Proposal for a Council Regulation imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain ring binder mechanisms (RBM) originating in Indonesia and terminating the anti-dumping proceeding in respect of imports of certain RBM originating in India
Date: 2002-05-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: India, Indonesia, anti-dumping duty, book trade, import, originating product

24.9.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 227 E/309

Proposal for a Council Regulation imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain
ring binder mechanisms (RBM) originating in Indonesia and terminating the anti-dumping
proceeding in respect of imports of certain RBM originating in India

(2002/C 227 E/04)

COM(2002) 246 final

(Submitted by the Commission on 21 May 2002)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

2. Present proceeding

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 9 thereof,

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

Whereas:

A. PROCEDURE

1. Previous proceeding concerning imports of ring
binder mechanisms originating in the People's
Republic of China and Malaysia

In January 1997, by Regulation (EC) No 119/97 (2), the
Council
imposed definitive anti-dumping duties on
imports of ring binder mechanisms (‘RBMs’) originating
in the People's Republic of China (‘the PRC’) and
Malaysia.

In September 2000, following the initiation of a review
to Article 12 of Council Regulation (EC)
pursuant
the Council, by
No 384/96 (‘the basic Regulation’),
Regulation (EC) No 2100/2000 (3),
the
definitive anti-dumping duties on imports of RBMs orig-
inating in the PRC.

amended

the Commission initiated a review
In January 2002,
pursuant
to Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation of
anti-dumping measures applicable to imports of RBMs
originating in the PRC (4). No request for a review was
received concerning the measures applicable to Malaysia,
which consequently expired in January 2002.

(1)

(2)

(3)

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

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

(2) OJ L 22, 24.1.1997, p. 1.
(3) OJ L 250, 5.10.2000, p. 1.
(4) OJ C 21, 24.1.2002, p. 25.

(4) On 18 May 2001, the Commission announced by a
notice (‘Notice of
Initiation’) published in the Official
Journal of the European Communities (5) the initiation of
an anti-dumping proceeding with regard to imports
into the Community of certain RBMs originating in
India and Indonesia.

(5) The proceeding was initiated as a result of a complaint
lodged on 3 April 2001 by the following Community
producers: Koloman Handler AG (‘Koloman’), Austria,
and Krause Ringbuchtechnik GmbH & Co. KG (‘Krause’),
Germany (the
representing a major
proportion, in this case about 90 %, of the Community
production of RBMs. The complaint contained evidence
of dumping of the said product and of material injury
resulting therefrom, which was considered sufficient to
justify the initiation of a proceeding.

‘complainants’)

(6) The initiation of a parallel anti-subsidy proceeding
concerning imports of the same product originating in
the same countries was announced by a notice published
in the Official Journal of the European Communities (6) on
the same date.

(7) The Commission officially

the

advised

representatives

exporters
the

exporting
producers,
and importers known to be
exporting
concerned,
countries concerned, the complainants and all known
and users
other Community producers
the
initiation of
Interested parties were
the proceeding.
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.

about

the

of

(8) One exporting producer

in each of

the countries
concerned made
its views known in writing. All
parties who so requested within the above time limit
and indicated that there were particular reasons why
they should be heard were granted a hearing.

(5) OJ C 147, 18.5.2001, p. 2.
(6) OJ C 147, 18.5.2001, p. 4.

C 227 E/310

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

24.9.2002

(9) The Commission sent questionnaires

in the Notice of

to all parties
known to be concerned and to all other companies
which made themselves known within the deadlines
set out
Initiation. Replies were
received from one of the two complainant Community
producers, one exporting producer in India, as well as
from its related exporter outside the Community, and
from one user and two unrelated importers in the
Community. The Commission sought and verified all
the information it deemed necessary for the purpose
of a determination of dumping,
injury, causation and
Community interest. Verification visits were carried out
at the premises of the following companies:

imposed on RBMs originating in India and

were
Indonesia.

4. Subsequent procedure

(12) All parties were informed of the decision not to impose
provisional measures. The Commission continued to
information deemed necessary for
seek and verify all
further on-the-spot
In particular,
definitive findings.
investigations were carried out at
the premises of a
user of RBMs in the Community and of two unrelated
importers in the Community.

(a) Community producers

— Koloman Handler AG, Austria

(b) Exporting producers in India

— ToCheungLee Stationery Mfg Co. Pvt. Ltd., Tiru-

vallore

(c) Related exporters outside the Community in Hong

Kong

— ToCheungLee

(BVI)

Stationery Mfg. Co., Ltd.
company)

Limited/World Wide
(ultimate holding

(d) Unrelated importers

— Bensons
Kingdom

International

Systems

Ltd, United

— Bensons

International

Systems

BV,

The

Netherlands

(e) User

— Esselte, United Kingdom.

(10) The investigation of dumping and injury covered the
period from 1 April 2000 to 31 March 2001 (‘investi-
gation period’ or ‘IP’). For the purposes of analysing
trends
the
Commission has examined data relating to the period
the IP (‘period
1 January 1998 up to the end of
considered’).

assessment of

relevant

injury,

the

for

3. Provisional measures

(11) Given the need to further examine certain aspects of
injury, causation and Community interest, in particular
in
the
complainants, no provisional anti-dumping measures

restructuring

view of

ongoing

the

of

(13) All parties were informed of

the essential

facts and
considerations on the basis of which it was intended
to recommend the imposition of definitive anti-dumping
duties. They were also granted a period within which
they could make representations subsequent
to this
disclosure. The oral and written comments submitted
by the parties were considered and, where appropriate,
the findings have been modified accordingly.

B. PRODUCT CONCERNED AND LIKE PRODUCT

1. Product concerned

(14) The product concerned is certain ring binder mech-
anisms (‘the product concerned’). These are currently
classifiable within CN code ex 8305 10 00. Lever-arch
mechanisms, falling within the same CN code, are not
included in the scope of this investigation.

(15) RBMs consist of two rectangular steel sheets or wires
with at least four half-rings made of steel wire fixed
on them and which are kept together by a steel cover.
They can be opened either by pulling the half-rings or
with a small steel-made trigger mechanism fixed to the
RBM. The rings can have different shapes,
the most
popular ones being round, rectangular or D-shaped.

(16) RBMs are used to file different kinds of documents or
papers. They are used,
inter alia, by producers of ring
binders, software and technical manuals, photo and
stamp albums, catalogues and brochures.

(17) Several hundred different models of RBMs were sold
during the IP in the Community. The models varied by
size, shape and number of rings, the size of the base
plate and the system to open the rings (pull open or
opening trigger). In the absence of a clear dividing line
in the range of RBMs and given that all of them have the
same basic physical and technical characteristics, and
that the models of RBMs can, within certain ranges,
replace each other, the Commission established that all
RBMs constitute one single product for the purpose of
the present proceeding.

24.9.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 227 E/311

2. Like product

(a) Normal value

(18) The Commission found that the RBMs produced and
sold on the domestic market
in India and those
exported to the Community from India had the same
basic physical and technical characteristics and uses.

(19) The Commission also found that there was no difference
in the basic physical and technical characteristics and
uses between the RBMs imported into the Community
originating in India and the RBMs produced by the
Community industry and sold on the Community
market.

(20) In view of the lack of cooperation from any Indonesian
producer, the Commission relied on facts available in
accordance with Article 18 of the basic Regulation. In
this regard and in the absence of any other information
available for the country, the Commission considered it
appropriate to make use of the information submitted in
the complaint, according to which the RBMs produced
and sold in Indonesia or exported to the Community
complainant
and
Community producers and sold on the Community
market are alike.

the RBMs

produced

the

by

(21) It was therefore concluded that the RBMs produced and
sold by the Community industry on the Community
market, the RBMs originating in India and Indonesia
exported to the Community and the RBMs produced
and sold on the domestic market
and
Indonesia were all like products within the meaning of
Article 1(4) of the basic Regulation.

in India

(22) During the IP the product concerned was subject to a
conventional customs duty of 2,7 % in 2000 and 2,7 %
in 2001. Under the GSP regime the product concerned
imported from India and Indonesia benefited from a
reduction amounting to 100 % of
the conventional
customs duty payable in 2000 and 2001. As a result,
the duty applied was 0 % in 2000 and 0 % in 2001.

(24) For the purpose of determining normal value, it was first
established whether the total domestic sales of RBMs of
the sole cooperating Indian exporting producer were
representative in comparison with its total export sales
to the Community. In accordance with Article 2(2) of
the basic Regulation, domestic sales were not considered
representative since the total domestic sales volume of
the exporting producer was less than 5 % of its total
export sales volume to the Community.

(25) In the absence of representative domestic sales, or sales
by any other exporting producer in the domestic market,
or other sales in the same general category of products
by the exporting producer, normal value had to be
the
constructed in accordance with Article 2(3) of
basic Regulation on the basis of the cost of manufac-
turing plus a reasonable amount for selling, general and
administrative (SG&A) costs and for profits.

(26) The company's own SG&A costs and profit on domestic
sales of the product concerned were added to the manu-
facturing costs of the exported models. In accordance
with Article 2(5) of the basic Regulation, SG&A costs
declared by the exporting producer were adjusted to
reflect its audited financial statements.

(27) Following

of

the

facts

essential

disclosure

and
considerations on the basis of which it was intended
to impose definitive measures, the cooperating Indian
exporting producer argued that,
in the absence of
representative domestic sales, its own SG&A and profit
margin on domestic sales could not be used for the
construction of normal value and that
the profit
margin was not reasonable in comparison to the profit
margin, used for the injury elimination level calculation,
used in previous investigations and actually attained on
export sales.

(28) As regards SG&A, the argument put forward by the
Indian exporting producer was not
supported by
evidence that the company's own SG&A would have
been significantly different had the domestic sales been
more than 5 % of exports. Accordingly, this claim was
rejected.

C. DUMPING

1. India

(23) One company replied to the questionnaire for exporting
producers. A company outside the Community related
to this exporting producer also replied to the ques-
tionnaire. On the basis of
import data reported by
Eurostat,
this exporting producer accounted for all
Indian exports to the Community.

(29) As regards profit, the situation was reviewed in light of
new data obtained for the Indian domestic market. Based
on this new data, it was determined that a reasonable
profit margin, not exceeding the profit normally realised
by other exporters or producers on sales of the same
general category of products in the domestic market of
the country of origin, India, would not exceed 5 %. The
calculation was accordingly revised on this basis.

C 227 E/312

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

24.9.2002

(b) Export price

(30) All export sales to the Community were made to inde-
pendent importers in the Community and the export
price was established pursuant to Article 2(8) of the
basic Regulation by reference to the prices actually
paid or payable.

company was duly informed that should it not cooperate
findings for it would be based on the facts available.
Despite this, the company still did not cooperate with
the investigation. In accordance with Article 16(1) of the
basic Regulation no verification visit was carried out at
the premises of this exporting producer.

(c) Comparison

(a) Normal value and export price

(31) For the purpose of ensuring a fair comparison between
the normal value and the export price, due allowance in
the form of adjustments was made for differences
affecting price comparability in accordance with Article
2(10) of the basic Regulation.

(32) Sales to the Community were made through a related
company in Hong Kong. This company carried out the
functions of a trader and an adjustment was made to the
export price from this company in Hong Kong by
deducting a commission from the export price to take
account of the functions performed by it.

(33) Allowances

for differences

insurance,
packing and credit costs have also been made where
applicable and justified.

in transport,

(d) Dumping margin

(34) As provided by Article 2(11) of the basic Regulation, the
weighted average normal value of each model of the
product concerned exported to the Community was
compared to the weighted average export price at
ex-factory level for the same model and at the same
level of trade.

(35) The comparison showed that no dumping existed for
exports of RBM made by the cooperating exporting
producer during the IP. The definitive dumping margin
expressed as a percentage of the cif import price at the
Community frontier duty unpaid is as follows:

— ToCheungLee Stationery Mfg. Co. Pvt. Ltd.: 0,0 %

(36) Since the cooperating exporting producer accounted for
all
Indian exports to the Community of the product
concerned, it was decided to set the residual dumping
margin at the level of the dumping margin found for
this cooperating exporting producer, i.e. 0,0 %.

2. Indonesia

(37) The sole known exporting producer in Indonesia and its
related importer did not reply to the questionnaire. In
accordance with Article 18 of the basic Regulation, this

(38) Using facts available and in the absence of any other
reliable information available for the country,
it was
considered appropriate to base the determination on
the
In
accordance with Article 18(5) of the Basic Regulation;
this information was checked, where practicable, by
reference
independent
sources.

information submitted in the

to information from other

complaint.

(39) Normal value was constructed for five different types of
RBMs in Indonesia on the basis of the cost of manu-
facturing plus a reasonable amount for SG&A costs and
for profit.

(40) The export price was determined on the basis of the
price to the first unrelated buyer in the Community
for each of the five types. Adjustments for SG&A costs
and a reasonable profit were made based on information
contained in the complaint.

(41) The sole known exporting producer in Indonesia argued
that the normal value established on the basis of the
complaint was not representative of their true normal
value and furthermore,
the
Commission is required to check the information in
the complaint against
independent sources including
published price lists, official statistics or other inde-
pendent official information.

that under Article 18(5)

(42) As mentioned above, this exporting producer did not
provide any data for
the establishment of normal
value. It was attempted, as much as possible, to find
alternative sources of
information and to cross-check
the complaint data through internet searches, exam-
importer and
ination of data from an independent
analysis of data from Eurostat.
the
complaint included five specific models with a diverse
range of prices for normal value and compared those
prices with the equivalent export prices for the same
models. A comparison of each individual normal value
the normal values from the
or a simple average of
complaint with the weighted average export price from
Eurostat would not have provided a meaningful basis for
a finding. Consequently, no alternative data was obtained
with regard to normal value or export price which was
considered more reliable than that in the complaint.

In this respect,

24.9.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 227 E/313

(b) Comparison

(43) Adjustments for transport and distribution costs were
made where
to allow a fair
comparison. The adjustments were equally based on
information contained in the complaint which was
verified.

applicable

in order

(c) Dumping margin

(44) As provided by Article 2(11) of the basic Regulation, the
normal values of each type considered of the product
concerned exported to the Community were compared
to the export prices at ex-factory level
for each
comparable type.

(45) The comparison showed the existence of dumping in
Indonesia. The dumping margin expressed
the
at
Indonesian

respect of
as
Community frontier duty unpaid for all
exporting producers is as follows:

a percentage of

import price

the

cif

(46) All exporters: 144,0 %.

D. INJURY

1. Preliminary remark

(47) Given that only one Indian exporting producer coop-
erated in the investigation and that
the Community
industry comprises only one company, specific data
relating to these companies have been indexed or put
in the form of a range in order to preserve the confi-
dentiality of
the data submitted in accordance with
Article 19 of the basic Regulation.

2. Community production

(48) It was

established that,

in addition to the

two
complainant Community producers' output, production
was also taking place in Italy and Spain. Although the
Italian company involved did not supply complete data to
the Commission, the information received confirmed that,
during the IP, it represented a share of around 10 % of
total Community production. As regards the Spanish
company, which did not supply complete data to the
Commission,
in 2001 it produced
negligible volumes of the product concerned, while it
imported a major portion of its sales from one of the
countries concerned. It was concluded therefore that it
should be considered as an importer
than a
producer.

it was found that

rather

(49) It was also found that a company located in the UK had
formerly been involved in the production of a certain
type of RBMs. This company confirmed in writing that
its production of the product concerned ceased some

years ago. No other producers in the Community are
known.

(50) Based on the above, the production of the complainants
and the other Community producer located in Italy
constitute the total Community production within the
meaning of Article 4(1) of the basic Regulation.

3. Definition of the Community industry

(a) Community industry

for

in Hungary

(51) Of the two complainant producers one did not reply to
the questionnaire (Krause) and was considered to be non
cooperating. This producer, even though supporting the
complaint, was therefore not regarded as being part of
the Community industry. Regarding the other producer
(Koloman),
it was found that this company not only
produced the like product in the Community during
the IP, but also produced parts of it in Hungary.
In
addition to its Community production, Koloman traded
the Hungarian products in the Community and also used
parts produced
its Community
production. Moreover, part of the production of the
cooperating Community producer was relocated at the
beginning of the year 2000 by means of transfer of
certain machinery from Austria to Hungary. However,
despite the foregoing, the core activity of this company
i.e. head office, ware-
remained in the Community,
significant
a
housing,
amount of
the product range, as well as significant
technical and marketing know-how. The imported sales
completed the product range of the like product and did
not therefore affect the Koloman's status as Community
producer. As to the production of parts in Hungary and
their subsequent incorporation into the finished product,
the investigation established that
these incorporated
parts represented only a minor proportion of the cost
of production of the finished products and thus, of the
added value. Consequently, the status of the producer as
Community producer is not affected by these imports.

sales office, production of

(52) The investigation confirmed that the sole cooperating
Community producer represented more than 25 % of
the Community production of RBMs, thus fulfilling the
requirements of Article 5(4) of the basic Regulation. It
was therefore deemed to constitute the Community
industry within the meaning of Article 4(1) of
the
same Regulation and will be hereinafter referred to as
‘the Community industry’.

(b) Events occurring after the investigation period

(53) In November 2001,

i.e. after the end of the IP, the
cooperating Community producer Koloman went into
receivership and as a result of a liquidation procedure,
was taken over by an Austrian company, whose parent
company,
also acquired the
Hungarian affiliate of Koloman.

located in the UK,

C 227 E/314

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

24.9.2002

(54) The acquirers

confirmed to the Commission their

(c) Prices of dumped imports

on-going support of the complaint.

(c) Community consumption

the

fact

taken of

(55) The apparent Community consumption was established
on the basis of the sales volumes of the Community
industry on the Community market, the sales of the
other Community producers on the Community
market as reported in the complaint, duly adjusted as
concerns the IP,
information provided by the coop-
erating exporting producer and Eurostat import data.
Account was
that CN code
8305 10 00 also covers products not included in the
scope of
this proceeding. However, with regard to
Indonesia, given the lack of cooperation of Indonesian
exporters, best facts available were used,
i.e. Eurostat
data. In this respect, based on the complaint as best
evidence
above-
mentioned CN code were considered to constitute the
product concerned. The non-cooperating Indonesian
its exports to the Community
exporter claimed that
market were around 15 % lower
than the import
volumes used. However,
this claim could not be
verified and the difference was such that it could be
explained by the ratio used to convert Eurostat statistics,
which are in tonnes, to units. On this basis, Community
consumption increased by 5 % between 1998 and the IP.
In more detail,
it remained relatively stable between
1998 and 1999 and then steadily increased until the
end of the IP when it was found to be around 348
million units.

imports under

available,

the

all

4. Imports from the country concerned

(56) It

is

recalled that

the proceeding against

India is
terminated. Therefore, only imports from Indonesia are
being analysed as imports from the remaining country
concerned.

(i) Price evolution

(59) The weighted average import prices of imports orig-
inating in Indonesia decreased by – 5 % between 1998
i.e. from ECU 105 per thousand units to
and the IP,
EUR 99 per
decrease was
thousand units. The
particularly marked between 1998 and 1999 when
prices fell by 3 % and between 2000 and the IP when
they fell by 2 %.

(ii) Undercutting

(60) Given the

lack of

cooperation from Indonesian
exporters, the price comparison was made on the basis
of Eurostat data duly adjusted for customs duties and
post
the same
level of trade, to Community producers' ex-works prices.

importation costs and compared, at

(61) On that basis, the price undercutting was reviewed and
amended when necessary on the basis of information
verification visits.
provided
Imports
found to undercut
Community industry prices between 30 % and 40 %. It
should also be noted that there was price suppression
since the Community industry was not profitable.

during
the
from Indonesia were

additional

5. Situation of the Community industry

(a) Production

(62) The Community industry's production followed a
downward trend over the period, decreasing by 25 %
between 1998 and the IP. A significant decrease took
place between 1998 and 1999 (– 15 %). A further
significant decrease occurred also between 1999 and
2000 and subsequently production volume remained
stable until the end of the IP.

(a) Volume of dumped imports

(b) Capacity and capacity utilisation rates

(57) Even if

imports volume originating in Indonesia
decreased between 1998 and 2000 and then slightly
rose again between 2000 and the IP,
it should be
noted that while imports from the country concerned
only started in 1997, they were already significant in
1998 and were at a level of 32 million pieces in the IP.

(63) The production capacity followed the same trend as the
production and decreased by 26 % between 1998 and
the IP.

(64) On this basis,

the capacity utilisation rate remained

stable over the period considered.

(b) Market share of dumped imports

(58) The market shares held by Indonesian imports were
found to be between 8 % and 13 % having decreased
by around 2 percentage points since 1998.

(c) Stocks

(65) The Community industry's end-of-year stocks decreased

by 12 % between 1998 and the IP.

24.9.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 227 E/315

(d) Sales in the Community

(66) Despite an increase in Community consumption, the
sales volume of the Community industry fell significantly
between 1998 and the IP, by 25 %. A decrease occurred
between 1998 and 1999 (– 10 %), and an even more
pronounced one between 1999 and 2000, (– 15 %).

same period, thus leading to an increase of the average
wage by 5 % between 1998 and the IP. Productivity of
the Community industry's workforce, measured as
production volume per person employed increased by
8 % between 1998 and the IP.

(e) Market share

(67) The market share of the Community industry decreased
by more than 4 percentage points between 1998 and
the IP, thus following the same trend as the volume sold.

(j) Investment and return on investment

(73) The level of

investments decreased by 39 % between
1998 and the IP. The decrease was particularly marked
between 1999 and 2000. The investigation showed that
most of this capital expenditure was related to replacing
or maintaining existing facilities.

(f) Prices

(68) The average net sales price of the Community industry
decreased by 4 % between 1998 and the IP. Such a
decrease was particularly marked between 1998 and
1999 (– 6 %),
the
country concerned significantly decreased, as explained
in recital (59).

i.e. when the import prices of

(g) Profitability

(69) The weighted average profitability of the Community
industry deteriorated by 10 percentage points between
1998 and the IP and became a loss as from 2000. As a
result of
and as
mentioned in recital (53), the Community industry had
to go into receivership.

this unfavourable

development

(74) The return on investment, expressed as the relation
the Community industry
between the net profits of
and the net book value of
followed
its investments,
very closely the profitability trend and became negative
in 2000.

(k) Growth

(75) While Community consumption increased by 5 %
between 1998 and the IP,
the
Community industry decreased by around 25 % and
the volume of imports concerned remained significant.
The Community industry was therefore unable to benefit
from the
the demand on the
Community market.

the sales volume of

increase of

slight

(h) Cash flow and ability to raise capital

(70) The development of the cash flow generated by the
Community industry in relation to sales of RBMs is
very similar to that of the profitability, i.e. a significant
decrease between 1998 and the IP.

(71) The

investigation established that

the Community
industry's ability to raise capital became more difficult
at
this time owing to its financial situation and in
particular to its deteriorated profitability.

(i) Employment, wages, and productivity

(72) Employment of the Community industry related to the
production of RBMs decreased by 30 % between 1998
and the IP. The total amount of wages as a whole
falling by 27 % during the
followed a similar trend,

(l) Magnitude of the dumping margin

(76) As concerns the impact on the Community industry of
the magnitude of the actual dumping margin, given the
volume and the prices of the imports from the country
concerned, this impact cannot be considered negligible.

(m) Recovery from the effect of past dumping

(77) The Community industry is still

in the process of
recovering from the effect of the past dumped imports
of RBMs originating in the PRC and Malaysia. As
mentioned, Regulation (EC) No 119/97 (1)
imposing
definitive measures was amended by Council Regulation
(EC) No 2100/2000 (2) to take account of the findings of
an anti-absorption procedure against the PRC. Moreover,
while measures against Malaysia lapsed in January 2002,
to Chinese
a review has been opened with respect
imports of RBMs.

(1) OJ L 22, 24.1.1997, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 250, 5.10.2000, p. 1.

C 227 E/316

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

24.9.2002

6. Relocation of part of the production

the

relocation of part of
(51)

(78) In order to verify that the deterioration of situation of
the Community industry was not due to a change in the
it was also
pattern of
the Community production,
the
examined whether
production mentioned in recital
(by means of
transfer of machinery from Austria to Hungary), which
took place at the beginning of the year 2000, had an
effect on the situation of the Community industry. It
happened that while the decreasing trend of certain
injury indicators was aggravated by this relocation (i.e.
production, production capacity and sales volume), the
trend of the capacity utilisation and of the average sales
leading to a limitation of losses. For
prices improved,
instance,
the
decrease in the production is linked to the relocation,
and around 80 % of the sales volume decrease, while
without this relocation, the price decrease would have
been three times higher and the profitability would have
lost 7 additional percentage points. Given the above, it
was concluded that the deterioration of the situation of
the Community industry was not due to a change in the
pattern of the Community production.

it was assessed that around 60 % of

(79) It has been argued that

the core activity of

the
Community industry is no longer in the Community
since the relocation to Hungary allegedly entailed a
60 % decline in its Community production, and a
80 % decline in its Community produced sales.

(80) As already explained in recital (78), the relocation did
not entail such a decrease in the Community industry's
production, but only a decrease of 15 % of
its
Community production and 20 % of
its Community
the conclusion stated in
produced sales. Therefore,
the
recitals
Community industry is confirmed.

activity of

regarding

core

(51)

the

7. Conclusion on injury

(81) A deterioration of

the situation of

the Community
industry (after having taken account of the relocation
as outlined in recital (78)) has been found by reference
to the period considered.

(82) While the anti-dumping measures on imports of RBMs
originating in the PRC and Malaysia led to a substantial
decrease of imports originating in these countries after
1998, the Community industry could not fully benefit
from this development. As from the year 1998, most
injury indicators, i.e. production, sales volumes, prices,
market share, profitability, return on investment, cash

flow and employment developed negatively. In particular
the decrease in the sales prices of
the Community
industry had a negative effect on its profitability.

(83) Moreover, while sales of

the Community industry
decreased between 1998 and the IP, imports originating
in Indonesia were substantial. The investigation has
shown that during the IP the Indonesian imports were
made at prices undercutting those of the Community
industry between 30 % and 40 %.
there
was price suppression.

In addition,

(84) The situation of the Community industry is thus found
is
the Community industry has suffered

to have deteriorated to such an extent
concluded that
material injury.

that

it

(85) It is recalled that after the IP, the poor financial situation
led the Community industry to go into receivership.

E. CAUSATION

1. Introduction

(86) In accordance with Article 3(6) and (7) of the basic
Regulation, it was examined whether the imports orig-
inating in Indonesia in view of their volume and their
effect on prices in RBM Community market, have caused
injury to the Community industry to a degree that
enables it to be classified as material. Known factors
other than the dumped imports, which could at the
same time be injuring the Community industry, were
also examined to ensure that possible injury caused by
these other factors was not attributed to the dumped
imports from Indonesia.

2. Effect of the dumped imports

(87) The volume of the dumped imports decreased by 14 %
between 1998 and the IP, and its corresponding share of
the Community market by 2 percentage points during
the same period. However, they remained significant and
always held a market share which ranged between 8 %
and 13 % between 1998 and the IP. These imports also
the Community
significantly undercut
industry. The market share of the Community industry
went down by more than 4 percentage points. At the
same time, average prices of the Community decreased
by 4 %. The actual decline in prices was in fact even
higher as outlined in recital (78).

the prices of

24.9.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 227 E/317

(88) During the same period, between 1998 and the IP, the
situation of
the Community industry deteriorated as
illustrated by the decrease of sales volume and market
share,
the price decrease and the substantial deterio-
ration of its profitability, which turned to losses. Thus,
the Community industry could not significantly benefit
from the imposition of the abovementioned measures
against the PRC and Malaysia.

(89) It has been argued by an Indonesian exporter that
Indonesian exports could not have caused injury since
they decreased between 1999 and 2000 and held a de
minimis market share. The same company alleged that
imports from Indonesia could not have any real impact
on the Community industry since the Community
production was
than the
volume of Indonesian imports.

six times higher

five or

(58), between 1998 and the IP,

(90) It is however recalled that although Indonesian imports
decreased between 1998 and 2000,
they slightly
increased between 2000 and the IP without reaching
the level of 1998. In addition, as already explained in
recital
Indonesian
imports held a market share situated between 8 % and
13 % which is substantial and clearly above de minimis.
Finally, it is also recalled that the Community industry is
clearly defined in recital
its level of
production is far below that which has been alleged
by the Indonesian company.

(52) and that

(91) It can therefore be concluded that the dumped imports
originating in Indonesia have undermined the effects of
the anti-dumping measures adopted in 1997 against the
PRC and Malaysia and amended in 2000 as regards the
PRC, and that they have been a substantive cause of the
negative developments as summarised in the preceding
paragraphs.

Thailand, whereas in the meantime, imports originating
in the PRC and Malaysia significantly decreased owing to
the anti-dumping measures imposed in 1997.

(94) The average unit price of imports from third countries
decreased by 16 % between 1998 and the IP. Prices from
almost all third countries decreased during this period
except prices of imports from the PRC, which due to the
increased
effect
significantly although reaching the same level as the
Hungarian prices only in the IP.

anti-dumping measures

the

of

(i) India

In addition,

than prices of

Indonesian imports
then,

(95) It was firstly examined whether imports originating in
India might have contributed to the injury suffered by
the Community industry. However, although imports
from India increased significantly between 1998 and
the IP, they were found to be undercut by the imports
from Indonesia whose prices were found to be in a range
Indian imports
of 2 % to 30 % lower than prices of
between 1998 and the IP.
it should be
noted that when Indian imports started in 1998, prices
of Indian imports were found to be more than 40 %
a
higher
for
comparable
Indian
volume of RBMs. Since
imports prices decreased steadily but have always been
above Indonesian prices and were still found to be more
than 5 % higher than Indonesian prices during the IP. It
is therefore concluded that, although Indian imports have
had a negative impact on the situation of the Community
industry, the negative impact of the dumped imports
from Indonesia taken in isolation was nonetheless
substantial.
Indonesia was an influential and
important player in the Community. Their volume of
than that of
exports to the Community was lower
Indian exports but still substantial.
Indonesian exports
undercut
the Community industry's prices even more
than Indian exports. It is also noted that the aforemen-
tioned analysis was seriously impeded by the fact that
no
Indonesia
cooperate
information was available in terms of product
types,
market segments represented by exports from Indonesia.

therefore,

Indeed,

and,

not

did

3. Effect of other factors

(a) Imports from other third countries

(92) Consideration was given to whether factors, other than
the dumped imports from Indonesia, might have led to
or contributed to the injury suffered by the Community
industry and especially whether imports from countries
than Indonesia may have contributed to this
other
situation.

(93) The import volume from other third countries increased
by 17 % between 1998 and the IP while their market
share increased by more than 5 percentage points during
the same period. This increase is to a large extent due to
the increase in imports originating in India, Hungary and

(ii) The People's Republic of China

(96) Consideration was also given to whether the absorption
of
the anti-dumping measures imposed in 1997 on
imports from the PRC might have led to or contributed
to the injury suffered by the Community industry. In this
respect, it is noteworthy that although the absorption of
the duty on imports from the PRC have undermined the
effect of the measures imposed in 1997 with regard to
the sales prices, those measures still led to a significant
reduction of the volumes imported from the PRC as
it should be noted that
soon as 1998.
while imports from Indonesia only began in 1997,
they had already reached around the same level as the
imports from the PRC by 1998. Since then,
imports
from the PRC dramatically decreased while Indonesian
imports decreased by a much lesser extent until the IP

In addition,

C 227 E/318

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

24.9.2002

when these latter imports were still more than three
times higher than imports from the PRC. Therefore,
given that the import volumes from the PRC were far
below the import volumes from Indonesia during the IP,
it was concluded that these imports did not have as
serious an impact on the Community industry as
compared to the effect of the dumped imports from
Indonesia.

(iii) Hungary

(97) In order to determine whether imports from Hungary, in
isolation, caused injury to the Community industry, the
level of imports and prices on the Community market
were examined.

(98) The analysis as regards Hungarian imports between
1998 and the IP was based on data provided in the
questionnaire reply of the Community producer, whose
sole Hungarian
represents
plant
producer.

in Hungary

the

(99) During the period considered,

imports of RBMs orig-
inating in Hungary increased in volume. As to their
prices charged by the Community industry on the
Community market
its products imported from
Hungary, while these decreased during the period
the
considered,
import prices from the other third countries and were
undercut by imports from Indonesia.

they remained the highest amongst

for

(100) The Hungarian production of RBMs of the Community
industry was analysed and compared to the Austrian
production.
there was very little
overlap between the models produced in Austria and
Hungary.

It was found that

(101) Given this small percentage of models manufactured
both in Austria and in Hungary, it was concluded that
the Hungarian products completed the product range of
the Community industry enabling it to offer a wider
choice of models to customers and that they did not
affect negatively the
the Community
industry.

situation of

(102) On the basis of the above, it was concluded that imports
to

from Hungary
deteriorate the situation of the Community industry.

did not materially

contribute

(iv) Thailand

(103) Given that, as already mentioned in Council Regulation
(EC) No 2100/2000,
the goods of Chinese
‘some of
origin were declared to national customs authorities as

being of Thai origin and thus avoided payment of the
also
anti-dumping
considered appropriate
impact of
imports consigned from Thailand.

duties normally

to evaluate

it was

due’,

the

(104) In this

respect,

imports

from Thailand significantly
increased during the period considered since they
started in 1998 with around 1 million units and rose
to more than 23 million units in the IP. In addition, it
was established on the basis of Eurostat data, that sales
prices of Thai imports were generally below the prices of
Indonesian imports.

(105) However, although Thai prices were found to be around
20 % lower than the prices of the Indonesian imports, it
is recalled these latter are more than one third higher
than import volumes from Thailand. Therefore, given
imported from Thailand are still
that
from
substantially
volumes
Indonesia,
it was concluded that these imports could
not have had a significant impact as compared to the
effect of the dumped imports from Indonesia.

the volumes

below the

imported

(106) The analysis in respect of Thailand has been questioned
by an Indonesian exporter, which did not cooperate. In
it argued that the level of imports from
this respect,
Indonesia is comparably lower and that prices are
higher when compared to Thai imports. It is however
recalled that although Thai prices were lower than the
prices of
the volumes
imported from Indonesia were more than 30 % higher
than imports from Thailand. Therefore, the conclusion
drawn in recital (105) is confirmed.

the imports from Indonesia,

(b) Further factors

(107) It was also examined whether factors other than the
abovementioned might have contributed to the injury
suffered by the Community industry.

(108) It has been contended by the cooperating importers that
RBM business is extremely price sensitive and therefore
producers must sell large volumes to be competitive. It
was also argued by the same parties that the Community
industry relies only on the Community market, instead
of the world market, which would allow it to be more
cost efficient. On this matter, it is recalled that the ratio
of sales of the Community industry inside and outside of
the Community did not significantly change between
1998 and the
even though the
Community industry was strongly oriented towards the
Community market,
sales permitted the
its export
Community industry to be profitable in 1998 at a
time when imports from Indonesia were significant.

IP. Nevertheless,

24.9.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 227 E/319

(109) One user argued that

the injury was caused by the
strong competition in the office supplies industry. This
competition allegedly led the users/distributors of the
product concerned to exert a price pressure on the
Community industry thus leading to a price decrease.
In this
the dumped
imports must have significantly worsened the price
pressure exerted by the users in the Community, thus
causing injury to the Community industry.

is underlined that

respect,

it

(110) Moreover, it was examined whether the price depression
could be attributable to the normal course of the RBM
business, since prices from almost all sources of supply
decreased between 1998 and the IP.

(111) In this respect,

it

the general price
is recalled that
decrease should be seen in the light of continued
unfair practices,
firstly from the PRC and Malaysia,
secondly from Indonesia, which have influenced the
Community market.

producer of ring binders to complement
range.

its product

(116) However, this assertion was found to be in contradiction
with the
statement made by the non-cooperating
Indonesian exporter who argued that the sole market
where the Indonesian producer has significant market
share is the United Kingdom. This is also confirmed
by Eurostat.

(117) This

these

latter producer alleged that

Indonesian
exports could not cause injury since its main market is
the UK where the Community industry does not have
any significant activities. However, in addition to the fact
that this assumption is in contradiction with the alle-
gation made by the Indonesian authorities,
it is also
recalled that
is made on a
injury
Community basis and not on a regional basis.

analysis

the

(112) In addition, as mentioned in recital

(108),

the RBM
market
is extremely price sensitive. Therefore, given
that prices of the Indonesian imports were found to be
dumped and lower than the average unit price of all
other imports of RBMs between 1998 and the IP, it is
to be concluded that imports from Indonesia, which held
between 8 and 13 % of the Community market during
the IP, have had a price depressive impact on this
market.

(113) Finally, it was analysed if the price behaviour of Krause,
the non-cooperating Community producer, could have
contributed to the injury suffered by the Community
industry. The additional examination of data referring
to Krause showed that this Community producer itself
suffered a deterioration of its situation during the period
sales price and
considered, particularly as concerns
profitability.
it has not
contributed to the injury suffered by the Community
industry, and that,
it has been equally negatively
affected by the imports from Indonesia, being forced
to decrease its prices, like the Community industry.

therefore

appears

that

It

(114) For all the reasons explained above,

it was concluded
that the price depression on the Community market
should not be seen as representing a normal devel-
opment of
trade, but rather as the consequence of
unfair commercial practices of Indonesia.

(115) It was contended by the Indonesian authorities that the
Indonesian exports were limited to supplying an Italian

4. Conclusion on causation

(118) In view of the above, it is concluded that the material
injury suffered by the Community industry, which is
characterised by a negative development of production,
sales volumes, prices, market share, profitability, return
on investment, cash flow and employment duly adjusted
to take account of the relocation to Hungary, was caused
by
the
combined effect on the Community industry's situation
of imports from India, Thailand and the PRC as well as
the partial relocation of Community production was
only limited.

dumped imports

concerned.

Indeed,

the

(119) It was also contended by an Indonesian exporter which
did not cooperate, that there is a contradiction between
the conclusion stated in recital (118) and the fact that
there is sufficient evidence to open an expiry review on
the PRC.

the

situation of

(120) In this respect, it should be recalled that the scope of an
expiry review is
the
to analyse
Community market in the perspective of the likelihood
of continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury
should the measures in force be removed. Consequently,
the fact
the Community
the deterioration of
industry has been attributed during this investigation
period to Indonesia, does not affect the analysis of the
future behaviour in the Community market of Chinese
exporters and its likely effect on the situation of the
Community industry.
the
is
Chinese market share was at a very low level during
the last two years of the period considered.

also recalled that

that

It

C 227 E/320

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

24.9.2002

(121) Given the analysis, which has properly distinguished and
separated the effects of all the known factors on the
from the
situation of
industry
injurious effects of the dumped imports,
it is hereby
factors as such do not
concluded that
reverse the fact that the material injury found must be
attributed to the dumped imports.

the Community

these other

imported more than 90 % of its sales from Indonesia. It
is concluded, therefore, that the two complainants are
the only Community producers of RBMs with a
significant production left.

F. COMMUNITY INTEREST

1. Preliminary remark

(122) It was examined whether compelling reasons existed that
could lead to the conclusion that
in the
Community interest to adopt measures in this particular
case. For this purpose, and in accordance with Article
21(1) of the basic Regulation, the impact of possible
measures on all parties involved in this proceeding and
also the consequences of not
taking measures were
considered on the basis of all evidence submitted.

is not

it

(123) In order to assess the likely impact of the imposition or
non-imposition of measures, information was requested
from all interested parties. Questionnaires were sent to
the two complainant Community producers, two other
companies known as producers in the Community, nine
unrelated importers, 49 users and one users' association.
One complainant Community producer (Koloman), two
unrelated importers as well as one user related to those
importers replied to the questionnaire. Another user
replying to the ques-
made a submission without
tionnaire.

(124) These replies and submissions formed the basis for the

Community interest analysis.

2. Interest of the Community industry

(a) Preliminary remark

(125) Several producers of RBMs in the Community stopped
manufacturing the product concerned within the last few
years. As to the companies left, the investigation estab-
lished that, as mentioned in recital
(49), a company
located in the UK also stopped its production some
years ago. As to the company located in Italy, it was
found that it did not represent a significant proportion
the production of RBMs in the Community and
of
imported a significant part of
its sales. As to the
Spanish company it found that it should be considered
as an importer rather than a producer since it produced
negligible volumes of the product concerned, while it

(126) It

the

should be

recalled that

two complainant
Community producers were heavily injured already in
the past by imports of RBMs originating in the PRC
and Malaysia which, as described in Regulation (EC)
No 119/97 (1),
to a 28 % decrease of
their workforce between 1992 and October 1995. As
(72), a further reduction of the
shown under recital
Community industry's workforce of 30 % occurred
between 1998 and the IP.

inter alia,

led,

(127) In view of

injury

suffered by

the material

Community industry,
Community industry not
dumping practices,
the Community will cease completely and that
users will be significantly dependant on imports.

the
it is concluded that, should the
from the unfair
it is likely that the production in
the

recover

(b) Financial situation of the Community industry

(128) The financial

situation of

the Community industry
developed so negatively during the period considered,
that after the IP the Community industry went
into
receivership, as mentioned in recital (53). It should be
noted that
loss-making
the Community industry's
situation resulted from its difficulty to compete with
the low-priced dumped imports. However, the fact that
the cooperating Community producer has been taken
over,
in the
Community is in the process of being restructured and
that a strong effort is being made to keep this industry
viable and to render it profitable.

the production of RBMs

shows

that

(c) Possible

of
measures on the Community industry

effects

the

imposition/non-imposition of

(129) Following the imposition of measures, the restoration of
fair market conditions would enable the Community
industry to recover lost market share and, by increasing
capacity utilisation, to decrease unit production costs
and to increase profitability. Furthermore, the measures
are expected to have a positive effect on the level of the
Community industry's prices.
is
expected that
the increase in production and sales
volume, on the one hand, and the further decrease in
unit costs, on the other hand, eventually combined with
a moderate price increase, will allow the Community
industry to improve its financial situation.

In conclusion,

it

(1) OJ L 22, 24.1.1997, p. 1.

24.9.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 227 E/321

(130) To the contrary, should anti-dumping measures not be
imposed, it is likely that the Community industry would
have to further lower its prices and/or continue to lose
market share. In both scenarios, the financial situation of
the Community industry is likely to worsen. As a further
consequence, it is likely that the Community production
would, within a short period of time, definitively cease.

accounting

(131) Moreover, given that the Community industry does not
only produce the product concerned but also other
products
its
turnover, it is very likely that the closure of production
lines manufacturing RBMs would affect the viability of
the whole factory and lead to closure of all production
lines with a consequent wider negative
effect on
employment and investment.

about one

third of

for

(d) Possible relocation of the Community industry production

(132) It was examined whether any measures could be
the
considered as not being in the
Community given the
the
Community industry production to a third country.
relocation was also
The possibility of any further
examined.

interest of
relocation of part of

(133) First of all, as explained in recital (78), it is recalled that
the relocation, which took place in 2000, permitted the
Community industry to limit its losses. In this respect, it
was a strategic decision taken to thwart the effect of the
dumped practices. In addition, it is likely that this relo-
cation, by improving the financial
the
Community industry, had the indirect effect to make it
more attractive for the new investor that recently took it
over.

situation of

(134) As

to the

relocation,

risk of any additional

the
Commission received satisfactory confirmation that
foreseen by the Community
such relocation is not
industry.
there is no reason to consider
that such a move is likely since the restructuring effort
combined with the imposition of anti-dumping duty
should enable the Community industry to enjoy a prof-
itable situation once again.

In addition,

3. Interest of importers

(135) Certain importers, which however did not purchase
RBMs from Indonesia, submitted that switching sources
of supply could involve additional costs or transitional
problems. More particularly, the importers underlined
that owing to the anti-dumping measures imposed in
1997, they had already been forced to change their
source of supply.

(136) However, it is recalled that the purpose of anti-dumping
measures is not to force importers or users to change
their source of supply but to restore fair competition on
the Community market. In addition, these importers also
recognised that a number of other third countries could
easily produce RBMs and they foresaw no difficulties in
sourcing from a country not covered by anti-dumping
measures. Moreover, they could also trade Community
producers' products. Therefore any problems resulting
from a possible switching of supply are likely to be
temporary and unlikely to offset the positive effect on
the Community industry of anti-dumping measures
against injurious dumping.

4. Interest of users and consumers

(a) Users

(137) It has been alleged both by the cooperating unrelated
importers and user
the
imposition of anti-dumping measures would have a
serious adverse impact on the financial situation of the
users.

(ring binder producer)

that

(138) In this

respect,

the likely effect on users' cost of
production of the anti-dumping measures imposed on
Indonesia was assessed.
In this respect an estimation
was undertaken of what would be the impact of the
measures proposed against Indonesia on a user having
as sole source of supply imports from Indonesia (worst
case scenario). On this basis the impact of the measures
proposed against Indonesia would be evaluated as an
increase in the cost of production of around 4 %. As
already
an entirely hypthetical
is
scenario since no user cooperated which only sourced
the product concerned from Indonesia.

explained,

this

(139) In view of the above findings, it was concluded that the
impact of anti-dumping duties on users would be
terms, given the lack of
negligible.
cooperation from other users, it is likely that the cost
impact on all other users would be similarly negligible.

In more general

the

following

imposition of

(140) The cooperating user claimed that, as happened in the
past three years, when it had to relocate part of its
production outside the Community and to close three
anti-dumping
plants
measures on RBMs originating
in the PRC and
Malaysia, anti-dumping measures on imports originating
in Indonesia, by increasing the prices of one of the items
of its cost of production, could entail a further move of
its ring binder production outside of the Community
and/or closure of the relevant plants. This would risk
to affect its whole activity,
i.e. also the manufacturing
of other products, whose plants would be delocalised as
well, with significant job losses in the Community.

C 227 E/322

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

24.9.2002

it

is fundamental

(141) As a general remark, it should be noted that the risk of
relocation of the downstream industry owing to the anti-
dumping measures is tempered by the fact that part of
the binder market is business to business oriented and
that users are close to their
that
customers, have a flexible production ready to meet
the demand and a sound knowledge of
the market.
The investigation showed in fact that the main criteria
customers of ring binders producers take into account in
their choice are price, quality and service, as well as
speedy delivery.
In addition, as already explained in
recitals (137) to (138), the financial impact of the anti-
dumping measures on the downstream industry was
found negligible. Finally, the fact that only one binder
producer fully cooperated with the investigation, tends
to confirm the conclusion that anti-dumping measures
will not have a decisive impact on users.

(142) In addition, certain interested parties pointed out that
the relocation of several users that have occurred in
the past years was due to the high cost of production
in the Community. This confirms that any relocation
should be seen in the wider context of the overall cost
structure in which, as already explained, anti-dumping
measures represent a negligible portion.

its

part

production

(143) As regards the specific situation of the cooperating user,
investigation showed that,
the
although this user
relocated
of
outside
the
i.e. after the
Community between 1998 and the IP,
imposition of anti-dumping measures against the PRC
and Malaysia, this user in fact changed its source of
supply after the imposition of anti-dumping measures
against the PRC and Malaysia, purchasing RBMs from
the cooperating importers which in turn, as
from
1998, started to import from India to the detriment of
the PRC. It seems therefore difficult to establish a link
between the move of the ring binder production of that
user outside the Community and the imposition of anti-
dumping duties on imports from the PRC and Malaysia.
Moreover, as already shown in recital
(139) anti-
dumping duties have a negligible impact on the users'
cost of production.

(144) It was found that the relocation described above should
rather be seen as the consequence of
the external-
oriented strategy of this user which acquired a number
of companies during the last years. This
strategy
eventually led to a consolidation and a restructuring of
the different entities of
the group, certain amongst
which have been closed. The relocation of some plants
outside the Community should be seen as part of this
strategy, which aims to strengthen the position of that
user over the Community market and to develop its
presence in eastern Europe.

(145) Before the above background, and in view of

negligible impact
likely to have on the user concerned,

the level of

the
the duties imposed is
it appears

that

against
unlikely
Indonesia would, as such, entail a further move of its
ring binder production outside of the Community.

anti-dumping measures

the

(146) As regards the closure of plants and the risk of further
closures
linked to the imposition of anti-dumping
measures against Indonesia, it was found that the coop-
erating user closed three plants in the past three years,
when measures on the PRC and Malaysia were in force.
In view of the negligible impact the measures would
have on the cost of production and on the financial
situation of the user in question, as explained under
it is unlikely that the measures on the
recital
PRC and Malaysia led, on their own, to the closure of
these plants and that
the anti-dumping measures on
imports from Indonesia would cause a closure of other
plants.

(144),

(b) Consumers

(147) It should be mentioned that the product concerned is
not
and that no consumers'
level
association made themselves known and participated to
this investigation.

sold at

retail

(148) The cooperating user also argued that anti-dumping
measures would increase the price paid by the final
customer of ring binders,
in
view of the above explanation regarding the impact on
ring binder producers, any increase in the final sales
price to consumers of ring binders is likely not to be
significant.

i.e. consumers. However,

(149) In addition, the investigation showed that the cooperating
user sells its products mainly to distributors. In the worst
scenario, should the cost increase that the users might
suffer be passed on in full until the final consumer, this
would entail a price increase of a maximum of 4 % for
the final consumer. However, this is unlikely to occur
since general experience shows that each step in the
distribution chain is likely to support part of its costs
increase in order to stay competitive on its market.

(150) On the basis of the above, the impact on users of RBMs
and consumers of ring binders was considered not to
constitute a compelling reason against the imposition of
anti-dumping measures, as the possible negative effect is
unlikely to offset the positive effect on the Community
industry of anti-dumping measures against
injurious
dumping.

(c) Impact on competition

(151) It was also examined whether the imposition of anti-
dumping measures on imports from Indonesia could
lead to a situation where the Community industry
from a dominant position on the
could benefit

24.9.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 227 E/323

in particular in view of the anti-
Community market,
dumping measures imposed in 1997 on imports from
the PRC and Malaysia and in view of the restructuring of
the Community industry.

(152) First of all, it is recalled that the Community industry
held, during the IP, a market share which only ranged
between 10 % and 15 %. The
two complainant
Community producers taken together would have held,
during the IP, a market share ranging between 32 % and
37 %. Even in the event of including Koloman's imports
in the market share held by both complainants together,
this market share would have ranged from 47 % to 52 %
of the Community market in the IP. In addition, it is
recalled that, although the Commission initiated a review
of the measures against the PRC, this review does not
concern imports from Malaysia. Also RBMs can still be
is considered very
imported from India. Therefore it
unlikely that the imposition of anti-dumping measures
against Indonesia would lead to any negative effect on
industry on the
the Community
competition of
Community market. Finally,
the
recalled that
is
imposition of anti-dumping measures on imports from
the PRC and Malaysia likewise did not lead to any kind
of dominance for the Community industry, even if no
other sources of supply but these two countries existed
at the time.

it

(153) On the other hand, as already explained in recital (130),
it is likely that without measures to correct the effects of
dumped imports, Community production will, within a
short period of time, no longer be viable and therefore
cease. It would certainly not be in the interest of the
the Community industry would cease its
users that
production of the product concerned.
Indeed, on the
that cooperated purchased
the sole user
one hand,
between 20 % and 50 % of
from the
Community industry between 1998 and the IP. On the
other hand, should the Community industry definitely
cease
the production of RBMs, users would be
significantly dependent on imports.

its RBMs

this country recently expired. Moreover,

(154) Should measures be imposed, several alternative sources
of supply still exist. RBMs are being or can be purchased
from the Community industry, the other Community
producers, India and Hong Kong. In addition, imports
from Malaysia are likely to recommence since measures
against
the
the imposition of anti-
investigation has shown that
from the PRC and
dumping measures on imports
Malaysia did not entail any shortage of
the product
concerned. Finally, it is recalled that the impact of the
measures on users was found to be negligible, and that
the product concerned will therefore quite likely still be
imported from Indonesia.

G. DEFINITIVE MEASURES

1. Injury elimination level

(156) In view of

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

(157) In accordance with Article 9(4) of the basic Regulation,
the Commission examined what level of duty would be
adequate to remove the injury to the Community
industry caused by dumping. For that purpose,
it was
considered that a price level based on the Community
producers' cost of production together with a reasonable
profit margin should be calculated.

(158) Here,

it was found that a profit margin of 5 % of
turnover could be regarded as a reasonable minimum,
taking into account the need for long-term investment
and, more particularly,
the profit margin which the
Community industry could have been expected to
obtain in the absence of injurious dumping.

(159) Given the lack of cooperation, it was considered that the
the difference
cif prices

injury elimination level
between this
adjusted as explained in recital (60).

calculated price

should cover

and the

(160) The injury elimination levels found was 42,30 % for

imports from Indonesia.

2. Definitive anti-dumping measures

(161) In the light of the foregoing and in accordance with
Article 9(4) of the basic Regulation,
is considered
that definitive anti-dumping duties should normally be
imposed at the level of the injury margin for Indonesia.

it

5. Conclusion on Community interest

(155) Given the above reasons, it is concluded that there are
no compelling reasons against the imposition of anti-
dumping duties.

(162) However, with regard to the parallel

anti-subsidy
in accordance with Article 24(1) of
proceeding,
Council Regulation (EC) No 2026/97 (1) (‘the basic anti-
subsidy Regulation’) and Article 14(1) of the basic Regu-

(1) OJ L 288, 21.10.1997, p. 1.

C 227 E/324

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

24.9.2002

lation, 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
and from export subsidisation. In the present investi-
it was found that anti-dumping duties should
gation,
be imposed on imports of the product concerned orig-
it is necessary to
inating in Indonesia and therefore,
determine whether, and to what extent,
the subsidy
and the dumping margins arise from the same situation.

(163) In the parallel anti-subsidy proceeding, with regard to
Indonesia, countervailing duties corresponding to the
amount of subsidies, which were found to be 10 %,
were imposed in accordance with Article 15(1) of the
basic anti-subsidy Regulation. Some of those investigated
in Indonesia constituted export subsidies within the
meaning of Article 3(4)(a) of the basic anti-subsidy Regu-

the dumping margin established for

lation. As such, these subsidies could only affect the
export price of
the Indonesian exporting producers,
thus leading to increased margin of dumping. In other
words,
the
Indonesian producers are partly due to the existence of
it is noted that the injury
export subsidies. However,
margin was considerably lower
than the dumping
margin even if the latter was adjusted to take account
of the export subsidy. In these circumstances it is not
considered appropriate that both countervailing and
anti-dumping duties could be imposed to the full
extent of the relevant subsidy and dumping margins
established. Therefore, the combined duty level should
not exceed the injury margin. Given that a part of the
injury margin amounting to 42,3 %, will be covered by
the
countervailing duty which
amounts to 10 %, the anti-dumping duty should not
exceed the remaining injury margin of 32,3 %.

imposition of

the

Company

Export
Subsidy Margin

Total
Subsidy Margin

Injury Margin

CV Duty

AD Duty

Total Duty Rate

Indonesia all companies

5 %

10 %

42,3 %

10 %

32,3 %

42,3 %

(164) It has been argued that Article 14(1) of the basic Regu-
lation would have been violated since no product shall
be subject
to both anti-dumping and countervailing
duties for the purpose of dealing with one and the
same situation arising from dumping or from export
subsidisation. It is however recalled that as explained
in recitals
the duties have been
adjusted in conformity with Article 14(1) of the basic
Regularion. The argument was therefore rejected.

(162) and (163)

(165) In order to meet the deadline set out in Article 6(9) of
the basic Regulation, the present Regulation should enter
into force on the day of its publication,

The rate of the definitive anti-dumping duty applicable to
2.
the net, free-at-Community-frontier price, before duty, shall be
as follows for products originating in:

Country

Indonesia

Definitive duty
(%)

32,3

Unless otherwise

3.
concerning customs duties shall apply.

specified,

the provisions

in force

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The proceeding concerning imports of certain ring binder

4.
mechanisms originating in India shall be terminated.

codes

(Taric

ex 8305 10 00

1.
A definitive anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on
imports of certain ring binder mechanisms, falling within CN
code
and
8305 10 00 20) and originating in Indonesia. For the purpose
of this Regulation, ring binder mechanisms shall consist of two
rectangular steel sheets or wires with at least four half rings
made of steel wire fixed on it and which are kept together by a
steel cover. They can be opened either by pulling the half rings
or with a small steel-made trigger mechanism fixed to the ring
binder mechanism.

8305 10 00 10

Article 2

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

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