Council Regulation (EC) No 2570/2000 of 20 November 2000 amending Regulation (EC) No 393/98 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of stainless steel fasteners and parts thereof originating, inter alia, in the People's Republic of China
Date: 2000-11-20
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: China, anti-dumping duty, anti-dumping legislation, import policy, manufactured goods, steel

24.11.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 297/1

I

(Acts whose publication is obligatory)

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 2570/2000

of 20 November 2000

amending Regulation (EC) No 393/98 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of
stainless steel fasteners and parts thereof originating, inter alia, in the People's Republic of China

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22
December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from
countries not members of the European Community (1), and in
particular Article 11(3) and (4) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal submitted by the Commission
after consulting the Advisory Committee,

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

A. PREVIOUS PROCEDURE

fasteners and parts thereof

By Regulation (EC) No 393/98 (2), the Council imposed
a definitive anti-dumping duty of 74,7 % on imports of
stainless steel
(hereinafter
referred to as ‘the product’) originating, inter alia, in the
People's Republic of China. The product is currently
classifiable under CN codes 7318 12 10, 7318 14 10,
7318 15 30, 7318 15 51, 7318 15 61, 7318 15 70 and
7318 16 30.

B. CURRENT PROCEDURE

The Commission subsequently received an application
from Bulten Fasteners
(China) Co Ltd (hereinafter
referred to as ‘the company’) for a review of the meas-
ures currently in force, namely, a request to initiate a
‘new exporter’ review of Regulation (EC) No 393/98,
pursuant to Article 11(3) and (4) of Regulation (EC) No
384/96 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘basic Regulation’).
The company claimed that it operated under market
economy conditions as provided for in Article 2(7)(c) of
the basic Regulation and that it was not related to any of
the exporting producers in the People's Republic of
China subject to the anti-dumping measures in force
with regard to the product. Furthermore, the company
claimed that it had not exported the product during the

(1) OJ L 56, 6.3.1996, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation

(EC) No 2238/2000 (OJ L 257, 11.10.2000, p. 2).

(2) OJ L 50, 20.2.1998, p. 1.

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

original period of investigation (1 January 1996 to 30
November 1996), but had exported it to the Community
since then.

The product covered by the current review is the same
as the one under consideration in Regulation (EC) No
393/98.

The Commission examined the evidence submitted by
the company and considered it sufficient to justify the
initiation of a review in accordance with the provisions
of Article 11(3) and (4) of the basic Regulation. After
consultation of the Advisory Committee and after the
Community industry had been given the opportunity to
comment, the Commission initiated, by Regulation (EC)
No 59/2000 (3), a review of Regulation (EC) No 393/98
with regard to the company and commenced its invest-
igation.

By the Regulation initiating the review, the Commission
also repealed the anti-dumping duty imposed by Regula-
tion (EC) No 393/98 with regard to imports of the
product produced and exported to the Community by
the company and directed customs authorities, pursuant
to Article 14(5) of the basic Regulation, to take appro-
priate steps to register such imports.

The Commission officially advised the company and the
representatives of the exporting country. Furthermore, it
gave other parties directly concerned the opportunity to
make their views known in writing and to request a
hearing. However no such request has been received by
the Commission.

The Commission sent a questionnaire to the company
and its two related companies in Sweden (Bulten Micro
Fasteners AB and Bulten Stainless Industry AB) selling
the product produced by the company and received full
replies within the deadline. The Commission sought and
verified all
information it deemed necessary for the
purpose of the investigation, and carried out verification
visits at the companies' premises.

(3) OJ L 7, 12.1.2000, p. 1.

L 297/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

24.11.2000

(8)

(9)

The investigation of dumping covered the period from 1
January 1999 to 31 December 1999 (hereinafter
referred to as the ‘investigation period’).

The same methodology as in the original investigation
was applied in the current investigation.

C. SCOPE OF THE REVIEW

(10) As no request for a review of the findings on injury was
made in this investigation, the review was limited to
dumping.

D. RESULTS OF THE INVESTIGATION

1. New exporter qualification

(11)

The investigation confirmed that the company had not
exported the product during the original period of
investigation and that the company had begun exporting
it to the Community after this period.

the like product
the volume of domestic sales of
the 5 %
achieved a level considerably in excess of
type
threshold mentioned above. For each product
exported to the Community,
it was then examined
whether or not there were representative domestic sales
of identical or directly comparable types. It was found
that this was not the case and that in fact the product
types sold on the domestic market were not at all
comparable to the types
to the
Community, mainly because the types of steel grade
used for domestic purposes, although all stainless steel,
were different from the ones used for exports.

sold for export

(16) As a result, the normal value for each product type
exported to the Community was constructed on the
basis of
the cost of manufacturing incurred by this
producer plus a reasonable amount for sales, general and
administrative expenses and for profits in accordance
with Article 2(3) and 2(6) of the basic Regulation, since
the prices of another exporting producer could not be
used instead. The sales, general and administrative
expenses and the profit margin on domestic sales in the
ordinary course of trade were those of the producer in
question.

to

according

documentary

evidence
Furthermore,
submitted,
the company was able to satisfactorily
demonstrate that it did not have any links, direct or
indirect, with any of the Chinese exporting producers
subject
to the anti-dumping measures in force with
regard to the product.

Accordingly, it is confirmed that the company should be
considered as a new exporter in accordance with Article
11(4) of the basic Regulation, and thus an individual
dumping margin should be determined for it.

2. Dumping

a) M a r k e t e c o n o m y t r e a t m e n t

(12)

(13)

Since the company applied for market economy treat-
ment, detailed questions regarding ownership, manage-
ment control and determination of commercial and
business policies were put forward.

The investigation at the company's premises showed
that the five criteria required by Article 2(7)(c) of the
basic Regulation in order to grant market economy
status, were fulfilled.

(14) Details of

this

the outcome of

investigation were
presented to the members of the Advisory Committee
on 23 March 2000. Member States were given an
opportunity to comment on the proposal but did not
object to the conclusions of the Commission.

c) E x p o r t p r i c e

(17) All exports of the company were made to a related
company based in the Community. This company sold
to independent customers
in the Community and
partially to another related company also based in the
Community, which in its turn sold the product, together
with similar products sourced from other exporters, to
independent customers.

(18)

In order to establish a correct export price for the
product of the company only,
it was constructed in
accordance with Article 2(9) of the basic Regulation as
based on the price at which the exported product was
first resold to independent customers in the Community
by the first related company. This price was adjusted for
all costs incurred between importation and resale and
for profit.

(19) A profit margin of 5 % was used,

in line with the
findings concerning unrelated importers during the orig-
inal period of investigation.

b) N o r m a l v a l u e

d) C o m p a r i s o n

(15)

In accordance with Article 2(2) of the basic Regulation it
was examined whether the volume of the company's
sales of the like product on the Chinese domestic market
in total reached at least 5 % of the volume of the exports
of the product to the Community. It was established that

(20)

In accordance with Article 2(11) of the basic Regulation,
the weighted average normal value by product type was
compared, on an ex-factory basis, with the weighted
average export price at the same level of trade.

24.11.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 297/3

(21)

(22)

(23)

(24)

For the purpose of a fair comparison, due allowance in
the form of adjustments was made for differences which
were claimed and demonstrated to affect prices and
price comparability. These adjustments were made,
in
accordance with Article 2(10) of the basic Regulation, in
respect of import charges, discounts and rebates, trans-
port,
insurance, handling and ancillary costs, packing
and credit costs.

e) D u m p i n g m a r g i n

The comparison revealed the existence of dumping for
exports of the product to the Community during the
investigation period.

This weighted average dumping margin established for
the company, expressed as a percentage of the free-at-
Community-frontier price, amounts to 18,5 %.

E. AMENDMENT OF THE MEASURES BEING REVIEWED

Based on the findings made during the investigation, it is
considered that imports into the Community of stainless
steel fasteners and parts thereof produced and exported
by the company should be subject to an anti-dumping
duty corresponding to the dumping margin established

for it. Regulation (EC) No 393/98 should be amended
accordingly.

F. RETROACTIVE LEVYING OF THE ANTI-DUMPING

DUTY

(25) As

the review has

resulted in a determination of
dumping in respect of the company, the anti-dumping
duty applicable to it should also be levied retroactively
from the date of initiation of this review on imports
which have been made subject to registration pursuant
to Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 59/2000.

G. DISCLOSURE AND DURATION OF THE MEASURE

(26)

(27)

The company was informed of the facts and considera-
tions on the basis of which it is intended to impose a
definitive anti-dumping duty on its imports to the
Community.

This review does not affect the date on which Regulation
(EC) No 393/98 will expire pursuant to Article 11(2) of
the basic Regulation,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The table in Article 1(2) of Regulation (EC) No 393/98 shall, with regard to China, be replaced by the

1.
following:

‘Country

Company

Rate of duty

China

Bulten Fasteners (China) Co. Ltd

Ningbo Shyechang Metal Products

Power Van Industrial Co. Ltd

All other companies

18,5 %

24,2 %

13,6 %

74,7 %

TARIC
additional code

A208

8757

8333

8900’

The duty hereby imposed shall also be levied retroactively on imports of the product which have been

2.
registered pursuant to Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 59/2000.

3.

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

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

Article 2

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

Done at Brussels, 20 November 2000.

For the Council

The President

H. VÉDRINE