COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMvlUNITIES 
COM(89) 395 final 
Brussels, 8 August 1989 
Proposal for a 
COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) 
imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of calcium metal 
originating In the People's Republic of China and the Soviet Union 
and definitively collecting the provisional ant I-dumping duty 
Imposed on such Imports 
(presented by the Commission) 
~A-
TgrPTAWAiray HPumAwm 
1. By Regulation (KBC) No 707/891) the Commission Imposed a 
provisional anti-dimrping duty on Imports of oalcium metal 
originating in the People's Republic of China and the Soviet Union. 
2. By Council Regulation (BBC) No 2165/892) the period of validity of 
the provisional duty imposed on Chinese and Soviet Imports of 
oalcium metal was extended for a further period not exceeding two 
months. This provisional duty will expire on 21 September 1989. 
3. After the imposition of the provisional duties, an independent 
importer (who also transforms the calcium metal) and the sole 
Community producer requested and were granted hearings. Both these 
two parties made their views known in written submissions and were 
informed of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of 
which it was Intended to recommend the Imposition of definitive 
duties. The Chinese and Soviet exporters were also informed of the 
intention to impose definitive duties higher than the amount of the 
provisional anti-dumping duties. 
4. As regards the description of the product, an Importer has ni Aimai 
that the Imported Chinese and Soviet oalcium is not a like product 
to oalcium produced In the Community. The Commission, having 
examined the arguments, has found that, although Community produced 
oalcium is of a slightly lower degree of purity than the Imported 
calcium, Community produced oalcium and the Imported Chinese and 
Soviet product have sufficiently dose physical and technical 
characteristics, the same end uses and the same markets to be 
considered as like products. 
5. As regards the dumping, definitive normal value was established in 
the same way as the provisional normal value, i.e. by reference to 
domestic selling prices in a market economy country, the United 
States of America. An importer has contested the calculation 
alleging that prices were based on inter company transactions by 
1) ŒT No L 78, 21.3.1989, p.10 
2) OT No L 208, 20.7.1989, p. 1 
- 2 -
the US producer giving excessive profits and the importer suggested 
that normal value should be determined on the basis of constructed 
value. Tills suggestion has been rejected since the Commission had 
only taken sales transactions to Independent end users and found 
that these sales allowed a reasonable but not excessive profit. 
One comparison of normal value to export prices, after taking 
account where appropriate of differences affecting price 
comparability, showed Chinese and Soviet exports were being dumped 
in the Community with weighted average dumping margins of 21.8% and 
22.0% for the Chinese and Soviet product respectively. 
6. An importer has also disputed the preliminary conolusions as 
regards injury on the grounds that: 
- the period chosen to examine Injury Is not appropriate; 
- the Community producer's decision to Invest in new capacity was 
unjustified and was responsible for low capacity utilization; 
- the Community producer has chosen not to supply the importer 
resulting in self Inflicted Injury; 
- the fall in selling prices of the Community producer has been 
due to other factors than just low prices of imported products; 
- other third countries have also been responsible for any injury 
caused; 
- prior to 1985, it was the Community producer who practiced 
price undercutting and has forced the Chinese and Soviet 
exporters to follow these price trends. 
After due consideration, however, none of the above arguments put 
forward by the importer leads the Commission to amend the 
preliminary conclusions set out in the above Regulation, which are 
consequently confirmed. 
7. Concerning Community Interest, an Importer has also contested the 
Commission's preliminary oonoluslonfl claiming that: 
- calcium Is no longer used In the production of uranium; 
- the impact of a duty would significantly Increase its costs and 
threaten its viability to oontlTme in business; 
- 3 -
- it Is In the interests of the Community to pursue developments 
in the industrial sector of new types of magnets, which the 
importer as a transformer is a leading contributor through the 
use of Imported Chinese and Soviet calcium. 
After due consideration, the Commission Is unable to accept the 
claims made by the importer. The Commission considers that, in 
view of the injury suffered by the Community industry, the limited 
Impact of such a duty on prices for Community end users, and the 
strategic importance of continuing to produce calcium within -Use 
Community, the Community interest requires action to be taken. 
8. The Commission has re-examined the purchase prices of the Community 
importers with the selling price necessary to provide an adequate 
profit (8% margin on the sales price) for the Community producer, 
the injury threshold. Taking into account the conclusions reached 
concerning injury, that there has been price undercutting and that 
the Community producer has suffered considerable financial losses 
in selling below its cost of production, the Commission has 
concluded that definitive anti-dumping duties should be imposed 
against imports of calcium originating in the People's Republio of 
China and the Soviet Union higher than the amount of the 
provisional anti-dumping duties and equivalent to the definitive 
dumping margins found, which are below the Injury threshold. The 
Commission subsequently proposes the Council Impose a definitive 
anti-dumping duty of 21.8% and 22.0% of the net free-at-Community-
frontier price before duty of imported calcium metal originating in 
the People's Republio of China and the Soviet Union respectively. 
9. The Anti-dumping Committee has been consulted and has given a 
favourable opinion. 
Proposal for a 
COUNCIL RBOTATICN (BBC) 
imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of calcium 
metal originating in the People's Republic of China and the Soviet 
TTnjnn jyri definitively collecting the provisional anti-dumping 
duty Imposed on such imports 
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN OCWMDNITIES, 
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economie 
Community, 
Having regard to Council Régulation (BBC) No 2423/88 of 11 July 1988 on 
protection against dumped or subsidised imports from countries not 
members of the European CommunltyCl)f Q^ in particular Article 12 
thereof, 
Having regard to the proposal submitted by the Commission after 
consultation within the Advisory Committee as provided for under the 
above Regulation, 
Whereas: 
A. RrovislODal action 
1. The Commission, by Regulation (KBC) No 707/89(2), imposed a 
provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of calcium metal 
originating In the People's Republio of China and the Soviet 
Union. That duty was extended for a maximum period of two months 
by Regulation (BBC) No 2165/89.(3). 
Cl) Off No L 209, 2.8.1988, p. 1 
(2) OJNoL 78, 21.3.1989, p. 10 
(3) Off NO L 208, 20.7.1989, p. 1 
- 2 -
B. Subsequent r^xwv^n^ 
(2) Following the imposition of the provisional anti-dumping duty, the 
Community producer and an Independent Importer (who also 
transforms the product) requested, and were granted, an 
opportunity to be heard by the Commission. They also made written 
submissions making known their views on the findings. 
(3) Upon request, the Community producer and the Importer were 
informed of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of 
which it was intended to recommend the imposition of definitive 
duties and the definitive collection of amounts secured by way of 
a provisional duty. They were also granted a period within which 
they could make further representations to these disclosure 
meetings. The Importer made comments which were considered prior 
to the Commission finalising its conclusions. 
The Chinese and Soviet exporters were also informed of the 
intention to recommend the imposition of definitive duties wgh«r 
than the amount of the provisional anti-dumping duties. The 
Chinese exporter responded by repeating an allegation concerning 
injury, which was considered prior to the Commission finalising 
its conduisions. 
C. Description of the product 
(4) In its provisional findings, recital 6 of Regulation (BBC) No 
707/89, the Commission had concluded that calcium metal (calcium) 
is used essentially In the metallurgical and uranium industries. 
This conclusion was contested by one importer, who also transforms 
the product in question, on the grounds that oaloium is no longer 
used In the production of uranium. The Commission has examined 
this fiiA-im ftrri hag found that, whilst fifj'l'"*1rifi> oontlnues to be used 
In the uranium Industry, this usage is Indeed limited and that 
fiftirrivtm ±Q used essentially in the metallurgical Industry. 
(5) The same Importer has also claimed that the imported oaloium from 
the People's Republic of China and -Use Soviet Union Is not a like 
product to oaloium produced in the Community. The Importer has 
alleged that Community^produoed oaloium Is of a poorer quality and 
- 3 -
is more difficult to transform than Chinese or Soviet imported 
calcium and that only Chinese and Soviet imported calcium can be 
used for many of the uses of calcium metal. 
Concerning physical and technical characteristics, although 
Ccmmunity^prcduoed calcium, without distillation, is of a slightly 
lower degree of purity than Chinese and Soviet imported calcium, 
both the Ccnnraunity-produoed calcium and the imported products are 
commercial grade material and both need further distillation to 
produce the highest purity grade of calcium. 
The majority of calcium end use Is for metallurgical applications, 
where, in many cases, Community~prodnoed calcium is directly 
substitutable by Chinese and Soviet imported calcium. The 
importer has claimed that only calcium from the People's Republio 
of China and the Soviet Union can be used for certain technical 
applications In the iron and steel Industry and for calcium 
thermio réactions, although this claim was denied by the Community 
producer. The importer has also requested that an expert be 
nominated to carry out a technical analysis of the products in 
question. This request has not been accepted since the Importer, 
as a transformer, whilst claiming to experience difficulties In 
using the Community product, has itself acknowledged that it can 
technically use the Community-produced calcium Instead of the 
Chinese or Soviet imported product. The Importer has even 
complained that the Community producer has refused to supply 
immunity produced calcium for its use. (See recital 15 below). 
(6) The Soviet exporter had also claimed during the procedure that its 
product was not a like product to the Community producer, but on 
the grounds that Soviet-produced calcium was poorer in quality. 
No end user of calcium has either requested a hearing or made any 
written submission to contest the Commission's findings on this 
subject. 
In these circumstances, the Commission has cynniiiH^ that, 
although Ccramunity-produoed calcium is of a slightly lower degree 
of purity than Chinese and Soviet Imported calcium, Community 
- 4 -
produced calcium and the imported product from the People's 
Republic of China and the Soviet Union have sufficiently dose 
physical and technical characteristics, the same end uses and the 
same markets to be considered as like products. 
(7) In the light of the findings presented in Regulation 
(BBC) No 707/89 (recitals 6 to 8), and of the considerations set 
out above, the Council concludes that the Chinese and Soviet 
imports are like products to calcium produced in the Community, 
within the meaning of Article 2(12) of Regulation (BBC) No 
2423/88. 
D. TTnmnlng 
(8) In establishing the nnrpma.1 value, the rsruwrnipprfr^ had to take 
account of the fact that neither the People's Republic of China 
nor the Soviet Union have a market economy and that, therefore, In 
aooordance with Regulation (BBC) No 2423/88, normal value'should 
be determined with reference to prices or costs of a producer or 
producers in a market economy country. In this connection the 
Commission based its calculation of normal value on the domestic 
market prices of the like product In the United States and set out 
its reasons for so doing In recital 11 of Regulation (EEC) No 
707/89. 
One Importer contested the calculation of the normal value 
alleging that the prices used by the Commission were based on 
Inter-Kxanrpany transactions by the US producer and that, as a 
result, the US producer had made excessive profits. To support 
this claim, the Importer produced statistics for US consumption 
for the year 1983 and suggested, therefore, that normal value 
should be determined on the basis of constructed value, as per 
Article 2(5)(b) of Council Regulation (BBC) No 2423/88. 
The Commission has only taken sales transactions to independent 
end users into account for the period of the investigation, year 
1987, to determine prices and, as pointed out in recital 11 of 
Regulation (BBC) 707/89, the prices charged by the United States 
- 5 -
producer d^r**^ the reference period allowed a reasonable but not 
excessive profit. The Council therefore confirms the Commission's 
provisional findings concerning the basis for determining the 
normal value. 
(9) As regards the calculation of normal value, the Commission has 
only considered the United States sales prices of calcium crowns 
and pieces, requiring no distillation or major transformation of 
form by the producer, and determined a weighted average normal 
value. 
(10) Export prices were determined on the basis of prices actually paid 
or payable for the Chinese or Soviet product sold for export to 
the Community. 
(11) In comparing normal value with export prices, the Commission took 
account, where appropriate, of différences affecting price 
comparability, Including transport, Insurance, handling, loading 
and anoilliary costs, commissi cms paid in respect of the sales 
under consideration, and credit terms. All comparisons were made 
on an ex-works basis. 
One Importer has claimed that an adjustment for physical 
characteristics should be made as the quality of the US'prcduced 
calcium is slightly lower than that of the Chinese and Soviet 
product. This request has not been accepted as the normal value 
In the United States market was determined by restricting the 
calculation to sales prices of calcium crowns and pieces, 
requiring no distillation or major transformation, i.e. those 
products directly comparable to, and which compete directly with, 
Chinese and Soviet products. 
(12) The comparison showed that Chinese and Soviet exports to the 
Community were being dumped during the reference period, weighted 
average dumping margins, calculated as a percentage of the cif 
price of the product at the Community frontier, excluding customs 
duties, are 21.8 % for the Chinese product and 22.0 % for the 
- 6 -
Soviet product. The Council confirms these definitive dumping 
margins. 
B. Injury 
(13) As regards the Injury caused by the dumped imports, one importer 
has presented six arguments to contest the Commission's 
conclusions as set out In Regulation (BBC) No 707/89. 
The first argument Is that year 1988 cannot serve as the reference 
year for examining Injury as the Community production in year 1985 
is not in line with the trend for production seen in years 1981 to 
1983. 
The argument cannot be accepted since the period to examine 
Injury, the years from 1985 to 1987, was chosen as these years 
corresponded to the most recent period to examine the evolution of 
Imports into the Community. As regards the figures of production 
for this period, they have been verified by the Commission. 
References made by the importer to trends in the earlier years of 
1981 to 1983 are not therefore considered relevant. 
(14) The second argument Is that the producer's decision to Invest In 
new capacity was not justified and was responsible for the fall In 
capacity utilisation. 
This claim is considered to be unfounded. In recital 20 of 
Regulation (BBC) No 707/89, the Commission had referred to 
investments made by the Community producer in 1985 and 1986. The 
decision, however, to invest in new capacity, representing a 35% 
Increase, was taken In 1984 when capacity utilisation was at a 
level of 92% and with the market in a period of expansion. In any 
case, the announcement to double capacity, to which the importer 
is referring, was consequently suspended and has not taken place. 
(15) The third argument concerns a claim that the Community producer 
has suffered self-inflicted injury in refusing to supply calcium 
- 7 -
to the importer, who has begun Court proceedings in one Member 
State against the Community producer alleging abuse of dominant 
position. 
The Commission notes that the Community producer has denied these 
allegations and that no final judgement has yet been reached In 
the Court proceedings in the Member State concerned. 
The Commission takes the view that the purpose of anti-dumping 
proceedings is not, and cannot be, to condone or encourage 
restrictive business practices, and that the Initiation of such a 
proceeding does not therefore deprive an enterprise of its right 
to initiate proceedings under Articles 85 or 86 of the Treaty, the 
outcome of which cannot be prejudiced by an anti-dumping 
investigation. Moreover, if and when an infringement of Articles 
88 and 86 is discovered and a decision has been made under Council 
Regulation No 17(4), the Commission may review the present anti­
dumping proceeding In accordance with Article 14(1) of 
Regulation (EBC) No 2423/88. 
(16) The fourth argument Is that the fall in sales price of the 
Community producer was not only due to competition from Imported 
products but also due to a lack of competition in the absence of 
any other producers, coupled with poor management practices and 
large fixed costs of the Community producer. The importer 
requested that the Commission should recalculate the «ftinr^g 
prices of the Community producer by deducting the level of its 
fixed costs. 
The request cannot be accepted since the Commission has 
established the actual selling prices in the marketplace based on 
the sales transactions to Independent purchasers. In addition, it 
has been found that the fall in sales price has occurred during 
the period In which Imports of Chinese and Soviet calcium have 
increased in terms of both volume and market share. In any case, 
fixed costs are not a factor to be deducted in determining the 
actual sales prices found In the marketplace. Under these 
(4) Off No 13, 21.2.1962, p. 204/62 
- 8 -
oiroumstanoes, there is no reason to recalculate the selling 
prices. 
(17) The fifth argument claims that other third country imports have 
been responsible for any injury caused. 
The Commission, in its preliminary determination, has already 
examined whether the Injury sustained by the Community producer 
was caused by factors other than the dumped Imports. Concerning 
the level of Imports from other third countries, these have 
deolInert by over 46 % during the period 1985 to 1987 with a 
reduction in market share. Additionally the price of other 
Imports during the reference period was found to be higher than 
those of the imported Chinese and Soviet product. 
(18) The sixth argument alleges that, prior to 1985, it was the 
Community producer who practiced price undercutting and has forced 
the Chinese and Soviet exporters to follow its prices. This 
allegation was also made by -Use Chinese exporter. 
Thfr Commission, in its preliminary nnry>iiiffinnf»t had eff*,Ah1 * p*K*d 
price undercutting by the Chinese and Soviet exporters during the 
reference period. A recalculation of the undercutting figures, 
based on weighted average GIF export prices, shows price 
undercutting of 6.8% for the Chinese imported product and 9.8% for 
the Soviet Imported product, i.e. figures lower than provisionally 
established (10.7% and 11.2% respectively). The argument as to 
who started the price undercutting, prior to 1988, is now 
considered difficult, if not impossible, to determine and In any 
case, whether the exporters concerned Initially intended only to 
align their prices to those of the Community producer Is not 
considered relevant to the Issue of price undercutting during the 
period in which injury had been examined. The recalculation of 
price undercutting has confirmed that there Is evidence that 
dumped Chinese and Soviet exports have undercut the prices of the 
Community producer. 
- 9 -
(19) None of the above arguments put forward by the importer calls into 
question the conclusions as regards the injury to the Community 
industry which the Commission reached In its preliminary 
conclusions, recitals 16 to 22 of Regulation (BBC) No 707/89. 
Consequently, the Council confirms these conclusions. 
F. OoBsunlty interest 
(20) One importer has also disputed the Commission's preliminary 
conc3.iis1.ons concerning Community Interest. Firstly, it is olalmRrt 
that calcium is no longer used In the production of uranium and 
therefore there is no strategic reason for maintaining oaloium 
production In the Community. 
This claim, referring to the use of oaloium in the production of 
uranium, has already been examined in recital 4 above. Even 
without this particular use, the Commission, however, still 
considers that, in the absence of any protection against the 
injurious effects of the dumped Chinese and Soviet Imports, the 
viability of the sole Community producer would be jeopardised and 
the Community would then be entirely dependent on outside sources 
of oaloium for use in the metallurgical Industry. 
(21) Secondly, the importer, who also transforms the product, has 
alleged that the impact of a duty would significantly increase its 
costs and threaten its viability to continue in business. 
The Commission is unable to accept this claim. An examination of 
the submission made by the importer shows that the Importer has 
based its claim on a calculation incorporating, not only the 
expected duty increase but also, other increases in product costs 
and changes in currency rates In the period 1988/89. The 
Commission, In examining the Impact of the duty on imports of 
calcium, has necessarily to base its examination on the facts 
established In the Investigation period. This shows that the 
proposed measures would have the effect of a limited Increase in 
the total costs of a company which transforms the product and an 
- 10 -
insignificant Increase for the Community end users of oaloium. 
(22) Finally, the importer has claimed that it is in the interest of 
12)e CoDmunity to pursue developments In the industrial sector of 
new types of magnets, to which the Importer as a transformer of 
calcium is a leading contributor through the use of imported 
Chinese and Soviet calcium. 
The claim has already been examined, recital 5 above, and had to 
be rejected as Chinese and Soviet Imported products are considered 
as like products to the Community produced oaloium. Additionally, 
as discussed In recital 21 above, the limited impact of definitive 
anti-dumping duties, on the total costs of a company which 
transforms calcium, is not considered to be an economio deterrent 
to pursuing these developments. 
(23) Nô Community end users have either requested a hearing or made any 
written submission after the imposition of provisional measures. 
Taking into account the considerations set out above, the Council 
has come to the conclusion that it is In the Community's interest 
that action be taken and that protection of the Community's 
Interest calls for the Imposition of a definitive anti-dumping 
duty on Imports of calcium originating In the People's Republic of 
China and the Soviet Union. 
(24) One Independent Importer has also requested a special exemption in 
the event that a decision would be taken to Impose definitive 
duties. The Council Is unable to grant such a request from an 
Independent Importer, when it is clear that it Is in the 
Community's Interest that action be taken to prevent the injurious 
effect of dumped Chinese and Soviet Imports and since this 
objective would be azmuled if such an exemption were to be made 
and which would also be difficult to defend on the grounds of 
equality of treatment of all Importers. 
- 11 -
6. Définitive duty 
(25) The Commission has re-examined the purchase prices of the 
Community importers with the selling price necessary to provide an 
adequate profit (5% margin on the sales price) for the Community 
producer, the Injury threshold. Taking Into account the 
conclusions reached concerning Injury, that there has been price 
undercutting and that the Community producer has suffered 
considerable financial losses in selling below its cost of 
production, the Commission has concluded that definitive anti­
dumping duties should be imposed against imports of calcium 
originating in the People's Republio of China and the Soviet Union 
higher than the amount of the provisional anti-dumping duties and 
equivalent to the definitive dumping margins found, which are 
below the injury threshold. The Council confirms this conclusion. 
(26) The Council considers that, to ensure the effectiveness of the 
protective measures and to facilitate customs clearance, the 
definitive duty should take the form of an ad valorem duty. 
H. Col lection of the provisional duty 
(27) The amounts secured by way of provisional, anti-dumping duty should 
therefore be oolleoted in their entirety. 
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 
ATtlttlft 1 
1. A definitive anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on Imports of 
calcium metal originating In the People's Republio of China and the 
Soviet Union and corresponding to CN code 2806 21 00, and the rate 
thereof is set as follows: 
- 12 -
a) The rate of duty for calcium metal originating in the People's 
Republic of China shall be 21.8 % of the net freest-Community-
frontier price of the product before duty; 
b) The rate of duty for calcium metal originating in Hie Soviet 
Union shall be 22.0 % of the net free-at-Gommunity-frcntier price 
of the product before duty. 
2. The provisions in force with regard to customs duties shall apply. 
Article 2 
The sums secured by way of provisional anti-dumping duty under 
Regulation (EEC) No 707/89 shall be definitively collected. 
Article 3 
This Regulation shall enter into foroe on the day following that of its 
publication In the Official Journal of the European Communities. 
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly 
applicable in all Member States. 
Done at Brussels, For the Council 


ISSN 0254-1475 
COM (89) 395 final 
DOCUMENTS 
EN 08 il 
Catalogue number : CB-CO-89-349-EN-C 
ISBN 92-77-52412-X 
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 
L-2985 Luxembourg