PROPOSAL FOR A COUNCIL REGULATION ( EEC ) AMENDING REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 1048/90 WITH REGARD TO THE IMPOSITION OF A DEFINITIVE ANTI-DUMPING DUTY ON IMPORTS OF SMALL SCREEN COLOUR TELEVISION RECEIVERS ORIGINATING IN THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Date: 1991-08-19
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: South Korea, anti-dumping duty, dumping, import, television equipment

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

COM(91>326  final 

Brussels, 19 August  1991 

Proposal  for a 

COUNCIL  REGULATION  (EEC) 

«rending Régulation (ŒD) No 1048/90 with regard to the 
irrposition of a definitive anti-durrping duty on  irrports of 
«rail screen colour television receivers originating  in the 
Republ ic of Korea 

(presented  by  the Commission) 

i^F 

;*?? 

?#t-

EXPLANATORY  MEMORANDUM 

1.  In April  1990  the Council  imposed  a  definitive  ant i -dumping  duty  on 
imports  of  small  screen  colour  television  receivers  (SCTVs) 
originating  in the Republic of Korea, by Regulation  (EEC) 1048/90. 

2.  In  the  above  regulation,  duties  of  between  10,2  %  and  10,5  %  were 

imposed on  imports from  three cooperating exporters. 

3.  The duty  applicable  to other  Korean exporters  (the general  duty) who 
refused  to  cooperate  in  the  investigation,  was  established  on  the 
basis  of  facts  available,  in  accordance  with  Article  7(7)(b)  of 
Regulation  (EEC)  2423/88,  at  a  level  of  19.6  %,  with  the  dumping 
margin  calculated  by  comparing  an  export  price  based  on  the  average 
C.I.F.  unit  price  of  imports  into  the  Community  from  Korea  with  a 
normal  value  based  on  the  average  domestic  selling  price  of  the 
cooperating  Korean  exporters.  This  method  was  used  because  of  the 
activities of  one  particular  exporter  which  was  known  to  be  sending 
large  volumes  of  SCTVs  to  the  Community,  often  transhipped  through 
third countries, and which  refused  to co-operate with  the Commission. 

4.  In  November  1990  the  Commission  received  information  from  the 
Electronic  Industries  Association  of  Korea  (E.I.A.K.)  to  the  effect 
that  the  non-cooperating  exporter  mentioned  above  was  no  longer 
exporting  small  screen  colour  television  receivers  to  the  European 
Community.  They  alleged  that  this  changed  situation  removed  the 
justification  for  the  19,6  %  general  duty  and  suggested  that  it 
should  be  reduced  to the  level  of  the highest  duty  for  a  cooperating 
company  (i.e. 10,5  % ). 

5.  In  the  light  of  this  information,  the  Commission,  in  January  1991, 
opened  a partial  review on  its own  initiative,  limited  to question of 
whether or  not  to modify  the general  duty. 

6.  The  Commission's  investigation  showed  that  the  exporter  whose 
activities  led  to  the  imposition  of  the  19.6  %  general  duty  is  no 
longer producing SCTVs  in Korea. 

In addition,  it was established  that  the quantities exported  by other 
non-cooperating  exporters  were  extremely  small,  even  before  the 
imposition of  the anti-dumping duty. 

"L 

2 -

In  view  of  these  changed  circumstances,  the  imposition  an  anti 
dumping  duty  on  a  different  basis  from  that  used  for  the  cooperating 
exporters  is  no  longer  Justified,  and  the  appropriate  level  for  the 
general  duty  should  be  highest  rate  of  anti-dumping  duty  found  for  a 
cooperating  exporter,  i.e.  10.5 %. 

8.  Regulation  (EEC) No  1048/90 should  therefore  be amended  to reduce  the 
general  duty  from  19.6  %  to  10.5  %.  This  measure  shall  lapse  on  the 
same  day  as  the  definitive  anti-dumping  measures  imposed  by 
Regulation  (EEC) No  1048/90. 

9.  Of  course,  if  the  Commission  becomes  aware  of  a  resumption  of 
production  of  SCTVs  in  Korea  by  the  exporter  mentioned  in 
Paragraph  3, 4 and  6,  it will  consider  reopening  a new  partial  review 
in order  to  investigate  the matter. 

Proposal  for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION  (EEC) 

«rending Regulation  (EEC) No 1048/90 with  regard to the 

irrposition of a definitive anti-durrping duty on irrports of 

«rail screen colour  television receivers originating  in the 

Republ ic of Korea 

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, 

Having  regard to the Treaty establishing  the European Economic Community, 

Having  regard  to Council  Regulation  (EEC) No 2423/88 of 11 July  1988 on 

protection  against  dumped  or  subsidized  imports  from  countries  not 
members  of  the  European  Economic  Commun!ty<1),  and  in  particular 

Article 14 thereof, 

Having  regard  to  the  proposal  submitted  by  the  Commission  after 

consultation  within  the Advisory  Committee  as  provided  for  under  the 

above Regulation. 

(1) OJ No L 209,  02.08.1988, p.  1 

U 

-  2 -

I. PREVIOUS PROCEDURE 

(a) Imposition of definitive anti-dumping  duty 

(1) In February  1988 the Commission  initiated  an anti-dumping  proceeding 

concerning  imports  of  small  screen  colour  television  receivers 

(hereafter  referred  to  as  SCTVs)  originating  in  the  Republic  of 

Korea  <2>.  This  followed  a  complaint  lodged  by  the  European 

Association  of  Consumer  Electronic  Manufacturers  (E.A.C.E.M.), 

representing a major  proportion of Community production. Following an 

investigation,  a  provisional  anti-dumping  duty  was  imposed  by 

Commission  Regulation  (EEC)  No  3232/89(3),  and  a  definitive  duty 

was subsequently  imposed by Council  Regulation  (EEC) No  1048/90(4). 

(b) General  duty 

(2) In Regulation  (EEC) No  1048/90, duties of  between  10,2 %  and  10,5  % 

were  imposed on  imports from three cooperating exporters. 

(3) The duty  applicable  to other  Korean exporters  (hereafter  referred  to 

as the general  duty) and  in particular  to one exporter  who refused  to 

cooperate  in  the  investigation  and  who  was  known  to  have  exported 

large  quantities  of  the  product  concerned  to  the  Community,  was 

established  on  the  basis  of  what  were  considered  to  be  the  most 

appropriate  facts available,  i.e. by comparing  an export  price  based 

on  the  average  C.I.F. unit  price of  imports  into  the  Community  from 

Korea with a normal  value based on the average domestic selling price 

of  the cooperating  Korean  exporters. The margin  thus established  was 

19.6%. 

(2) OJ No C  44, 17.02.1988, p.  2 

(3) 0J No L 314, 28.10.1989, p.  1 

(4) OJ No L 107, 27.04.1990, p. 56 

- 3 -

II» REVIEW  PROCEDURE 

(4)  in  November  1990  the  Commission  received  information  from  the 

Electronic  Industries  Association  of  Korea  (E.I.A.K.)  to  the  effect 

that  the  non-cooperating  exporter  mentioned  above  was  no  longer 

exporting  small  screen  colour  television  receivers  to  the  European 

Community.  It  was  alleged  that  this  changed  situation  removed  the 

Justification  for  the  19,6  %  general  duty  and  suggested  that  it 

should  be  reduced  to the  level  of  the highest  duty  imposed  on  imports 

of  a cooperating  exporter  (i.e. 10,5  % ). 

(5) After  consulting  the Advisory  Committee,  the Commission  decided  that 

there  was  sufficient  evidence  to  Justify  the  initiation  of  a  partial 

review,  limited  in scope  to  the  question  of  whether  or  not  to modify 

the  general  duty.  The  partial  review was opened  on  the  initiative of 

the  Commission,  in accordance  with  Article  14 of  Council  Regulation 

(EEC)  2423/88, by  a  notice  published  in  the  Official  Journal  of  the 
European  Communities*5*. 

(6) The  Commission  officially  advised  E.I.A.K.,  the  exporters  who 

cooperated  in  the original  Investigation,  the  representatives of  the 

>-

exporting  country  and  the  complainant  in  the  original  proceeding 

(E.A.C.E.M.),  and  gave  the  parties  concerned  the opportunity  to make 

their  views known  in writing and  to request  a hearing. 

(7) E.I.A.K.,  some  exporters  and  E.A.C.E.M.  made  their  views  known  in 

wr i t i n g. 

(8) The  Commission  sought  and  verified  all  information  it  deemed  to  be 

necessary  for  the  purposes  of  this  proceeding  and  in  particular 

received  and  verified  to  the  extent  necessary  information  from 

E.I.A.K. 

(5) OJ  No C  18, 26.1.1991, p.  3 

G 

-  4 -

M l.  RESULTS OF THE  INVESTIGATION 

(a) Determination of  general  duty  in original  anti-dumping  investigation 

(9)  As  is  stated  by  the  Commission  in  Recital  33  of  Regulation  (EEC) 

3232/89  (imposing  the  provisional  duty),  for  those  Korean  exporters 

who  did  not  make  themselves  known  during  the  course  of  the original 

investigation,  dumping  was  determined  on  the  basis  of  what  were 

considered  by  the  Commission  to  be  the  most  appropriate  facts 

available,  in  accordance  with  Article  7(7)(b)  of  Regulation  (EEC) 

No 2423/88. 

(10) For  these  non-cooperating  exporters,  the  dumping  margin  was 

calculated  by  comparing  an export  price  based  on  the  average  C.I.F. 

unit  price  of  imports  into  the  Community  from  Korea  (according  to 

1987  Eurostat  data)  with  a  normal  value  based  on  the  average 

domestic  selling  price  of  the  cooperating  Korean  exporters.  The 

resulting  dumping  margin  of  19.6  %  became  that  applicable  to  the 

non-cooperating  exporters  and was  imposed  as  the general  duty,  while 

the  imports  of  the  three  cooperating  Korean  exporters  (Daewoo, 

Goldstar  and  Samsung)  are  subject  to  definitive  anti-dumping  duties 

of  10.2 %,  10.4 %  and  10.5 %  respectively. 

(11) The  major  reason  for  not  considering  the  highest  duty  imposed  on 

imports  from  a  cooperating  exporter  to  be  appropriate  for  the  non-

cooperating  exporters  was  the  behaviour  of  one 

particular 

manufacturer  based  in Korea. This  company  was  known  to  be  exporting 

large  quantities of  SCTVs  to  the Community,  with  many  of  them  being 

trans-shipped  via  third  countries.  It  was  approached  by  the 

Commission  during  its on-the-spot  investigation, with  the  assistance 

of  the  Electronic  Industries  Association  of  Korea,  with  a  view  to 

securing  its  co-operation.  However,  the  company  refused  to  co 

operate. 

- 5 -

(12) The  Commission  decided,  and  the  Council  confirmed,  that,  in  these 

circumstances,  neither  the  dumping  margins  determined  for  the 

cooperating  exporters nor  the  information  contained  in the  complaint 

provided  the  most  appropriate  basis  for  determining  the  margin  of 

dumping  for non-cooperating exporters. 

(b) Changed  trade  situation 

(13) The  19.6  %  general  duty  was  imposed  on  the  basis  of  the  facts 

available  for  the original  investigation  period  -  1987.  In view  of 

the  information  received  from  E.I.A.K.  and  other  sources,  it  is 

clear  that  the trade situation  concerning  the above exporter  has now 

changed  considerably. 

(i) 

Information  from  E.I.A.K. 

JFr 

(14) According  to  E.I.A.K.'s  internal  statistics,  and  independent  data 

obtained  from  the  Korean  Foreign  Trade  Association,  both  of  which 

were  verified  by  the  Commission,  the  exporter  in  question  has  not 

exported  S C T Vs  to  the Community  since  1988. Furthermore,  its  total 

exports  from Korea of S C T Vs  to all  destinations  in 1990 amounted  to 

only  3 % of  the 1988 volume. 

(15) E.I.A.K.  supplied  evidence  that  the  exporter  involved  had  shifted 

its capacity  away  from CTV's to other  electronic  products. 

(16) The  exporter,  which  is  a  member  of  E.I.A.K.,  had  supplied  the 

Association  with  a  signed  declaration  that  it no  longer  planned  to 

export  S C T Vs  to the Community.  Furthermore,  it was established  that 

it  had  converted  its  production  facilities  to  the  manufacture  of 

other  electronic  products. 

f 

(ii) 

Information  from Korean Ministry  of Trade and  Industry 

(17)  In May  1991,  the  Ministry  of  Trade  and  Industry  of  Korea  certified 

to  the  Commission  that  the  exporter  had  now  ceased  all  production 

of  SCTVs  in Korea, and provided  appropriate documentary  evidence. 

(c)  Imports  from other  non-cooperatIng  exporters 

(18) The  Commission  also  established  that  the  export  volumes  of  other 

non-cooperating  exporters  were  extremely  small,  even  before  the 

imposition of  the anti-dumping  duty. 

(d) Conclusion 

(19)  In  view  of  these  changed  circumstances,  the  Council  concludes  that 

the situation which  Justified  the use of  a different  basis  from  that 

applied  to  the  cooperating  exporters  for  the  purpose  of  imposing  an 

anti-dumping  duty  no  longer  exists.  The  exporter  mentioned  in 

recitals  13-17  has  now  ceased  production  of  SCTVs  in  Korea  and 

therefore  the  quantities  exported  to  the  Community  by  non-

cooperating  exporters can only  be very  small.  In these  circumstances 

the  appropriate  level  for  the  general  duty  should  be  the  highest 

rate  of  anti-dumping  duty  imposed  on  imports  from  a  cooperating 

exporter  i.e. 10.5  %. 

(20) This  rate of  duty  does not  act  as an  incentive  to circumvention, nor 

as  a  reward  for  non-cooperation,  but  constitutes  an  equitable 

response  to the changed  trade situation. 

(21) The  parties  were  informed  of  the  essential  facts  and  considerations 

upon which  the  findings were based, and were granted  a period  within 

which  to make  representations  to  the Commission.  Where  appropriate, 

their  comments  were  taken  into consideration.  E.A.C.E.M.  requested, 

and  was  granted,  an  opportunity  to  be  heard  by  the  Commission  .vith 

regard  to  its findings  in this  proceeding. 

a 

-  7  -

IV. AMENDMENT  TO REGULATION  (EEC) No  1048/90 

c 

(22) Article  1 of  Regulation  (EEC) No  1048/90 should  therefore  be  amended 

to  reduce  the general  anti-dumping  duty  from  19.6 %  to  10.5 %, with 

effect  from  the date of entry  into force of  the present  regulation. 

(23) This  measure  shall  lapse  on  the  same  day  as  the  definitive  anti 

dumping measures  imposed  by Regulation  (EEC) No 1048/90, 

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION : 

ArtlÇla 1 

In Article  1  (1) of  Regulation  (EEC) No  1048/90  the  figure  "19.6 %"  is 
replaced  by  "10.5 %M. 

The  remainder  of  Regulation  (EEC) No  1048/90 remains  unchanged. 

Article  2 

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 entirely  and  directly  applicable 

in a 11 Member  States. 

'"Lis 

ISSN 0254-1475 

COM(91) 326 final 

DOCUMENTS 

EN 

1102 

Catalogue number : CB-CO-91-373-EN-C 

ISBN 92-77-75361-7 

Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 
L-2985 Luxembourg