COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 04.02.1998 
COM(1998) 56 final 
Proposal for a 
COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) 
IMPOSING A DEFINITIVE 
ANTI-DUMPING DUTY ON IMPORTS OF GLYPHOSATE 
ORIGINATING IN THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA 
AND COLLECTING DEFINITIVELY THE PROVISIONAL DUTY IMPOSED 
(presented by the Commission) 

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 
1. On 5 September 1997, the Commission imposed a provisional anti-dumping duty of 
21.1% on imports of glyphosate originating in the People's Republic of China (PRC). 
2. The Commission subsequently continued to seek all the information it deemed 
necessary for it definitive findings. The main conclusions are stated below. 
3. Given that the PRC is a non-market economy country, Brazil was used as an analogue 
market. On this basis the dumping margin was 38.2%. 
4. As regards injury and causality, the main conclusions were that, between 1991 and the 
IP (1 September 1994 to 31 August 1995) the Community industry suffered significant 
reductions in prices and profits, in addition to a continuous loss in market share. This 
situation coincided with a constant increase in the volume and market share of 
glyphosate originating in the PRC, at prices that undercut the prices of the Community 
industry. 
5. Importers in the Community argued that the situation of the Community industry was 
mainly due to the expiry of the patent on the Community market, held by one 
complainant Community producer up to 1991. However, it was found that irrespective 
of the expiry of the patent, the Chinese dumped imports clearly aggravated the 
injurious situation of the Community industry. 
6. As regards Community interest it was considered that, the duties would ensure 
increased competition on the Community market. 
7. Given that the injury margin determined, is lower than the dumping margin found, the 
definitive duty should be based on this lower level, in accordance with the provisions 
of Article 9(4) of Regulation (EC) N° 384/96. On this basis it is proposed to impose a 
definitive anti-dumping duty of 24.0% on imports of glyphosate originating in the 
People's Republic of China. 
8. A majority of Member States in the Anti-dumping Advisory Committee were in 
favour of the imposition of definitive measures. 
COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) N° 798 
OF 
IMPOSING A DEFINITIVE 
ANTI-DUMPING DUTY ON IMPORTS OF GLYPHOSATE 
ORIGINATING IN THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA 
AND COLLECTING DEFINITIVELY THE PROVISIONAL DUTY IMPOSED 
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION 
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, 
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) N° 384/96 of 22 December 19951 on 
protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European 
Community, as amended by Regulation (EC) N° 2331/962, and in particular Article 
9(4) thereof, 
Having regard to the proposal submitted by the Commission after consulting the 
Advisory Committee, 
Whereas: 
OJL 56 of 6.3.1996 
OJL3nof6J2.!996 
A. PROVISIONAL MEASURES 
(1) By Commission Regulation (EC) N° 1731/97" (hereinafter referred to as the 
"provisional duty Regulation") provisional anti-dumping duties were imposed 
on imports of glyphosate falling within CN codes ex 29 31 00 80 and ex 3808 
30 27 originating in the People's Republic of China. 
B. SUBSEQUENT PROCEDURE 
(2) Following the imposition of the provisional anti-dumping measures, a number 
of interested parties submitted comments in writing. 
(3) Importers in the Community, Chinese exporters, and both complainant 
Community producers requested and were granted a hearing. 
(4) The Commission continued to seek and verify all information deemed necessary 
for its definitive findings. 
(5) 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 and the definitive collection of amounts secured by way of provisional 
duties. They were also granted a period within which to make representations 
subsequent to this disclosure. 
OJL 243 of 5.9.1997 
(6) The oral and written comments submitted by the interested parties were 
considered, and, where deemed appropriate, taken into account in the 
Commission's definitive findings. 
C. PRODUCT UNDER CONSIDERATION AND LIKE PRODUCT 
/. Product under consideration 
(7) As stated in recital (10) of the provisional duty Regulation, the product under 
consideration is glyphosate. This product can be produced in different grades or 
forms of concentration of which the main ones are the following: formulated 
(generally with 36% glyphosate content), salt (with 62%), cake (with 84%) and 
acid (95%), 
In order to reduce the costs of transportation, distributors normally purchase 
glyphosate in a concentrated form (usually acid, but also salt) and further 
process it to obtain the formulated glyphosate, the only form that can be used as 
an end-product, i.e. as a non-selective herbicide. 
(8) The Chinese exporters and a number of importers in the Community claimed 
that the various forms of glyphosate above referred to could not be considered as 
one product because they presented substantial differences in cost terms, 
customer structure, price and end use. One importer argued, in particular, that 
the transformation of acid into formulated glyphosate required further chemical 
processing and that the resulting formulated product was of different chemical 
composition than the acid form. The importers considered that, as a 
consequence, the acid form, which accounted for the majority of all glyphosate 
imported from the People's Republic of China during the investigation period 
and the formulated form, which accounted for the majority of sales of the 
Community industry in the same period, could not be considered as a single 
product. 
(9) However, these claims were not considered justified for the following main 
reasons : 
It was found in the course of the investigation that there were no basic 
differences in the chemical characteristics and properties of all above 
mentioned forms of glyphosate. Indeed, although the acid constitutes an 
intermediate stage in the production of the formulated form, the acid 
already contains the essential chemical properties of the formulated 
product. 
Furthermore, although the above-mentioned forms of glyphosate have 
different grades^of concentration, thus justifying differences in cost or 
price, the transformation cost from one to the other are not substantial. 
Finally, it should be noted that all forms are dedicated to the same end-
use, i.e. as a herbicide, albeit in the case of acid, salt and cake, following 
further processing into formulated, and cannot be used for any other 
purpose. 
(10) It was therefore concluded that all forms should be considered as one product 
for the purpose of the investigation, irrespective of the glyphosate concentration. 
2. Like product 
(11) One importer claimed that the glyphosate production process used in the 
Community and in Brazil (the analogue country) is different from that used in 
the People's Republic of China and that, as a consequence, the products 
resulting from these different processes are not alike. 
(12) The investigation has confirmed that the production process used in the 
Community and Brazil, on one hand, and that used in the People's Republic of 
China, on the other, were different. However, the glyphosate produced by either 
processes was found to be identical in all respects. 
(13) In the absence of other arguments, it was confirmed that the glyphosate exported 
to the Community by the People's Republic of China and that produced and sold 
by the Community industry were alike in all respects. The same applied to 
glyphosate produced in Brazil, when compared to glyphosate exported from the 
People's Republic of China and to that produced in the Community. All these 
products are therefore like products within the meaning of Article 1(4) of 
Regulation (EC) N° 384/96 (hereinafter the "Basic Regulation"). 
D. DUMPING 
/. Analogue country 
(14) Some exporters and importers reiterated their opposition to the choice of Brazil 
as analogue country and made a number of counterproposals. The exporters and 
importers in particular argued that the Commission did not do enough to verify 
whether the alternative countries proposed were more appropriate than Brazil. 
(15) In that respect, the Commission made a close examination of the 
counterproposals. It should be noted that in Indonesia all producers refused to 
co-operate with the Commission's investigation. Whereas in Brazil there are 
two producers and significant imports of the product concerned , in Argentina, 
Australia, India and Malaysia the markets are largely dominated by companies 
related to the main complaining producer located in the Community, i.e. 
Monsanto. In those circumstances, it was concluded that none of the countries 
proposed were more appropriate than Brazil. 
2. Normal value 
(16) Exporters requested the Commission to give justification for the determination 
of a constructed normal value for acid while domestic prices were used for the 
formulated product. 
(17) In this respect it should be noted that as clarified to the exporters in the course 
of the investigation, normal value for acid was constructed pursuant to Article 2 
(3) of the Basic Regulation because the domestic sales to unrelated customers, 
although they were sold in representative quantities, were not sold in the 
ordinary course of trade. In the absence of further arguments concerning the 
establishment of normal value, the provisional determination is hereby 
confirmed. 
3. Export price 
(18) In the absence of further arguments concerning the establishment of export 
price, the provisional determination is hereby confirmed. 
4. Comparison 
(19) Exporters claimed that the Commission in determining the dumping margin had 
compared export prices of acid with the weighted average normal value of both 
acid and the formulated product. In this respect it is noted that export prices for 
acid were only compared with the normal value for acid. The same method was 
used for formulated. On that basis a weighted average dumping margin was 
then calculated. 
5. Dumping margins 
(20) The methodology used to determine the definitive dumping margin is the same 
as that used for the calculation of the provisional dumping margin. In the 
absence of any amendments to the establishment of the normal value and the 
export price, the provisional determination is hereby confirmed. 
(21) The dumping margin established for definitive determinations expressed as a 
percentage of the CIF price at Community frontier, remains at 38.2%. 
E. INJURY 
/. Consumption in the Community market 
(22) In determining total apparent consumption on the Community market, the 
Commission added the sales of Community producers to the imports into the 
Community. 
(23) A further examination of the imports volumes originating in both the People's 
Republic of China and other third countries resulted in minor changes in the 
total volume of imports and, consequently, of consumption figures for the 
period examined. On this basis, Community consumption increased by 130% 
between 1991 and the investigation period. 
2 Volume and market share of imports 
fa 
(24) A number of importers contested the determination of market share held by 
imports originating in the People's Republic of China, as established in the 
provisional duty Regulation. They alleged that this market share was 
overestimated because it did not take into account the relative importance of 
imports from other third countries, such as the USA, India, Switzerland and 
Japan, which, according to these importers, were substantial under Eurostat 
statistics. 
(25) In this context, it is recalled that, at the provisional stage, the determination of 
imports originating in third countries other than the People's Republic of China, 
was based on information provided by co-operating importers in the 
Community. As regards these imports, it was not considered appropriate to use 
Eurostat, because no precise figures for these imports could be established under 
Eurostat statistics. Indeed, Eurostat is available per CN code only. As the CN 
codes applicable to glyphosate are also applied to products other than the 
product concerned this course of action was deemed appropriate. In addition, it 
has been confirmed that as regards imports originating in the USA (by far the 
largest single import quantities declared under Eurostat), products other than 
glyphosate were imported under the same CN code as glyphosate, during the 
period examined. This would also appear to be the case as regards imports from 
other origins, since for some of these origins the import volumes reported by 
Eurostat largely exceeded the import volumes of glyphosate reported by 
importers. 
For the reasons stated above, and in the absence of information which would 
justify a different approach, the volume of imports originating in third countries 
other than the People's Republic of China was definitively determined on the 
basis of information supplied by the importers. 
(26) As regards imports originating in the People's Republic of China, at provisional 
stage, these imports were based on Eurostat, since the Commission was not 
aware of products other than glyphosate being imported from the People's 
Republic of China under the same CN codes as glyphosate. However, at the 
definitive stage it was considered appropriate to also base the findings 
concerning the development of Chinese imports on information supplied by the 
importers , since this information was considered reliable. 
(27 ) The above analysis resulted in small changes in the assessment of consumption 
(recital 23 above) and consequently of the market shares of both imports and 
sales of the Community producers. 
(28) Following the above, the total volume of dumped imports of glyphosate 
originating in the People's Republic of China increased continually and 
substantially, from a very low level in 1991 to 1487 tonnes in the investigation 
period. Glyphosate of Chinese origin was sold in its three main forms (acid, salt 
and formulated) and was sold in larger quantities in some Member States than in 
others. 
10 
(29) The market share of these imports followed a similar progressive trend, from 
very low levels between 1991 and 1993, to 9% in 1994 and 11% in the 
investigation period, i.e. showing a very rapid rate of increase after 1993. 
3. Prices of the dumped imports and price undercutting 
(30) A number of arguments were put forward by both the Community industry and 
importers regarding the price undercutting assessment made at the provisional 
stage. 
(31) In this context, it is recalled that prices were compared at the formulated stage. 
In order to ensure a fair comparison of prices, and given the existence of a 
variety of types of formulated glyphosate on the market, the prices of which can 
vary considerably both according to the concentration of the product and the 
type of surfactant used, the Commission services selected the most common 
formulation, called "3A", which has 360g of glyphosate content per litre. 
Consequently, for this comparison, one type of "3A" produced by the 
Community industry, containing a special type of surfactant 
(alkylpolyoalkylammoniumquat), designed to increase its efficiency, was 
excluded from the calculation. 
il 
(32) One Community producer argued, however, that all types of formulations 
having identical concentrations are interchangeable from the consumer 
viewpoint irrespective of the surfactant used. According to this producer, all 
such types, including the one with the special surfactant, should therefore be 
used for a correct assessment of price undercutting by Chinese formulations. 
However, the information available indicated that the product with special 
surfactant was of better quality regarding efficiency and environmental impact 
than other types of identical concentration and, indeed, was sold at a price 
significantly higher than that of more common "3A" formulations of the 
Community industry. In order to ensure the comparability of prices, the 
approach followed at provisional stage was therefore maintained. 
(33) Importers contested the prices used for the Chinese imports, which they argued 
were not representative because Chinese imports of formulated product 
accounted for a small percentage of all glyphosate imported from the People's 
Republic of China during the investigation period. 
(34) As mentioned above it should be noted that the price undercutting assessment 
was made for formulated product combining both the prices of direct imports of 
formulated product provided by one exporter, and the prices of formulated 
product processed in the Community from Chinese acid, provided by co­
operating importers in the Community. On this basis, the prices used accounted 
for a representative volume of all imports of glyphosate originating in the 
People's Republic of China. 
12 
(35) On the basis of the above-mentioned approach, the price undercutting margins 
during the investigation, period were found to range from 2 to 13% of the 
Community industry's corresponding weighted average sales unit price. 
4. Situation of the Community industry 
4.1. Market share 
(36) The market share of the Community industry decreased continuously from 98% 
in 1991, to 95% in 1992, to 93% in 1993, to 86% in 1994 and to 85% in the 
investigation period. 
4.2. Profitability 
(37) The profitability of the Community industry was re-assessed to take account of 
factors such as financing costs which, in the case of one producer, had been 
incorrectly determined at the provisional stage. It was confirmed that one 
producer was incurring heavy financial losses in the investigation period. The 
profitability of the other producer decreased substantially reaching very low 
levels in the investigation period. 
In addition, a calculation of the profitability of this producer for the product 
types more exposed to competition from the People's Republic of China and 
used in the undercutting assessment revealed significant financial losses in sales 
of such product types. 
13 
4.3. Employment 
(38) One importer argued that the employment figure for the Community industry 
provisionally determined, seemed overestimated because glyphosate production 
does not normally require as many people. The Commission confirms that, on 
the basis of verified information, in the investigation period the Community 
industry employed some 814 people in connection with the glyphosate activity. 
(39) In the absence of other arguments, the other findings concerning the situation of 
(he Community industry, as slated in recitals (46) to (53) of the provisional duly 
Regulation, are confirmed. 
4.4. Conclusion on injury 
(40) Importers argued that in the light of the increase in capacity, production, sales 
volume and employment of the Community industry, it could not be considered 
that this industry had suffered material injury in the period examined. 
However, it is recalled, that, in accordance with Article 3(5) of the Basic 
Regulation, any one or more of the injury factors set out in this provision cannot 
necessarily give decisive guidance as to the impact of the dumped imports on 
the situation of the Community industry. 
14 
In this context, it is noted, that in spite of the positive development of the above 
factors, which took place, in the context of a significant expansion of the market, 
during the period examined, the Community industry's market share decreased 
significantly, as did its prices and profits. Furthermore, it is recalled that, in the 
investigation period, and as underlined by the analysis of imports prices made in 
recitals (41) to (44) of the provisional duty Regulation, the Chinese dumped 
prices of acid were found to be below the manufacturing costs of acid of the 
Community industry. This shows the magnitude of the impact of such imports 
on the situation of this industry. 
The conclusion whereby the Community industry suffered material injury during 
the period examined, as set out in recitals (54) and (55) of the provisional duty 
Regulation, is, therefore, confirmed. 
F. CAUSATION 
/. Patent expiry 
(41) Importers claimed that the situation of the Community industry and, in 
particular, the decrease in prices and profits of this industry, was mainly a 
consequence of the expiry of the patent held by one Community producer up to 
1991. The importers argued, in particular, that the decrease in glyphosate prices 
on the Community market was in line with other cases of patent expiry and that, 
as a consequence, the decrease in profitability of the former patent holder was to 
be expected. 
15 
As regards any losses suffered by the other producer, these were claimed by the 
importers to be due to lack of anticipation of the price evolution that the market 
would follow after the expiry of the patent. The importers further claimed that 
the prices of glyphosate on the Community market during the investigation 
period were comparable to prices of the product on other world markets, e.g. 
Argentina, which showed that following the expiry of the patent the prices in the 
Community market had reached a normal level. 
(42) It should be noted, in the first instance, that no new evidence was submitted on 
this subject following provisional findings, which would justify a change in the 
conclusions regarding causality. In particular, it is noted that as regards the 
comparison of prices of glyphosate in the Community and Argentina, no 
sufficient evidence was provided on the prices in the latter market or, indeed, on 
whether the conditions of competition in Argentina would be comparable to 
those in the Community following the expiry of the patent. It should further be 
noted that given the different situations for different markets as regards patent, 
no world price could be established for this product. 
(43) Concerning the profitability of the Community industry, it is recalled that in 
spite of considerable reductions in costs of this industry, its prices decreased 
further than costs. In addition, the investigation revealed that this decrease in 
prices was considerably accelerated between 1993 and the investigation period, 
when the Chinese imports appeared on the Community market in significant 
volumes. This shows that, irrespective of the patent expiry, the Chinese imports 
had a negative impact on the level of Community market prices. 
16 
(44) It is further noted with regard to the other Community producer which entered 
the market after the expiry of the patent, that it had made detailed forecasts of 
the decrease in prices that would follow the expiry of the patent. However, it is 
clear that prices went to much lower levels than anticipated. 
(45) Finally, it is stressed that in the investigation period, the Chinese imports of acid 
were found to be below the manufacturing costs of the Community industry, i.e. 
at a level excluding any general, sales or administrative expenses, thus exerting 
a continuous downward pressure on the prices of the formulated product. 
(46) In view of all the above elements, the conclusion in the provisional duly 
Regulation is maintained that the dumped prices largely influenced the level of 
prices and profits of the Community industry in the period examined. 
Furthermore, it is recalled that the impact of the dumped Chinese imports 
resulted in an increase of market share of these imports, to the detriment of the 
market share of the Community industry. 
2. Other imports 
(47) As regards the effects of imports other than those originating in (he People's 
Republic of China, one importer claimed that the Commission had 
underestimated the volume of these imports, in particular of those originating in 
Hungary. 
17 
For the reasons explained in recital (25) above, it is recalled that the volume of 
imports was based on information provided by importers. In this context, it is 
noted that other imports were found to have taken place from Hungary, Korea, 
Taiwan, Slovenia, India and Malaysia. The total market share of these imports 
was, in the investigation period, 3.2%, with individual market shares of less than 
1 % in all cases with the exception of Hungary, As regards Hungary, its market 
share was 2% in the investigation period, however, there was no evidence that 
the Hungarian prices were dumped. 
(48) In the light of the above, it is unlikely that other imports had any significant 
impact on the situation of the Community industry. 
3. Conclusion on causation 
(49) Although it is not contested that the patent expiry had an impact on the 
Community industry's situation, it was concluded that the imports concerned 
have, in isolation, caused material injury to the Community industry The 
findings set out in recitals (56) to (60) of the provisional duty Regulation, 
concerning causation, are confirmed 
F. COMMUNITY INTEREST 
/. Impact on importers/fqrmulators 
(50) Importers in the Community claimed that the imposition of anti-dumping duties 
would force them to cut down an important part of their activities. However, 
since this claim was not substantiated and for the reasons set out in recitals (66) 
and (67) of the provisional duty Regulation, it could not be considered justified. 
2. Competition in the Community 
(51 ) One importer alleged that the imposition of duties would strengthen the position 
of the former patent holder in the Community market, thus preventing 
competition from developing in this market. 
(52) In this respect, it is considered that, on the contrary, measures would ensure the 
viability of new producers in the Community, as well as o\' (hose already 
producing, thus enlarging the number of competitors on the market. 
(53) As explained in recitals (70) and (71) of the provisional duty Regulation, it is 
noted that, following the expiry of the patent, two new producers have entered 
the Community market. However, the investments made by these new producers 
are being jeopardised by the continued presence of the dumped imports, the 
prices of which have apparently continued to decrease after the investigation 
period. 
It is therefore considered essential that fair conditions of competition are 
established on the Community market in order to ensure the viability of these 
producers, while encouraging the emergence of new ones. 
(54) Furthermore, given the difficulties encountered by the new producers due to the 
Chinese dumped prices there is a likelihood, that without the imposition of 
measures, competition in the Community would be limited to the former patent 
holder and the Chinese, to the extent that the former patent holder would 
economically be in a position to compete with the very low dumped prices of 
the Chinese exporters. It is considered that new entrants would ensure a more 
effective competition on the Community market as there would be a greater 
number of players involved on that market. In doing so, a greater variety of 
reliable sources of supply for Community consumers would be maintained than 
would be the case if Chinese imports were the only alternative to the former 
patent holder products. 
3. Conclusion on Community interest 
(55) In the absence of any other arguments, the conclusions on Community interest 
as stated in recitals (61) to (74) of the provisional duty Regulation are 
maintained. 
20 
H. DEFINITIVE DUTY 
f a 
(56) The product type useâ as a reference to determine the duty rate was the acid 
form of the product concerned, because the acid form represented 67% of the 
volume of glyphosate imported from the People's Republic of China during the 
investigation period. Moreover, acid is the common base of all forms of 
glyphosate exported from the People's Republic of China and produced in the 
Community. 
(57) For the purpose of calculating the injury elimination level, the Commission 
considered that the prices of the dumped imports should be compared with the 
production costs of acid of the Community industry plus a reasonable level of 
profit. In this context, the Community industry contested both the determination 
of its cost of production at provisional stage, in so far as it did not include 
certain R&D costs claimed by this industry, and the profit level used by the 
Commission, which the industiy considered to be underestimated for a product 
in the agrochemical sector. 
(58) Specifically, the Community industry argued, that the Commission, at 
provisional stage, had improperly classified glyphosate acid as a commodity 
product and that this had resulted in an underestimation of both the R&D costs 
and the profit margin attributed to this product. The Community industry 
claimed that glyphosate acid is a highly technical product that requires 
continued research and development for compliance with environmental 
requirements. 
(59) In this context, the producer concerned provided sufficient additional evidence 
showing the link of certain R&D costs with the product type concerned. 
(60) Therefore, the cost of production of the Community industry, for the purpose of 
establishing the non injurious price level, was adjusted, where appropriate, to 
take account of these R&D costs. 
(61) No further evidence was provided on R&D costs relating to glyphosate which 
should be taken into account at definitive stage. Furthermore, as far as the 
former patent holder is concerned, and given the effective duration of the patent 
protection for this company, it can be considered that any other significant 
research costs in relation to this product were already recovered. 
(62) As regards profit, the Community industry argued that a profit level higher than 
that used at provisional stage would be adequate for the glyphosate business. In 
this respect, it should be noted that during much of the period examined, the 
prices on the Community market were influenced by the former existence of a 
patent, and latterly, by the presence of dumped Chinese prices. Therefore, it was 
not possible to obtain reliable information on the profit level this industry would 
be able to obtain in normal conditions of competition. 
22 
(63) In any event, it should be borne in mind that, irrespective of whether acid should 
be qualified as a commodity, glyphosate has benefited during an extended time 
period from patent protection. Therefore, the level of profit of 5% on turnover 
was considered reasonable. It should be noted that the same level of profit was 
considered appropriate for producers in the analogue country (see recital (26) of 
the provisional duty Regulation). 
(64) Furthermore, a small downward correction was found to be required in the 
amount of post importation adjustment added to the Chinese CIF export price of 
acid, in order that the comparison be made at the same level of trade. 
(65) On the basis of the revised figures, the weighted average export price of acid, 
for the investigation period, on a CIF Community frontier level, adjusted to take 
account of customs duty and post importation costs, was compared with the 
weighted average cost of production of the Community industry, increased by a 
profit margin of 5%. 
(66) This comparison resulted in an injury margin of 24.0%, on the basis of the net, 
free-at-Community frontier average price before duty. 
(67) Since the injury margin is lower than the dumping margin found, the definitive 
anti-dumping duties should be based on this lower level, in accordance with the 
provisions of Article 9(4) of the Basic Regulation. 
? ) 
I. COLLECTION OF THE PROVISIONAL DUTY 
(68) Considering the conclusions on dumping and injury definitively established, and 
that the rate of definitive duty is higher than that provisionally determined, the 
amounts secured by way of the provisional anti-dumping duty should be 
definitively collected at the rate established in the provisional duty Regulation. 
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 
Article 1 
1. A definitive anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on imports of glyphosate 
falling within CN Code ex 2931 00 95 (code Taric 29310095*80) and ex 3808 
30 27 (code Taric 38083027* 10) originating in the People's Republic of China. 
24 
2. The rate of duty applicable to the net, free-at-Community- frontier price, before 
duty shall be 24%.0. r { 
3. Unless otherwise specified, the provisions in force concerning customs duties 
shall apply. 
Article 2 
The amount secured by way of provisional anti-dumping duty pursuant to Regulation 
(EC) N° 1731/97 shall be definitively collected at the duty rate provisionally imposed. 
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 Brussels,... 
For the Council, 
The President 
25 

ISSN 0254-1475 
COM(98) 56 final 
DOCUMENTS 
EN 11 02 10 
Catalogue number : CB-CO-98-056-EN-C 
ISBN 92-78-30776-9 
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 
L-2985 Luxembourg 
2G