. 
42 
2. The rate of the duties, applicable to the net, free-at-Community-frontier price, 
before duty, shall be as follows: 
(a) 51.9% for imports originating in Thailand (Taric additional code 8900) with the 
exception of imports which are produced and sold for export to the Community by 
Politop Co. Ltd, Bangkok where the rate shall be 5.8% (Taric additional code 
8937); 
(b) 43.0% for imports originating in the Philippines (Taric additional code 8900) 
with the exception of imports which are produced and sold for export to the 
Community by Swedish Match Philippines, Inc., Manila where the rate shall be 
17.0% (Taric additional code 8938); 
(c) 27.1% for imports originating in Mexico (Taric additional code 8900). 
3.(a) The duties referred to in paragraph 2 (a) shall not apply to gas-fuelled, non-refillable 
pocket flint lighters produced and sold for export to the Community by Thai Merry 
Co., Ltd. Samutsakorn (Taric additional code 8542); 
(b) The duties referred to in paragraph 2 (b) shall not apply to gas-fuelled, non-refillable 
pocket flint lighters produced by Iwax Philippine, Inc., Rosario, Cavité, or Iwahori 
Philippines, Inc., Mariveles, Bataan and sold for export to the Community by 
themselves or by Iwax Inc., Shizuoka, Japan (Taric additional code 8939); 
(c) The duties referred to in paragraph 2 (c) shall not apply to gas-fuelled, non-refillable 
pocket flint lighters produced by JMP Mexico, S.A. de C.V., Tijuana, and sold for 
export to the Community by Scripto Tokai Corp., Fontana, USA (Taric additional 
code 8940). 
43 
4. Unless otherwise specified, the provisions in force concerning customs duties shall 
apply. 
Article 3 
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official 
Journal of the European Communities. 
This regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. 
Done at 
For the Council 
The President 



^9 
ISSN 0254-1475 
COM(97) 62 final 
DOCUMENTS 
EN 02 11 
Catalogue number : CB-CO-97-055-EN-C 
ISBN 92-78-16104-7 
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 
L-2985 Luxembourg