Council Regulation (EC) No 760/2004 of 22 April 2004 extending the definitive anti-dumping duty imposed by Regulation (EC) No 1796/1999 on imports of steel ropes and cables originating, inter alia, in Ukraine to imports of steel ropes and cables consigned from Moldova, whether declared as originating in Moldova or not
Date: 2004-04-22
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Moldova, Ukraine, anti-dumping duty, import, metal product, originating product, steel

24.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 120/1

I

(Acts whose publication is obligatory)

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 760/2004

of 22 April 2004

extending the definitive anti-dumping duty imposed by Regulation (EC) No 1796/1999 on imports
of steel ropes and cables originating, inter alia, in Ukraine to imports of steel ropes and cables
consigned from Moldova, whether declared as originating in Moldova or not

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

(3)

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)
(the
basic Regulation), and in particular Article 13 thereof,

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

Whereas:

A. PROCEDURE

1. Existing measures

(1)

(2)

By Regulation (EC) No 1796/1999 (2) (the original Regu-
lation), the Council
imposed an anti-dumping duty of
51,8 % on imports of steel ropes and cables originating,
inter alia, in Ukraine. By Decision 1999/572/EC (3), the
Commission
from the
an
exporting producer Joint Stock Company Silur, Ukraine.
By Regulation (EC) No 1678/2003,
the undertaking
which had previously been accepted from Joint Stock
Company Silur was withdrawn.

undertaking

accepted

2. Request

On 16 June 2003, the Commission received a request
pursuant to Article 13(3) of the basic Regulation (the
request) from the Liaison Committee of the European
Federation of Steel Wire Rope Industries (EWRIS) (the
applicant) to investigate the alleged circumvention of the
anti-dumping measures imposed on imports of steel
ropes and cables originating in Ukraine. The request was
submitted on behalf of a major proportion of the Com-
munity production of steel ropes and cables.

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

(EC) No 461/2004 (OJ L 77, 13.3.2004, p. 12).

(2) OJ L 217, 17.8.1999, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Regulation

(EC) No 1674/2003 (OJ L 238, 25.9.2003, p. 1).

(3) OJ L 217, 17.8.1999, p. 63. Decision as amended by Regulation

(EC) No 1678/2003 (OJ L 238, 25.9.2003, p. 13).

The applicant alleged and submitted sufficient evidence
showing that, following the imposition of measures on
imports of steel ropes and cables originating, inter alia, in
Ukraine,
there had been a significant change in the
pattern of trade involving exports of steel ropes and
cables from Ukraine and Moldova to the Community.
This change in the pattern of trade was alleged to stem
from the transhipment via Moldova of steel ropes and
cables originating in Ukraine. It was alleged that there
was insufficient due cause or economic justification for
the aforementioned changes other than the imposition
of the duty on imports of steel ropes and cables from
Ukraine.

the applicant alleged and submitted evidence
Finally,
that the remedial effects of this duty were being under-
mined both in terms of quantities and prices. It was
claimed that significant volumes of
imports of steels
ropes and cables from Moldova have replaced imports of
steel ropes and cables originating in Ukraine. In addition,
the applicant submitted evidence that the prices of steel
ropes and cables imported from Moldova were dumped
in relation to the normal values previously established
for the steel ropes and cables originating in Ukraine.

3. Initiation

By Regulation (EC) No 1347/2003 (4)
(the initiating
Regulation), the Commission initiated an investigation
into the alleged circumvention of steel ropes and cables
originating in Ukraine by imports of steel ropes and
cables consigned from Moldova, whether declared as
originating in Moldova or not and, pursuant to Articles
13(3) and 14(5) of the basic Regulation, directed the
customs authorities to register imports of steel ropes and
cables consigned from Moldova, whether declared as
originating in Moldova or not, as of 31 July 2003. The
Commission advised the authorities of Ukraine and
Moldova of the initiation of the investigation.

(4)

(5)

(4) OJ L 190, 30.7.2003, p. 3.

L 120/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

24.4.2004

(6)

(7)

(8)

(9)

4. Investigation

to the parties

Questionnaires were sent
located in
Ukraine and Moldova that were either named in the
request or subsequently became known to the Commis-
sion. Questionnaires were sent to importers in the Com-
munity that were named in the request or cooperated in
the original
led to the existing
measures. All parties were informed that non-coopera-
tion might lead to the application of Article 18 of the
basic Regulation and to findings being made on the
basis of the facts available.

investigation that

No complete reply to the questionnaires was received
from exporters/producers in Ukraine. The two known
exporting producers in Ukraine informed the Commis-
sion that they had only exported an insignificant quan-
tity of the product concerned to Moldova during the
investigation period, and that these exports were exclu-
sively destined for internal consumption in Moldova. No
replies to the questionnaires were received from expor-
ters/producers in Moldova.

the investigation,

statistical data
In the course of
concerning
the product
concerned were obtained from the Ukrainian and
Moldovan authorities.

and exports of

imports

A number of Community importers replied by declaring
that they had not imported any steel ropes and cables
from Moldova during the investigation period. One
importer reported that
the
product concerned amounting to 196 tonnes declared as
of Moldovan origin during the investigation period.

it had two deliveries of

5. Investigation Period

(10)

The investigation period covered the period from 1 July
2002 to 30 June 2003 (the IP). Data were collected from
1999 up to the end of the IP to investigate the alleged
change in the pattern of trade.

B. RESULTS OF THE INVESTIGATION

ance with Article 18 of the basic Regulation. At the
outset of the investigation, all companies known were
informed that non-cooperation might lead to the appli-
cation of the said Article, as explained in recital 6.

2. Additional information

(12) Without prejudice to the present investigation and by
way of background it is mentioned here that an investi-
gation on alleged fraud involving steel ropes and cables
declared as originating in Moldova but
likely to be
originating in Ukraine was initiated by the European
Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) in 2002 and is still ongoing.
Other OLAF investigations are also ongoing, concerning
similar allegations relating to the same product likely to
be originating in Ukraine but declared as originating in
another third country. Moreover, the customs authorities
of one Member State considered that a quantity of 196
tons imported into the Community during the IP and
declared as of Moldovan origin was not of that origin
but of Ukrainian origin.

3. Product concerned and like product

(13)

(14)

The product under consideration is, as defined in the
original
investigation, steel ropes and cables, including
locked coil ropes, excluding ropes and cables of stainless
steel, with a maximum cross-sectional dimension
exceeding 3 mm, currently classifiable within CN codes
ex 7312 10 82,
ex 7312 10 86,
ex 7312 10 84,
ex 7312 10 88, ex 7312 10 99.

it

In the absence of cooperation by any Moldovan
company and given the statements provided in the
is considered that steel ropes and cables
request,
exported to the Community from Ukraine and those
consigned from Moldova to the Community have the
same basic characteristics and the same uses. Therefore,
they are considered as like products within the meaning
of Article 1(4) of the basic Regulation.

1. Degree of cooperation

4. Change in the pattern of trade between third

countries and the Community

(11) As mentioned in recital 7, no producers/exporters of
steel ropes and cables in Moldova made themselves
known, or cooperated in the investigation. Accordingly,
findings in respect of the exports of steel ropes and
cables consigned from Moldova to the Community had
to be made on the basis of the facts available in accord-

(15) Due to the non-cooperation of any Moldovan company,
the volume and value of Moldovan exports of
the
product concerned to the Community were determined
on the basis of the information available, which in this
case was Eurostat data at CN level.

24.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 120/3

(16)

Following the imposition of the anti-dumping duty of
51,8 %, imports of the product concerned originating in
Ukraine into the Community decreased substantially
from 1 234 tonnes in 1999 to 386 tonnes in 2000, 320
tonnes for the year 2001 and 209 tonnes in 2002.
During the IP, the reported imports amounted to 437
tonnes. At the same time, imports into the Community
of steel ropes and cables from Moldova have increased
from a situation of zero imports until 1999 to 36
tonnes in 2000, and suddenly increased to 1 054 tonnes
in 2001 and 1 815 tonnes in 2002. During the IP, the
reported
still
confirming the change in the pattern of
trade that
commenced from the year 2000, since beforehand there
were no imports from Moldova into the Community.
Accordingly, a marked change in the pattern of trade is
established in the case of both exporting countries
which coincided with the entry into force,
in August
1999, of the anti-dumping measures on steel ropes and
cables originating in Ukraine.

amounted to 196 tonnes

imports

5. Insufficient due cause or economic justification

(17) According to the available information, there appears to
be no Moldovan production of steel ropes and cables.
There were no imports of the product concerned into
Moldova from Ukraine before 2000 according to the
imports
statistical
national Ukrainian
commenced in 2000 after the imposition of measures in
August 1999, coinciding with the change of pattern of
trade as shown in recital 16. Statistical data supplied
provided by the Moldovan authorities show that, except
for some negligible quantities, no other countries have
exported the product concerned to Moldova.

data.

The

(18)

There is a coincidence in time between the imposition of
the anti-dumping measures on imports of the product
concerned from Ukraine and the parallel
surge of
exports from Moldova. In the absence of cooperation by
any Moldovan company, it is concluded, on the basis of
the available information, that the change in the pattern
of
the anti-
dumping duty rather than any other sufficient due cause
or economic justification within the meaning of
the
second sentence of Article 13(1) of the basic Regulation.

trade stemmed from the imposition of

6. Undermining of the remedial effects of the duty
in terms of the prices and/or the quantities of the
like product

(19)

It is evident from the figures in recital 16 that a clear
in the pattern of Community
quantitative
imports of the product concerned occurred since the

change

imposition of measures in 1999. Following the imposi-
tion of the antidumping duty, Ukrainian imports into
the Community decreased significantly and there was a
parallel surge of exports of the product concerned to the
Community from Moldova. According to the Eurostat
data, since 1999 until the end of IP, the total amount of
the Moldovan exports to the Community was 2 870
tonnes that replaced corresponding quantities previously
exported from Ukraine.
It is therefore clear that the
marked change in trade flows undermined the remedial
the quantities
the measures
effects of
imported into the Community market.

in terms of

(20) With regard to prices of

the products concerned
consigned from Moldova, in the absence of cooperation,
it was necessary to refer to Eurostat data, which was the
best evidence available. It was found that the average
export price of the Moldovan exports to the Community
were below the injury elimination level of Community
prices as established in the original investigation. Hence,
the remedial effects of the duty imposed in terms of
prices are undermined.

(21)

It is therefore concluded that the imports of the product
concerned from Moldova undermine the remedial effects
of the duty both in terms of quantities and prices.

7. Evidence of dumping in relation to the normal
values previously established for like or similar
products

in order

to determine whether

(22) As explained in recital 20, given the absence of coopera-
evidence of
tion,
dumping could be found with respect to the exports of
the product concerned to the Community from Moldova
during the IP, Eurostat data at CN level were used
pursuant to Article 18 of the basic Regulation as the
basis for establishing export prices to the Community.

(23)

(24)

In accordance with Article 13(1) of the basic Regulation,
the normal value to be used in anti-circumvention inves-
tigations is the normal value established during the
original
investigation,
Poland was considered to be the appropriate market
economy analogue country for Ukraine and normal
value was established on the basis of prices as well as
constructed normal value in that analogue country.

In the original

investigation.

the basic Regulation,

In the absence of cooperation and pursuant to Article
the purpose of
18 of
comparing the export price and normal value,
it was
considered appropriate to assume that the product mix
of the goods observed during this investigation was the
same as in the original investigation.

for

L 120/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

24.4.2004

(25)

(26)

(27)

(28)

(29)

For the purpose of a fair comparison between the
normal value and the export price, due allowance in the
form of adjustments was made for differences in factors
affecting price and price comparability. These adjust-
ments were made in accordance with Article 2(10) of
the basic Regulation in respect of transport, insurance
and handling. As far as the exports consigned from
Moldova to the Community were concerned,
in the
absence of other information relating to these factors,
the information contained in the request was used.

In accordance with Article 2(11) and 2(12) of the basic
Regulation, the weighted average normal value as estab-
lished during the original investigation was compared to
the average export price for the IP established as indi-
cated in recital 22. In the absence of any information to
the contrary, it was assumed that the product mix had
not changed between the original investigation and the
IP. This comparison showed the existence of dumping.
The dumping margin found, expressed as a percentage
of the cif price at the Community frontier duty unpaid,
was between 10 % and 15 %.

from the measures on these imports. The producers
concerned which would consider lodging a request for
an exemption from the extended anti-dumping duty
would be required to complete a questionnaire in order
to enable the Commission to determine whether an
exemption may be warranted. Such exemption may be
granted after the assessment of the market situation of
the product concerned, production capacity and capacity
utilisation, procurement and sales and the likelihood of
continuation of practices for which there is insufficient
due cause or economic justification and the evidence of
dumping. The Commission would normally also carry
out an on-spot verification visit. The request would have
to be addressed to the Commission forthwith, with all
relevant information, in particular any modification in
the company's activities linked to production and sales.
Importers could still benefit from exemption from regis-
tration or measures to the extent that their imports are
from exporters, which are granted such an exemption,
and in accordance with Article 13(4).

(30) Where an exemption is warranted, the Commission will,
after consultation of the Advisory Committee, propose
the amendment of this Regulation accordingly. Subse-
quently, any exemptions granted will be monitored to
ensure compliance with the conditions set therein.

C. MEASURES

D. PROCEDURE

In view of the findings above, it is found that circumven-
tion has taken place within the meaning of Article 13(1),
second sentence, of the basic Regulation. In accordance
with Article 13(1) first sentence of the basic Regulation,
the existing anti-dumping measures on imports of the
product concerned originating in Ukraine should be
extended to imports of
the same product consigned
from Moldova, whether declared as originating in
Moldova or not.

(31)

Interested parties were informed of the essential facts
and considerations on the basis of which the Council
intended to extend the definitive anti-dumping duty in
force and were given the opportunity to comment and
to be heard. No comments which were of a nature to
change the abovementioned conclusions were received,

In accordance with Article 14(5) of the basic Regulation,
which provides that measures shall be applied against
registered imports from the date of registration, the anti-
dumping duty should be collected on imports of steel
ropes and cables consigned from Moldova which entered
the Community under registration imposed by the initi-
ating Regulation.

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The circumvention takes place outside the Community.
the basic Regulation aims to counter
Article 13 of
circumvention practices without
affecting operators
which can prove that they are not involved in such prac-
tices, but
it does not contain a specific provision
providing for the treatment of producers which could
establish that they are not involved in circumvention
practices. Therefore, it appears necessary to introduce a
possibility for producers which have not
sold the
product concerned for export during the IP and are not
related to any exporters or producers subject to the
extended antidumping duty to request an exemption

in Ukraine,

falling within

1.
The definitive anti-dumping duty imposed by Regulation
(EC) No 1796/1999 on imports of steel ropes and cables
the CN codes
originating
ex 7312 10 82,
ex 7312 10 86,
is hereby extended to
ex 7312 10 88 and ex 7312 10 99,
imports of the same steel ropes and cables consigned from
Moldova (whether declared as originating in Moldova or not)
(TARIC codes 7312 10 82 11, 7312 10 84 11, 7312 10 86 11,
7312 10 88 11 and 7312 10 99 11).

ex 7312 10 84,

2.
The duty extended by paragraph 1 shall be collected on
imports registered in accordance with Article 2 of Regulation
(EC) No 1347/2003 and Articles 13(3) and 14(5) of Regulation
(EC) No 384/96.

24.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 120/5

The provisions in force concerning customs duties shall

3.
apply.

Article 2

Requests for exemption from the duty extended by
1.
Article 1 shall be made in writing in one of
the official
languages of the Community and must be signed by a person
authorised to represent the applicant. The request must be sent
to the following address:

European Commission
Directorate-General for Trade
Directorate B
Office: J-79 05/17
B-1049 Brussels
Fax (32 2) 295 65 05
Telex COMEU B 21877.

The

after

Commission,

the Advisory
2.
Committee, may authorise by a decision, the exemption of
imports which are shown not to circumvent the anti-dumping
duty imposed by Regulation (EC) No 1796/1999 from the duty
extended by Article 1 of this Regulation.

consulting

Article 3

Customs authorities are hereby directed to discontinue the
registration of imports, established in accordance with Article 2
of Regulation (EC) No 1347/2003.

Article 4

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

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

Done at Brussels, 22 April 2004.

For the Council

The President

B. COWEN