Commission Regulation (EC) No 617/1999 of 23 March 1999 imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of stainless steel wires with a diameter of 1 mm or more originating in India
Date: 1999-03-23
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: India, anti-dumping duty, import, originating product, steel, wire

24. 3. 1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 79/13

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 617/1999

of 23 March 1999

imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of stainless steel wires
with a diameter of 1 mm or more originating in India

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

(4)

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

The Commission sent questionnaires to all parties
known to be concerned and received replies from a
number of companies in the Community and the
exporting countries.

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of
22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports
from countries
the European
Community (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No
905/98 (2), and in particular Article 7 thereof,

not members

of

(5)

The Commission sought and verified all the infor-
mation it deemed necessary for the purposes of a
preliminary determination of dumping, injury and
Community interest and carried out verification
visits at the premises of the following companies:

After consulting the Advisory Committee,

(a) Community producers

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

(3)

A. PROCEDURE

On 25 June 1998 the Commission announced, by
a notice published in the Official Journal of the
European Communities (3),
the initiation of an
anti-dumping proceeding with regard to imports
into the Community of stainless steel wires with a
diameter of 1 mm or more originating in India and
the Republic of Korea (hereafter ‘Korea'). A parallel
anti-subsidy investigation regarding India
and
Korea was initiated on the same date.

The proceeding was initiated as a result of a
complaint lodged in May 1998 by the European
Confederation of Iron and Steel Industries (Eurofer)
on behalf of Community producers representing a
major proportion of the Community production of
stainless
steel wires. The complaint contained
evidence of dumping of the said product and of
injury resulting therefrom, which was
material
considered sufficient, after consultation, to justify
the initiation of a proceeding.

suppliers

The Commission officially advised the complain-
ant Community producers, exporting producers,
importers,
and users known to be
concerned as well as associations concerned and
representatives of the exporting countries. Inter-
ested parties were given the opportunity to make
their views known in writing and to request a
hearing within the time limit set in the notice of
initiation. All parties who so requested were
granted a hearing.

(1) OJ L 56, 6. 3. 1996, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 128, 30. 4. 1998, p. 18.
(3) OJ C 199, 25. 6. 1998, p. 8.

— AB Sandvik Steel, Sandviken, Sweden

— Bekaert N. V., Zwevegem, Belgium

— Bridon Wire Special Steel Division, Shef-

field, United Kingdom

— Fagersta Stainless AB, Fagersta, Sweden

— Gusab Stainless, Mjolby, Sweden

— Hemmings Ltd., Sheffield, United Kingdom

— Sprint-Metal, Paris, France

— Sprint Metal Edelstahlzieherei GmbH,

Hemer, Germany

— Rigby-Maryland Stainless Ltd., Sheffield,

United Kingdom

— Rodacciai S.p.a and Rodasider S.r.l, Bosisio

Parrini, Italy

— Societa Italiana Kanthal S.p.a, Cinisello

Balsamo, Italy

— Trafilerie Bedini S.r.l, Peschiera Borromeo,

Italy

— Winterbottom Wire,

Sheffield, United

Kingdom

(b) Exporting producers in the countries concerned

I n d i a

— Bhansali Bright Bars Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

— Devidayal India Ltd., Mumbai

— Hindustan Stainless Steel Wire Co. Pvt. Ltd.,

Mumbai

— Indore Wire Co. Ltd., Indore

— Isibars Ltd/Isinox Steels Ltd., Mumbai

— Kei Industries Ltd., New Delhi

— Macro Bars & Wires Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

— Mukand Ltd., Mumbai

L 79/14

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

24. 3. 1999

— Triveni Shinton International Ltd., Indore
— Raajratna Metal Industries Ltd., Ahmedabad
— Venus Wire Industries Ltd., Mumbai

K o r e a

— Dae Sung Rope MFG. Co. Ltd., Pusan
— Korea Sangsa Co. Ltd., Seoul/Pusan
— Korea Welding Electrode Co Ltd., Seoul
— Kowel Special MFG Steel Wire Co. Ltd.,

(9)

Pusan

— Seah Metal Products Co. Ltd., Chang Won
— Shine Metal Co. Ltd., Pusan

(c) Importers

in the Community

related to

exporting producers

I n d i a

— Isibars

Europe

GmbH,

D(cid:129)sseldorf,

Germany

— Mukand International Ltd, London, United

Kingdom

K o r e a

— Kos Europe GmbH, D(cid:129)sseldorf, Germany

(d) Importers in the Community not related to

exporting producers

— Trio Handels GmbH, Eppstein, Germany
— Bodo Trading GmbH, Dreieich, Germany

(6)

The dumping investigation covered the period
from 1 April 1997 to 31 March 1998 (hereafter
referred to as ‘the investigation period' or ‘IP').

The examination of injury covered the period from
1 January 1994 to 31 March 1998 (hereafter
referred to as the ‘period considered').

(11)

B. PRODUCT UNDER CONSIDERATION AND

LIKE PRODUCT

(7)

(8)

1. Product under consideration

The product concerned is wire of stainless steel,
containing by weight 2,5 % or more of nickel,
other than containing by weight 28 % or more but
no more than 31 % of nickel and 20 % or more
but not more than 22 % of chromium, having a
diameter of 1 mm or more (hereinafter ‘SSW'). This
product is currently classifiable within CN code ex
7223 00 19.

This product is basically defined by its physical
aspect and the grade of stainless steel. SSW is
obtained by shaping wire rod by operations which
reduce the cross-section of the wire rod. The final
cross-section of the SSW is generally round but
rectangular.
may also be square,

triangular or

Several processes are used to transform wire rod
into SSW. Depending on customer requirements
SSW will have specific mechanical characteristics
(diameter,
tensile, strength, stainless steel grade)
and surface aspects (bright, mat, coated), which
result in a large number of product types (herein-
after also referred to as references or models).

Despite those differences, all types of SSW are to
be considered as one product. SSW is further trans-
formed by users which manufacture for example
filtration elements, reinforcing elements, anti-vibra-
tion pads, springs, cables and wire ropes. These
semi-finished products are then used in sectors
such as the automotive, electro-mechanical, fibre,
textile, building industry, etc.

(10) During the investigation it has been provisionally
found that there are differences in physical charac-
teristics and uses between stainless steel wires with
a diameter of 1 mm or more on the one hand and
with a diameter of less than 1 mm (i. e. fine wires)
on the other hand. These physical differences relate
to tensile strength, coating and
in particular
ductility. In addition, the use of fine wires is largely
concentrated in the field of ultra-fine applications
such as medical and surgery equipment, fine filters
etc., while large wires are mainly used for construc-
tion, bearings,
in the automotive industry and
certain mechanical and household applications. For
these reasons it appears that there is very limited
interchangeability between large and fine wires’
applications. However, the question whether a clear
dividing line can be drawn between these two
products will be further investigated.

2. Like product

the

investigation established that

The
SSW
produced in India and Korea and sold domestically
or exported to the Community and the SSW
produced and sold in the Community by the
complainant Community producers had effectively
identical physical characteristics and uses and were
thus like products within the meaning of Article
1(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 (herein-
after referred to as ‘the Basic Regulation').

C. DUMPING

1. Normal value

(a) General method

(12)

In order to establish normal value, it was first deter-
mined for the cooperating exporting producers of
the countries involved in the proceeding whether
the
the total volume of

the domestic sales of

24. 3. 1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 79/15

product concerned were representative in accord-
ance with Article 2(2) of the Basic Regulation, i. e.
whether these sales represented more than 5 % of
the
concerned
exported to the Community.

the product

volume of

sales

profits in accordance with Article 2(3) and (6) of the
Basic Regulation. The SG&A were based on repres-
entative domestic sales and the profit margin based
on representative domestic sales made in the or-
dinary course of trade.

It was then examined for each exporting producer
whether total domestic sales of each product type
constituted 5 % or more of the sales volume of the
same type exported to the Community.

(b) Use of available information (India)

For those product types meeting the 5 % test, it
was established whether sufficient sales had been
made in the ordinary course of trade in accordance
with Article 2(4) of the Basic Regulation.

Where, per product type, the volume of domestic
sales above unit cost represented at least 80 % of
sales, normal value was established on the basis of
the weighted average prices actually paid for all
domestic sales. Where, per product
the
volume of profitable transactions was lower than
80 %, but not lower than 10 % of sales, normal
value was established on the basis of the weighted
average prices actually paid for the remaining prof-
itable domestic sales.

type,

those product

For
types where the volume of
domestic sales was lower than 5 % of the volume
exported to the Community, or where the volume
of profitable domestic sales was less than 10 %,
domestic sales of those product types were consid-
ered insufficient within the meaning of Article 2(4)
of the Basic Regulation and were therefore disre-
garded. In these cases, normal value was based on
the weighted average of the prices charged by other
producers in the country concerned for repres-
entative domestic
corresponding
sales of
product type made in the ordinary course of trade
in accordance with Article 2(1) of the Basic Regula-
tion.

the

(13) One Indian exporting producer was unable to
provide comprehensive information on normal
value, in particular certain information about cost
of production was not available for reasons outside
the company’s control. Consequently, the normal
value of this company was established partially on
the basis of available and verified data provided by
the company and partially, pursuant to Article 18
of the Basic Regulation, on data from other co-
operating Indian producers.

2. Export price

(14) Where export sales to the Community were made
directly to independent
importers export prices
were established on the basis of the prices actually
paid or payable by these importers in accordance
with Article 2(8) of the Basic Regulation.

(15) Where export sales were made to importers in the
Communmity which were related to the exporting
producer, the export prices were constructed on the
basis of the prices at which the imported products
were first resold to independent buyers in the
Community, in accordance with Article 2(9) of the
Basic Regulation. Adjustments were made for all
costs incurred between importation and resale,
including a reasonable margin for SG&A plus
profit. The level of profit was determined on the
basis of information on profits submitted by the
cooperating unrelated importers of
the product
concerned in the Community where such informa-
tion was considered both reliable and repres-
entative.

Where, per product type, there were insufficient
sales or no representative domestic sales by other
producers in the country concerned, normal value
was constructed on the basis of the costs of manu-
facturing incurred by the exporting producer
concerned for the exported product type in ques-
tion plus a reasonable amount for SG&A costs and

(16)

In this connection, one related Korean importer in
the Community requested to decrease its SG&A
expenses by the amount of commissions received
from the parent company in Korea. It was estab-
lished that the commissions paid from Korea to

L 79/16

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

24. 3. 1999

to

independent

this related importer in the Community were in
fact based on sales made directly by the parent
company
in the
Community and that no services were rendered by
the related importer in connection with these sales.
Consequently these commissions were not taken
into consideration for the establishment of
the
constructed export price.

customers

3. Comparison

(17)

For the purposes of a fair comparison due allow-
ance, in the form of adjustments, was made for
differences claimed under Article 2(10) of the Basic
Regulation and demonstrated to affect price
comparibility. On this basis, adjustments were
made with regard to indirect taxes, import taxes,
charges for transport, insurance, handling, loading,
ancillary costs, packing, credit, aftersales costs and
commissions.

import charges. Pursuant

(18) Nine companies in India and six in Korea claimed
to
an allowance for
Article 2(10)(b) of the Basic Regulation the requests
were fully rejected for six companies in India and
one in Korea since these companies were not able
to prove that raw materials had been imported with
payment of duties and had been physically in-
corporated in the product concerned sold on the
domestic market. For the other companies the
requested adjustment was partially granted to the
extent that it was proved that the materials on
which import duties were payable had been phys-
ically incorporated into the products concerned
sold on the domestic market and that the import
duties had not been collected or
refunded in
respect of the product exported to the Community.

(19) One Korean company requested an adjustment for
differences in the level of trade on the grounds that
on the domestic market all its sales were made
directly to customers whereas on the Community
market part of its sales were made through a related
importer. It was argued that since all expenses
incurred by the related importer would be deducted
the
from the export price for the comparison,
indirect selling expenses incurred for the domestic
sales should be deducted from the domestic price
as well.

This claim could provisionally not be accepted
because the exporting producer concerned was not
able to demonstrate that the constructed export
price was at a different level of trade than the
normal value and that this difference affected price
comparability as required by Article 2(10)(d) of the
Basic Regulation.

4. Dumping margins

(20)

(21)

In accordance with Article 2(10) and (11) of the
Basic Regulation, the dumping margins were estab-
lished on the basis of a comparison between the
weighted average normal value per product type
and the weighted average export price at ex-factory
level for the same product type and at the same
level of trade.

For exporting producers involved in the proceeding
who did not reply to the Commission’s question-
naire or did not make themselves known,
the
dumping margin was determined on the basis of
the facts available in accordance with the provi-
sions of Article 18(1) of the Basic Regulation.

A comparison of Eurostat figures with the data on
the volume of exports to the Community supplied
by the cooperating exporting producers was made
in order to establish the level of cooperation in the
current investigation. As a result, for all countries
subject to investigation it was found that the overall
level of cooperation was high. The Commission
therefore considered it appropriate to set
the
dumping margin for the non co-operating com-
panies at
individual
dumping margin established for a cooperating
exporting producer in the country concerned, since
there was no reason to believe that a non cooper-
ating exporting producer had dumped at a level
lower than the highest level found.

the level of

the highest

The above approach was also considered necessary
in order to avoid creating a bonus for non-coopera-
tion and an opportunity for circumvention.

(22) One Indian company failed to cooperate to the
satisfaction of the Commission. In these circum-
stances, pursuant to Article 18(1) of the Basic Regu-
lation, it was decided to give this company the
dumping margin established for non-cooperating
exporting producers.

(23)

The dumping margins, expressed as a percentage of
the CIF price at Community frontier level, are:

(a) India:

— Bhansali Bright Bars Pvt Ltd:
— Devidayal India Ltd:
— Hindustan Stainless Steel Wire Co.

Pvt Ltd:

— Indore Wire Co. Ltd:
— Isibars Ltd/Isinox Steels Ltd:
— Kei Industries Ltd:
— Macro Bars & Wires Pvt Ltd:
— Mukand Ltd:

1,2 %,
27,5 %,

76,2 %,
44,6 %,
11,6 %,
76,2 %,
21,9 %,
23,3 %,

24. 3. 1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 79/17

— Raajratna Metal Industries Ltd:
— Triveni Shinton International Ltd:
— Venus Wire Industries Ltd:

16,0 %,
68,2 %,
7,4 %.

focusses exclusively on the effects of the dumped
imports from India.

3. Preliminary remarks: competition aspects

(b) Korea

The dumping margins found were de minimis
or very close to de minimis level.

(27)

D. INJURY

1. Definition of the Community industry

Community producers

(24)

The Community production within the meaning of
Article 4(1)(a) of the Basic Regulation is constituted
by:

— producers on behalf of which the complaint
was lodged and which cooperated in the invest-
igation (‘the cooperating complainants'),

— producers on behalf of which the complaint
was lodged and which did not cooperate in the
com-
investigation (the non cooperating
plainants),

and

— other Community producers which are not
complainants, which did not cooperate to the
proceeding and which did not oppose to it.

Community industry

(25)

The cooperating complainants fulfil the require-
ments of representativeness within the meaning of
the Basic Regulation, since they
Article 5(4) of
account
total
Community production of the product concerned.
They are therefore deemed to constitute the
Community industry within the meaning of Article
4(1) of the same Regulation.

than 65 % of

for more

the

2. Scope of the investigation

(26) Having regard to the above findings on dumping of
the Korean imports and the proposals pertaining
thereto, it was not considered appropriate at this
these
stage to assess specifically the effects of
thus
following analysis
Korean imports. The

In the course of the investigation, certain exporting
producers have argued that all data submitted by
the Community industry within the framework of
the current proceeding would be unreliable as a
result of
the ‘alloy
the uniform application of
surcharge' system, and that it would, therefore, not
be possible to conduct any accurate injury analysis
anti-dumping
within the
proceeding.

framework of

the

These exporting producers based their allegations
on the findings set out in a Commission decision
‘Alloy surcharge') (1) which stated that
(IV/35.814,
the Community producers of stainless steel — flat
products — have modified ‘in a concerted fashion
the reference values used to calculate the alloy
surcharge, a practice having the object and effect of
restricting and distorting competiton within the
common market'.

The exporting producers acknowledged the fact
that the above decision related to flat products (as
opposed to long products, such as stainless steel
wires), but they argued that, firstly a concerted prac-
tice also existed for the product concerned and,
secondly, that even if such a practice would not be
established for the product concerned, the existing
illegal practice for
flat products would have a
synergy or downstream effect on the product
concerned.

As SSW are not produced, for technical reasons,
from flat products, any downstream effect of the
concerted practice found for flat products on SSW
is doubtful. Moreover, no evidence has been found
either that the above concerted practice would have
been applied by suppliers of raw materials for SSW.
Furthermore, the producers of flat products and of
SSW are, to a large extent, not identical and the
number of SSW producers is significantly higher
than that of flat steel producers.

In this respect, while the exporting producers
concerned filed a complaint (IV/E-1/37.271) with
DG IV on 5 October 1998, no investigation was
opened by DG IV concerning the alleged infringe-
ment of Article 85 of the EC Treaty with respect to
the product concerned. Indeed, this complaint is in
fact an extension of
the complaint concerning
stainless steel bright bars (likewise belonging to the
category of long products) filed with DG IV on 3
February 1998 (IV/E-1/36.930) for which, pursuant
to Article 6 of Commission Regulation (EC) No
99/63, a letter of rejection of complaint was sent to
the complainants on 28 October 1998, although a
final decision has not yet been adopted.

(1) Commission Decision 98/247/ECSC (OJ L 100, 1. 4. 1998).

L 79/18

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

24. 3. 1999

In accordance with the above-mentioned Decision,
the application of an alloy surcharge system could
only be illegal if it were applied in a concerted
manner. However,
investigation has
the current
shown that there is no uniform application of the
alloy surcharge by the Community industry: some
companies apply it for all their customers or only
for some of them, others do not apply it at all.

Furthermore, it was noted that — when comparing
the sales pries of the members of the Community
industry among themselves — the sales prices for
identical references varied. Finally, even where it is
applied, the alloy surcharge constitutes only a small
percentage in the total price of
the product
concerned.

The Commission therefore concludes that there is
no evidence that the injury data collected be unreli-
able as a result of the application of the ‘alloy
surcharge'.

(33)

4. Community consumption

(28)

For the purpose of the assessment of the apparent
Community consumption of SSW, the Commis-
sion relied on data on the sales volume of the
product concerned in the Community provided by
the Community industry and EUROFER. These
data have been added to import figures established
on the basis of the data submitted by the cooper-
ating exporting producers
from the countries
concerned as well as on Eurostat.

(29) During the period 1994 to the investigation period,
the apparent Community consumption of SSW
expressed in tonnes amounted to 69 212 in 1994,
80 539 in 1995, 70 489 in 1996, 78 576 in 1997,
and 82 772 during the investigation period. It thus
increased by 20 % between 1994 and the invest-
igation period.

6. Prices of the imports concerned

(a) Price evolution

(32) Average sales prices per kg (in ECU) of the Indian
imports increased between 1994 and 1995 (from
1,88 to 2,44), but steadily decreased from that year
onwards (2,32 in 1996, 2,10 in 1997 and 2,05
during the investigation period).

(b) Price undercutting

M e t h o d o l o g y

the

investigation period,

For
sales prices of
matching models both for the Community industry
and the exporting producers, established on a
customer-delivered basis, have been compared. The
export prices at a customer-delivered level have
been obtained by adding to the export CIF values a
reasonable percentage
and
freight costs from the Community border to the
final customer.

covering insurance

(34)

The exporting country’s countrywide undercutting
margin has been calculated on the basis of
weighted average of
the undercutting margins
found for the cooperating exporting producers.

U n d e r c u t t i n g m a r g i n s

(35)

For India a 22 % weighted average undercutting
margin has been found (ranging between 13 % and
36 %).

7. Situation of the Community industry

5. Volume and market shares of the imports

concerned

(a) Production

(30)

(31)

The Indian imports in tonnes developed as follows:
952 tonnes in 1994, 4 513 in 1995, 6 951 in 1996,
8 719 in 1997 and 9 166 during the investigation
period. They have therefore increased steadily and
considerably over the period under consideration,
i. e. by 862 %.

(36)

Indian imports’ market share increased constantly
from 1,4 % in 1994 to 5,6 % in 1995, 9,9 % in
1996,
remaining stable at
11,1 % during the investigation period.

to 11,1 % in 1997,

Since producers do not hold significant stocks, the
trend reflected for production is similar to the one
of sales volume shown below. The total production
of the product concerned followed until 1996 the
evolution of the market, increasing from 54 380
tonnes in 1994 to 59 052 tonnes in 1995, and then
decreasing to 48 196 tonnes in 1996. As from 1997,
it remained more or less stable (54 316 tonnes in
1997, 55 539 tonnes during the investigation
period), while the total market
size increased,
showing that
the Community industry did not
benefit form the upward trend of the market.

24. 3. 1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 79/19

(b) Capacity utilisation

(h) Profitability

(37)

The capacity utilisation, while reaching a peak in
1995 (86 %), decreased significantly in 1996
the
(65 %). While slowly picking up towards
investigation period (75 %), it did not reach earlier
levels.

(c) Investment

(38)

Investment has slightly increased between 1994
and the investigation period, from 3 098 KECU in
1994 to 3 591 KECU during the investigation
period.

(d) Employment

(39) As regards employment, the Community industry’s
workforce has decreased steadily as from 1995 (798
in 1995, 727 during the investigation period).

(40)

(41)

(e) Sales volume

The sales volume of
the Community industry,
while decreasing between 1995 (46 278 tonnes) and
1996 (37 997 tonnes), has slightly increased since
then, reaching 45 766 tonnes during the invest-
igation period.

(f) Market shares

The Community industry’s market share decreased
significantly from 1994 to 1996 (from 63 % to
53,9 %), and from that year onwards, it first recov-
ered slightly (56,2 % in 1997), and then decreased
again (55,3 % during the investigation period).

(g) Prices

(42) Average sales prices of the Community industry
reached a peak in 1995 (3,71 ECU/kg), and strongly
decreased from that year onwards (3,61 in 1996,
3,19 in 1997 and 3,19 during the investigation
period). In addition to this price depression, the
Community industry has suffered price suppres-
sion. Indeed, as a reaction to increasing imports at
low prices, the Community industry had no choice
but to stop production and sales of certain standard
product models, privileging some market niches
where prices (but also costs of production) were
higher and direct competition with the dumped
imports was less pronounced. Therefore, it can be
assumed that the price decrease would have been
even more accentuated if the Community industry
had kept the same product mix throughout the
period under consideration.

(43)

Profitability of
the Community industry deteri-
orated between 1994 and the investigation period
(from 6,4 % in 1994 to 1,1 % during the invest-
igation period). It can be assumed that the trend
would have been even worse if the Community
industry had kept on producing and selling those
models
to the most aggressive pricing
policy by the exporting producers.

subject

8. Conclusion on injury

(44) Until 1996, the sales volume and market share of
the Community industry followed the same evolu-
tion as
the market. From that year onwards,
however, the Community industry did not benefit
anymore from the growing trend of the market.
Indeed, it managed to keep its sales volume stable
but at the expense of its profitability which, in a
context of depressed sales prices, strongly deteri-
orated. In addition, its market share did not recover
to previous levels.

(45)

For these reasons, it is provisionally concluded that
the Community industry has
suffered material
injury in terms of
loss of market shares, price
depression and price suppression as well as strongly
deteriorating profitability and decreasing employ-
ment.

E. CAUSATION

1. Effect of the dumped imports

(46)

(47)

increase of

The significant
the sales volume
(+ 862 %) and of the market shares of the dumped
imports (from 1,4 % to 11,1 %) between 1994 and
the investigation period as well as the substantial
undercutting found coincided with the deteriora-
tion of the situation of the Community industry in
terms of loss of market shares, price depression as
well as deteriorating profitability.

In the context of the general fall of the market in
1996, which followed the strong growth of the year
the Community industry was negatively
1995,
affected by the continuous rise of
the dumped
imports. Indeed, the Indian imports were those
which strikingly grew during that year.

(48) As from 1997, the growing trend of the market
mainly benefited the dumped imports. Sales
volumes of the Community industry did not follow
the upward trend of the market, and sales prices
did not reach their previous levels. On the contrary,
the Community industry suffered price suppression
and strong price depression, as shown by the
undercutting found. This situation is reflected in a
deteriorating profitability situation and decreasing
employment.

L 79/20

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

24. 3. 1999

2. Effect of other factors

In accordance with Article 3(7) of the Basic Regula-
tion,
the Commission has examined whether
factors other than the dumped imports might have
had an effect on the situation of the Community
industry, with particular regard to the role of other
Community producers not co-operating in the
investigation and of imports from other third coun-
tries.

(54)

(49)

(50)

(a) Other Community producers

in view of

It has been alleged by some interested parties that
other Community producers,
their
significant market share, might have contributed to
the injury suffered by the Community industry. In
this respect, it has to be outlined that the sales
volume of these other Community producers has
remained relatively stable between 1994 and the
investigation period, and also their market share
decreased sharply as from 1996 (from 27,2 % to
23,1 % during the investigation period). Overall,
the situation of these other Community producers
is not any different from that of the Community
industry. As
these other
to sales prices of
Community producers, no indication of any price
the Community industry’s sales
undercutting of
prices was found during the investigation. The
argument should therefore be rejected.

(b) Third countries’ imports

(51)

The same interested parties have underlined the
role allegedly played by other
third countries’
imports, and mostly by Switzerland, regarding the
injury suffered by the Community industry.

their market

(52) Concerning first imports from Switzerland, their
volume increased by 25 % between 1994 and the
investigation period but
share
remained more or less stable all over the period
under consideration (6,6 % in 1994, 6,9 % during
the investigation period), indicating therefore that
Swiss imports within the Community did just
follow the upward trend of
the market. When
the
comparing their situation with the one of
dumped imports between 1994 and the invest-
igation period, they remain overall below the level
reached by the dumped imports both in terms of
volume and market shares. As to prices, no indica-
tion of any price undercutting of the Community
industry’s sales prices was found in the course of
the investigation. The argument should therefore
be rejected.

(53)

Secondly, as to other third countries’ imports, for
individual countries they are of much smaller
quantities and while their market share increased
between 1994 and the investigation period (from
1,8 % to 3,7 %), they remained overall at a low
level. As to prices, no indication of any price
undercutting of the sales prices of the Community
industry was found in the course of the invest-

igation (1). The argument
rejected.

should therefore be

(c) Other

to

the

The Commission also examined whether factors
other than those mentioned above might have
contributed
the
Community industry, in particular a contraction in
demand or
in the patterns of
consumption, developments in technology and the
the
export performance
Community industry.

and productivity of

changes

suffered

injury

the

by

the market

(55) As to the development of demand and the changes
in the pattern of consumption, it has been previ-
ously established that
for SSW has
expanded between 1994 and the investigation
period. At the same time, it has been established
that the Community industry did not benefit from
this expansion of the market whilst the exporting
producers substantially increased their sales volume
and market share.

(56)

the Community industry,

In relation to the developments in technology and
productivity of
it has
been established that between 1994 and the invest-
igation period the Community industry has main-
tained its production and investments levels in
order not to lose competitiveness. Furthermore, its
level of exports has been stable over the period
taken into consideration, and the Community
industry’s sales have proved to be more profitable
in export markets than on the Community market.

(57)

Thus, it can be concluded that other factors than
dumped imports were not such as to break the
causal link between the dumped imports and the
the Community
suffered by
material
industry therefrom.

injury

3. Conclusion on causation

(58)

(59)

In view of the above, it is provisionally concluded
that the dumped imports from India have caused
material injury to the Community industry.

This does not prejudge the conclusions of
the
Community in the parallel antisubsidy proceeding
against imports of stainless steel wire with a dia-
meter of 1 mm or more originating in India and in
Korea.

(1) As to Korea, given the provisional findings with respect to the
dumping margins and the proposals pertaining thereto,
it is
considered at this stage that the causal link between Korean
imports and the injury suffered by the Community industry
need not be analysed in detail.

24. 3. 1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 79/21

F. COMMUNITY INTEREST

1. General comment

(60)

For the investigation of Community interest, the
Commission examined two scenarios, i.e. the most
likely effects in the event that anti-dumping meas-
ures were taken, and the most likely effects in the
event that no such measures were taken. In this
context, particular consideration was given to the
effect that antidumping measures,
if any, would
have on the Community industry, on suppliers of
the raw material and on users of
the product
concerned.

2. Community

industry

and

other

Community producers

(a) General

(61)

The Community industry has proven to be a struc-
turally viable industry, able to adapt its product
range to the changing competitive conditions on
the market and to concentrate on market niches
where there was less competition from dumped
imports.

(62) Despite this structurally viable background, it can
however not be excluded that this industry would
reduce its manufacturing activities for the product
concerned in the Community if no measures
against dumping were taken. This conclusion is
justified in view of the duration of the deteriorating
profitability situation suffered due to dumped
imports.
the price-
depressive effect of
the dumped imports will
continue to frustrate all efforts of the Community
industry to regain a satisfactory margin of profit-
ability.

Indeed, without measures,

(b) Employment

(63)

The situation of
the Community industry has
steadily deteriorated since 1995. Should this trend
continue, the Community industry might be forced
to stop production in the Community, and around
700 jobs directly linked to the product concerned
would be endangered in the Community. On the
the imposition of measures would
other hand,
enable this
industry to maintain and further
develop its activities in the Community.

(64) With the adoption of anti-dumping measures,
overall employment in the Community in relation
to the product concerned would thus be secured
and can even be expected to rise.

ogies. In this respect, it cannot be excluded that the
Community industry will have to reduce substan-
tially its investments if measures are not imposed.

3. Unrelated importers

(66)

Limited cooperation was obtained from unrelated
importers of
concerned in the
Community. For cooperating companies, neither
employment nor
investment was
significant
directly related to the product concerned.

the product

(67)

This justifies the provisional conclusion that anti-
dumping measures, if any, will most likely not have
a decisive impact on the unrelated importers.

4. Suppliers

(68)

The following six suppliers cooperated in the
investigation and the data they submitted were
verified by the Commission:

— Acciaieri Valbruna s.r.l, Vicenza, Italy
— Acciaierie Bolzano s.r.l, Bolzano, Italy
— Cogne Acciai Speciali, Aosta, Italy
— Fagersta Stainless AB, Fagersta, Sweden
— Rold(cid:145)n SA, Madrid, Spain
— Ugine Savoie Imphy, Ugine, France

(69)

Two other replies were received from suppliers of
the Community industry, Avesta Sheffield Ltd
(Sheffield, United Kingdom) and Krupp Edelstahl-
profile (Siegen, Germany). These suppliers raised
the argument that they suffered both from direct
competition from third countries’ imports of wire
rod, which had substantially increased during the
last years, and from the upstream effect of the
dumped imports of the product concerned. Indeed,
since competition for stainless steel wires was
fierce, the Community industry had tried to find
cheaper suppliers for the raw material, sourcing as a
consequence in countries outside the Community,
i.e. Korea, India and Taiwan and had exerted price
pressure on its suppliers in order to secure low raw
material prices.

(70) Anti-dumping measures on the product concerned
would help the Community suppliers of stainless
steel wire rod to improve their deteriorating
economic situation and to regain profitability,
which would enable them to carry out the neces-
sary investments.

(c) R & D

(65)

The product concerned requires continuous invest-
ments in R&D, mainly related to the production
process, i.e. to the development of environmentally
friendly and energy-saving manufacturing technol-

(71) Users are wires processors whose semi-finished
products are used afterwards in construction, in the
automotive industry, for domestic appliances, for
medical purposes, etc. Out of the 60 questionnaires
sent, only four replies were received:

5. Users

L 79/22

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

24. 3. 1999

— Bever GmbH, Kirchhunden, Germany

— Tucai SA, Barcelona, Spain

— Tubiflex, Orbassano, Italy

made to the comments made under recital
above.

(27)

— Max Rhodius GmbH, Weissenburg, Germany

7. Conclusion on Community interest

(72)

The limited cooperation justifies the provisional
conclusion that anti-dumping measures, if any, will
most likely not have a decisive impact on the user
industry, either because this raw material is not a
significant cost factor for them or because their
production of downstream products relating to
SSW only accounts for a small proportion of their
total production. Furthermore, it is expected that
given the relatively moderate duty rates proposed
for the exporters concerned, the high number of
competing producers located in the Community,
imports from other third
and the existence of
countries, the measures are not likely to lead to an
overall major price increase for SSW in the
Community.

6. Competition and trade distorting effects

(73) As to trade effects of possible anti-dumping meas-
ures, although the product concerned is being
exported by the Community industry to other third
countries,
they are not exported to India due,
amongst others, to the high import duties existing
in this country for SSW. Furthermore, due to the
current international situation, the EU market is
one of the few open markets where demand for
steel remains strong.

(74) With respect to the effects of possible measures on
competition in the Community, some interested
parties have argued that duties would lead to the
producers
disappearance
concerned from the Community market,
thus
considerably weakening competition, and to an
increase of the prices for SSW.

exporting

the

of

(75)

In view of the above-mentioned market position of
the exporting producers concerned, the relatively
low duties proposed, the large number of producers
in the Community as well as the transparency of
the market, it can be concluded that Community
producers continue to have a considerable number
of strong competitors on the Community market.
Thus, users will also in the future benefit from the
the product
choice of different
concerned.

suppliers of

(76)

Finally, certain interested parties have argued that
it could not be in the interest of the Community to
impose measures taking into account the afore-
mentioned alleged practices in the calculation of
the alloy surcharge. In this respect reference is

(77) Given the above reasons, it is provisionally consid-
ered that there are no compelling reasons against
the imposition of anti-dumping duties.

(78)

(79)

G. PROVISIONAL ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES

1. Injury elimination level

injury,

In view of the conclusions reached with regard to
dumping,
causation and Community
interest, provisional measures should be taken in
order to prevent further injury being caused to the
Community industry by the dumped imports.

references

For establishing the level of duty, account has been
taken of the dumping margins found and of the
amount of
the duty necessary to eliminate the
injury sustained by the Community industry. The
necessary price increase was determined on the
basis of a comparison of
the weighted average
import price, as established for the undercutting
calculations, with the non-injurious price of the
sold by the
different
Community industry on the Community market.
The non-injurious price has been obtained by
deducting from the sales price of the Community
industry its average actual profit margin and by
adding a profit margin of 5 %. This profit margin
corresponds
the
minimum necessary in earlier cases for this type of
industry. Any difference
from this
comparison was then expressed as a percentage of
the total CIF import value.

to what has been found as

(or models)

resulting

2. Provisional measures

(a) India

(80)

In the light of the foregoing, it is considered that a
provisional anti-dumping duty should be imposed
at the level of the dumping margins found, but
should not be higher than the injury margins, in
accordance with Article 7(2) of the Basic Regula-
tion.

(81) As far as the parallel anti-subsidy proceeding is
concerned it should be noted that, in accordance
with Article 12(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No
2026/97, the countervailing duty rate should cor-
respond to the amount of subsidy unless the injury
margin is lower.

24. 3. 1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 79/23

(82)

(83)

In accordance with Article 24(1) of the above Regu-
lation (EC) No 2026/97 and Article 14(1) of the
Basic Regulation, no product shall be subject to
both anti-dumping and countervailing duties for
the purposes of dealing with one and the same
situation arising from dumping or from export
subsidisation. As anti-dumping duties should be
imposed on imports of the product in question it is
necessary to determine whether, and to what
extent, the subsidy and the dumping margins arise
from the same situation.

In the case in question all of the subsidy schemes
investigated have been found to constitute export
subsidies within the meaning of Article 3(4)(a) of
the above Regulation (EC) No 2026/97. As such,
the subsidies can only affect the export prices of
the Indian exporting producers, thus leading to
increased margins of dumping. In other words, the
dumping margins established are wholly or partly
due to the existence of export subsidies. In these
circumstances it is not considered appropriate to
impose both countervailing and anti-dumping
duties to the full extent of the relevant subsidy and
dumping margins established. Therefore, the anti-
dumping duties need to be adjusted to reflect the
actual dumping margins remaining after the im-
position of the countervailing duties offsetting the
effect of the export subsidies.

(84) On the basis of the above, the provisional duty
rates, expressed as
the CIF
Community border price, customs duty unpaid,
taking into account the results of the anti-subsidy
proceeding, are as follows:

a percentage of

Country/Company

Proposed
AD duty %

— Raajratna

— Triveni

— Venus Wire

0

55,6

0

As far as other exporting producers are concerned,
in view of the high level of cooperation found, the
highest company-specific anti-dumping duty found
should be applied. This was found to be 55,6 % for
India.

(b) Korea

(85) As the dumping margins found were de minimis or
very close to de minimis, no provisional anti-
dumping duties are imposed.

H. FINAL PROVISION

(86)

In the interests of sound administration, a period
should be fixed within which the interested parties
may make their views know in writing and request
a hearing. Furthermore, it should be stated that the
findings made for the purposes of this Regulation
are provisional and may have to be reconsidered for
the purposes of any definitive duty,

Country/Company

Proposed
AD duty %

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

India

— Bhansali

— Devidayal

— Indore Wire

— Isibars

— Isinox

— Kei Industries

— Macro Bars

— Mukand

0

2,4

25,3

0

0

32,2

0

10,1

Article 1

A provisional anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed
1.
on imports of wire of stainless steel with a diameter of 1
mm or more, containing by weight 2,5 % or more of
nickel and 20 % or more but not more than 22 % of
chromium, falling within CN code 7223 00 19 (TARIC
code 7223 00 19.90) and originating in India.

2.
This anti-dumping duty has been adjusted to reflect
the actual dumping margins remaining after the imposi-
tion of the countervailing duties as provisionally deter-
mined in Commission Regulation (EC) No 618/1999 (1).

The

rate of duty

3.
Community-frontier price, before duty,
follows:

applicable

to the

free-at-
shall be as

(1) See page 25 of this Official Journal.

L 79/24

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

24. 3. 1999

Manufacturers

Rate of duty
(%)

TARIC additional
code

Bhansali Bright Bars Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

Devidayal Industries Ltd, Mumbai

Indore Wire Company Ltd, Indore

Isibars Ltd, Mumbai

Isinox Steels Ltd, Mumbai

Kei Industries

Macro Bars and Wires Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

Mukand Ltd, Mumbai

Raajratna Metal Industries Ltd, Ahmedabad

Venus Wire Industries Ltd, Mumbai

All other Indian companies

0

2,4

25,3

0

0

32,2

0

10,1

0

0

55,6

A009

A010

A004

A011

A002

A020

A008

A003

A005

A006

A999

Unless otherwise specified, the provisions in force concerning customs duties shall

4.
apply.

5.
The release for free circulation in the Community of the product referred to in
paragraph 1 shall be subject to the provision of a security, equivalent to the amount of the
provisional duty.

Article 2

Without prejudice to Article 20 of Regulation (EC) No 384/96, the interested parties may
make known their views in writing and apply to be heard orally by the Commission within
15 days of the date of entry into force of this Regulation.

Pursuant to Article 21(4) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96, the parties concerned may
comment on the application of this Regulation within one month of the date of its entry
into force.

Article 3

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the
Official Journal of the European Communities.

Article 1 of this Regulation shall apply for a period of six months.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member
States.

Done at Brussels, 23 March 1999.

For the Commission

Leon BRITTAN

Vice-President