Council Regulation (EC) No 1467/2004 of 13 August 2004 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of polyethylene terephthalate originating in Australia, the People's Republic of China and terminating the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of polyethylene terephthalate originating in Pakistan and releasing the amounts secured by way of the provisional duties imposed
Date: 2004-08-13
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Australia, China, Pakistan, anti-dumping duty, anti-dumping legislation, plastics, plastics industry

19.8.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 271/1

I

(Acts whose publication is obligatory)

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 1467/2004

of 13 August 2004

imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on
imports of polyethylene terephthalate originating in Australia, the People's Republic of China and
terminating the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of polyethylene terephthalate origi-
nating in Pakistan and releasing the amounts secured by way of the provisional duties imposed

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

3. SUBSEQUENT PROCEDURE

Having regard to the Treaty
Community,

establishing the European

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 Communities (1) (the
basic Regulation), and in particular Article 9 thereof,

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

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

(3)

A. PROCEDURE

1. PROVISIONAL MEASURES

On 19 February 2004,
the Commission imposed, by
Regulation (EC) No 306/2004 (2) (the provisional Regu-
lation), a provisional anti-dumping duty on the imports
into the Community of polyethylene terephthalate (PET)
originating in Australia, the People's Republic of China
and Pakistan (the countries concerned).

It is recalled that the investigation period of dumping and
injury (IP) covered the period from 1 April 2002 to 31
March 2003. The examination of trends relevant for the
injury analysis covered the period from 1 January 1999
to the end of the IP (period considered).

2. PARALLEL INVESTIGATION PROCEDURE

It is recalled that an interim review concerning imports
of PET originating in the Republic of Korea and Taiwan
was initiated by a notice published in the Official Journal
of the European Union on 22 May 2003 (3).

(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 52, 21.2.2004, p. 5.
(3) OJ C 120, 22.5.2003, p. 13.

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

(8)

Following the imposition of a provisional anti-dumping
duty on imports of PET from the countries concerned, all
parties received a disclosure of
the facts and consid-
erations on which the provisional Regulation was
based. All parties were granted a period within which
they could make representations in relation to these
disclosures.

Some interested parties submitted comments in writing.
Those parties who so requested were also granted an
opportunity
to be heard orally. The Commission
sought and verified all information it deemed necessary.
The oral and written comments submitted by the parties
were examined, and, where considered appropriate, the
provisional findings were modified accordingly.

further disclosed all

The Commission services
the
essential facts and considerations on the basis of which
it intended to recommend the imposition of a definitive
anti-dumping duty and the definitive
collection of
amounts secured by way of the provisional duty. The
interested parties were also granted a period within
which they could make representations subsequent to
this
and written comments
submitted by the parties were considered and, where
appropriate, the proposal for a definitive anti-dumping
duty has been modified accordingly.

disclosure. The oral

B. PRODUCT CONCERNED AND LIKE PRODUCT

It is recalled that, in recital 14 of the provisional Regu-
the product concerned was defined as poly-
lation,
ethylene
terephthalate with a viscosity number of
78 ml/g or higher, according to ISO Standard 1628-5,
currently classifiable within CN Code 3907 60 20, and
originating in the countries concerned.

Moreover, in recital 18 of the provisional Regulation, it
was stated that
the Commission had found that PET
produced by the Community industry and sold on the
Community market as well as PET produced in the
countries concerned and exported to the Community
were like products, since no differences in the basic
physical and chemical characteristics and Uses of
the
existing different types of PET had been found.

L 271/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

19.8.2004

(9)

In the absence of any comments regarding the definition
of
the
the product concerned and the like product,
contents and provisional conclusions of recitals 14 to
18 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.

applied for the calculation of the dumping margin are
confirmed.

C. DUMPING

1. GENERAL METHODOLOGY

(10)

The general methodology used to establish whether the
imports into the Community of the product concerned
have been dumped was described in recitals 19 to 34 of
the provisional Regulation.

1.1. Normal value

(11)

In the absence of any comments, the provisional findings
concerning normal value as set out in recitals 20 to 27
of the provisional Regulation are confirmed.

(12)

(13)

1.2. Export price

Several companies argued that the exchange rates used
by the Commission in making its provisional findings
were incorrect, were not from a reliable public source
and claimed that such exchange rates should rather
come from an official verifiable source.

These claims have been thoroughly investigated and after
verification, it was found that there were some errors in
the exchange rates applied by the Commission in making
its provisional findings. Therefore, calculations have been
revised on the basis of the monthly average exchange
rates published by (i) the Commission for all conversions
involving the euro (EUR); (ii) the Federal Reserve of the
United States of America for all conversions between the
USA dollar, the Chinese Yuan (CNY) and the Hong Kong
dollar (HKD); and (iii) the Bank of China for conversions
between HKD and CNY. All these exchange rates have
been applied, as was the case for the provisional calcu-
lations, on the basis of the monthly average exchange
rate applicable to the month in which the sales invoice
was issued.

1.3. Comparison

(14)

In the absence of any comments concerning the basis on
which normal value and export prices were compared,
recital 30 of the provisional Regulation is confirmed.

2. AUSTRALIA

(16) Only one of the two cooperating exporting producers
made submissions following the imposition of the provi-
sional measures.

2.1. Normal value

(17)

In the absence of any comments, the provisional findings
concerning normal value, as set out in recital 36 of the
provisional Regulation are confirmed.

2.2. Export price

(18)

In the absence of any comments other than those already
mentioned in the above recitals 12 and 13, the metho-
dology explained in recital 37 of the provisional Regu-
lation is confirmed.

2.3. Comparison

(19) One exporting producer claimed that different allowances
regarding after-sales technical assistance and marketing
expenses had not been taken account of by the
Commission in making its provisional
findings. The
claim in regard to technical assistance was accepted
after verification in accordance with Article 2(10)(h) of
the basic Regulation. The claim regarding marketing
expenses was accepted after verification in accordance
with Article 2(10)(k) of the basic Regulation.

(20)

(21)

2.4. Dumping margin

In the absence of any comments, the findings in recitals
39 to 41 of the provisional Regulation concerning the
methodology applied for the calculation of the dumping
margin, are hereby confirmed.

definitive

a
dumping margins,
The
percentage of the cif import price at the Community
border, are:

expressed

as

— Leading Synthetics Pty Ltd: 7,8 %

— Novapex Australia Pty Ltd: 15,9 %

1.4. Dumping margin

(15)

In the absence of any comments, recitals 31 to 34 of the
provisional Regulation concerning the methodology

— Residual dumping margin: 15,9 %

19.8.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 271/3

3. PAKISTAN

(22)

two

exporting

cooperating
producers made
The
submissions
following the imposition of provisional
measures in which they claimed that they should not
related
have been regarded as
parties but rather,
their relationship as a
unique exporting producer and that consequently, only
one dumping calculation should be made.

two separate albeit

in view of

(23)

This request was thoroughly analysed on the basis of the
arguments developed by these
exporting producers
subsequent to the provisional findings.

(24)

It was found that the particular characteristics of the
relationship between the companies concerned and the
very close interlinks in their operation was such as to
distinguish their position from the typical situation of
two related companies. In particular, account was taken
of the very significant financial and other links between
the two exporting producers, the fact that they sell the
product concerned under the same brand name, the fact
that they share the same administrative premises and
organisation as well as marketing division. Moreover,
they
and
Directors and have a common production plan. The
combination of all these elements is deemed sufficient
to consider that under these particular circumstances
the situation of the two exporting producers warrants
that they be treated as a unique exporting producer in
the Pakistani PET business rather than as two separate
companies. Therefore,
it
was considered that the claim should be accepted.

in view of all these elements,

staff members

largely

share

same

the

(27)

The Commission subsequently identified those types of
PET, sold domestically by the unique exporting producer
that had overall representative domestic sales and that
were identical or directly comparable to the types sold
for export to the Community.

(28)

For each type sold by the unique exporting producer on
its domestic market and found to be directly comparable
to the type of PET sold for export to the Community, it
was established whether domestic sales were sufficiently
representative for the purposes of Article 2(2) of the
basic Regulation. Domestic sales of a particular type of
PET were considered sufficiently representative when the
total domestic sales volume of that type during the IP
represented 5 % or more of the total sales volume of the
comparable PET type exported to the Community.

(29) An examination was also made as

to whether

the
domestic sales of each type of PET could be regarded
as having been made in the ordinary course of trade,
by establishing the proportion of profitable sales to inde-
in
pendent customers of
accordance with recitals 23 and 24 of the provisional
Regulation.

the PET type in question,

(30) Wherever domestic prices of a particular type sold by the
used,
producer

unique
constructed normal value had to be used.

exporting

could

not

be

(31)

3.1. Normal value

(25)

In view of the above, the general methodology explained
in recitals 20 to 34 of the provisional Regulation was
applied for the unique exporting producer and the meth-
odology explained in recitals 43 and 44 of the provi-
sional Regulation has been revised.

types,

exported

adjusted where necessary,

in accordance with Article 2(3) of

Consequently,
the
basic Regulation, normal value was constructed by
adding to the weighted average manufacturing costs of
the
a
reasonable amount for selling, general and administrative
expenses (SG&A) and a reasonable margin of profit. To
this end, the Commission examined whether the SG&A
incurred and the profit realised by the unique exporting
producer on the domestic market constituted reliable
data.

(26)

for

established,

The Commission first
the unique
exporting producer, whether its total domestic sales of
the product concerned were representative in comparison
In
sales
total export
with its
accordance with Article 2(2) of
the basic Regulation,
domestic sales were considered representative when the
total domestic sales volume of each exporting producer
was at least 5 % of its total export sales volume to the
Community.

to the Community.

(32) Actual domestic SG&A expenses were considered reliable
when the total domestic sales volume of
the unique
exporting producer could be regarded as representative
when compared to the volume of export sales to the
Community. The domestic profit margin was determined
on the basis of domestic sales of those types which were
sold in the ordinary course of trade. For this purpose, the
methodology set out
the provisional
Regulation was applied.

in recital 23 of

L 271/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

19.8.2004

(33)

For two types of PET exported by the unique exporting
producer, the Commission could establish normal value
on the basis of the prices paid or payable in the ordinary
course of
trade by independent customers on the
domestic market, in accordance with Article 2(1) of the
basic Regulation. For the three PET types whose domestic
sales were found to be not representative, constructed
normal value was used, in accordance with Article 2(3)
of the basic Regulation.

3.2. Export price

(39)

(34) All sales of the product concerned made by the unique
exporting producer on the Community market were
made to independent customers in the Community.
Consequently,
established
according to Article 2(8) of the basic Regulation on the
basis of the prices actually paid or payable.

price was

export

the

provided evidences which would lead to contradict the
conclusions
drawn in the provisional Regulation.
Therefore, the decision not to grant MET to these four
cooperating exporting producers and the findings set out
in the abovementioned recitals of the provisional Regu-
lation are confirmed.

of

an

it was not possible to
Following comments received,
calculate
the
one
individual margin for
companies which was granted only IT, as its exports of
the product concerned to the EU during the IP could not
be considered to have been in commercially significant
quantities. The other company which was granted only
IT and whose claim for MET was rejected on the basis of
non-compliance with criterion 2 specified in Article
2(7)(c) of the basic Regulation, also made submissions
in which it repeated its claim for MET. However, no
further evidence was submitted that was of a nature to
the conclusions drawn in the provisional
contradict
conclusion drawn in
Regulation. Consequently,
recital 68 of
the provisional Regulation is confirmed
for this company.

the

3.3. Comparison

(35)

In order to ensure a fair comparison, account was taken,
in accordance with Article 2(10) of the basic Regulation,
of differences in factors which were claimed and demon-
strated to affect prices and price comparability. On this
basis, allowances for differences in transport, insurance,
handling charges, commissions, credit and other factors
have been granted.

3.4. Dumping margin

(36) As provided by Article 2(11) of the basic Regulation, the
weighted average normal value of each type of
the
product concerned exported to the Community by the
unique
compared to the
weighted average export price of each corresponding
type of the product concerned.

exporting producer was

(37)

The dumping margin, expressed as a percentage of the cif
import price at the Community border, was reviewed in
the light of the issues outlined above, and was found to
be 1,6 % i.e. below the de minimis threshold as defined in
Article 9(3) of the basic Regulation.

4.2. Individual treatment

(40) One of the four companies which were neither granted
MET nor IT claimed that nevertheless, all conditions for
the granting of IT were met. However, given that no new
evidence was provided, the conclusions drawn in recital
76 of the provisional Regulation are confirmed and the
claim is rejected.

4.3. Normal Value

4.3.1. Determination of normal
producers not granted MET

value

for all

exporting

a) A n a l o g u e c o u n t r y

(41)

The exporting producers have repeated their objection to
the choice of the United States of America (USA) as the
analogue country. The main reasons given were the
difference in cultural and economic development,
the
difference in costs and the fact that countries such as
Pakistan or the Republic of South Korea (Korea) would
be much more appropriate than the USA.

4. PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA (PRC)

4.1. Market economy treatment (MET)

(38)

The four companies which were granted neither MET nor
individual treatment (IT) made submissions where they
reiterated the claims mentioned in recitals 57 to 73 of
them
the provisional Regulation. However, none of

(42)

First of all, differences in terms of cultural development
are considered irrelevant for the choice of an analogue
country, because an analogue country is taken to reflect
market economy conditions and not comparable cultural
development levels.

19.8.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 271/5

(43) As regards the use of a country with different economic
development, it should be mentioned that, by definition,
a non-market-economy country or an economy in tran-
sition does not have the same economic characteristics as
a market-economy country. It is not unusual that such
difference in economic development exists between an
analogue country and a non-market-economy country
or an economy in transition. This, however, does not
prevent the USA to be chosen as analogue country as
long as it is deemed more appropriate.

(49)

it is recalled that no
Regarding the difference in costs,
significant difference was found in the prices paid by
producers in the USA and the PRC for the main raw
material
(PTA) which represents the most significant
part of the cost of production of PET.

(44)

(45)

4.3.2. Determination of normal value for exporting producers

granted MET

the

Two exporting producers claimed that the Commission
had double counted the amount of the duty drawback in
the cost of production and substantiated their claim with
this new
supporting documents. On the basis of
evidence,
two
the
accepted for
claims were
companies concerned and the calculation of the cost of
these
production was corrected accordingly. One of
exporting producers also argued that some adjustments
have been either omitted or not correctly applied. After
verification, the claim was accepted with one exception
relating to credit cost. For this latter, the methodology
applied by the Commission at the provisional stage and
explained in recitals 89 to 91 of the provisional Regu-
lation is confirmed.

Some exporting producers stressed the fact that while
labour costs are higher in the USA than in the PRC,
labour costs in Pakistan and Korea are more comparable
to Chinese labour costs.
In these circumstances, these
producers considered that Pakistan or Korea would be
a more appropriate analogue country than the USA.

4.4. Export prices

(50)

Two exporting producers contested the exchange rates
used by the Commission. As already explained in
recitals 12 and 13, this claim has been accepted.

less

(46) As mentioned in recital 43, a country with a different
level of economic development may be chosen as
analogue country for a non-market-economy country
or an economy in transition. Similarly,
labour costs
which reflect the state of economic development of a
country are not
in isolation considered as a relevant
criterion. In the present case, in view of the very small
part that labour cost accounts for in the total cost of
production (i.e.
the total cost of
than 3 % of
production) compared to the cost of PTA (more than
60 % of the total cost of production), this criterion was
not considered sufficiently significant to choose Pakistan
or Korea as analogue country instead of
the USA.
Moreover,
in the light of the level of competition in
the chosen analogue country and of the representativity
in the
of domestic sales
analogue country as compared to the Chinese exports
of PET, Pakistan and Korea were deemed less appropriate
than the USA, as explained in recitals 78 to 86 of the
provisional Regulation. Therefore, the claim was rejected.

to independent customers

4.5. Comparison

(51)

In the absence of any comments concerning the basis on
which normal value and export prices were compared
and the adjustments made to ensure a fair comparison
between the export prices and normal value, the provi-
sional conclusion as contained in recital 93 of the provi-
sional Regulation is confirmed.

4.6. Dumping margin

4.6.1. For

the
MET/IT

cooperating

exporting

producers

granted

(52)

The dumping margins expressed as a percentage on the
cif import price at the Community border, which were
reviewed in the light of the issues outlined above, are
now as follows:

(47)

In the absence of any other comments concerning the
analogue country, the choice of the USA is confirmed.

b) D e t e r m i n a t i o n o f n o r m a l v a l u e

(48)

In the absence of any comments concerning the deter-
mination of normal value, the methodology described in
recitals 87 and 88 of
the provisional Regulation is
confirmed.

Changzhou Worldbest Radici Co. Ltd

Far Eastern Industries Shanghai Ltd

Jiangyin Xingye Plastic Co. Ltd

Hubei Changfeng Chemical Fibres Industry Co.
Ltd

0 %

2,6 %

18,4 %

18,5 %

L 271/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

19.8.2004

4.6.2. For all other exporting producers

(53) One exporting producer claimed that the calculation of
the anti-dumping duty for all cooperating exporting
producers neither granted MET nor IT resulted in an
individual duty for each of these companies. More parti-
cularly, this exporting producer argued that all coop-
erating exporting producers neither granted MET nor IT
should pay the same amount of duty.

the cif value of

the imports of each of

(54) At the provisional stage, these companies had the same
dumping margin in percentage of the cif value. However,
the calculation of the specific duty per tonne on the basis
these
of
companies led to different amounts of duty. In particular,
specific duties of EUR 188 per tonne and EUR 191 per
tonne have been established for two exporting producers
respectively. The amount of the specific duty per tonne
had been corrected for the calculation of the definitive
duty as follows: the individual dumping margin for the
cooperating exporting producers was
calculated by
comparing the weighted average normal value established
the analogue country and the weighted average
for
exporting producers
export price
reported by the
concerned. The average dumping margin was
then
the individual
calculated as a weighted average of
dumping margins
cooperating
exporting producers which were neither granted MET
nor IT. The specific duty per tonne has been calculated
by applying this single dumping margin to the weighted
average
these
tonne
the methodology explained above had
companies.
the provisional
been applied at
tonne for all exporting producers
specific duty per
neither granted MET nor
IT would have been EUR
183. Therefore, to the extent that the duties imposed
by the provisional Regulation were higher than this
amount,
should not be definitively
collected.

the provisional stage,

established for

cif value per

the difference

established

the

for

If

(55) On this basis,
dumping was
Community frontier price.

the
established

countrywide definitive
at 22,9 % of

level of
cif
the

D. INJURY

1. COMMUNITY PRODUCTION

(56)

In the absence of any new information submitted, the
total Community
basis

calculation of

the

the

for

production as set out
provisional Regulation is hereby confirmed.

in recitals 100 to 101 of the

2. DEFINITION OF THE COMMUNITY INDUSTRY

(57)

In the absence of any new information submitted, the
definition of the Community industry as set out in recital
102 of the provisional Regulation is hereby confirmed.

3. COMMUNITY CONSUMPTION

(58)

In the absence of any new information submitted, the
calculation of Community consumption as set out in
recitals 103 to 106 of
the provisional Regulation is
hereby confirmed.

4.

IMPORTS INTO THE COMMUNITY FROM THE COUNTRIES
CONCERNED

4.1. Cumulative assessment of

the
dumped imports concerned — market shares
of dumped imports

the effects of

(59) As mentioned in recital 52, one of

the exporting
producers in the PRC was found not to have sold at
dumped prices during the IP. Furthermore, and as
mentioned in recital 37, the dumping margin found for
the cooperating exporting producers in Pakistan was
below the de minimis
the
export volumes from these exporting producers should
be decumulated from the total import volumes from the
countries concerned. The evolution of dumped imports
from the countries concerned, as given in recital 108 in
the provisional Regulation,
should therefore be the
following:

threshold. Consequently,

1999

2000

2001

2002

IP

144

20

9 000

86 788

117 953

share

0 %

0 %

0,6 %

4,8 %

6,4 %

PRC

Market
(%)

Australia

0

0

5 157

17 031

27 538

Market
(%)

share

0 %

0 %

0,5 %

0,9 %

1,5 %

Total countries
concerned

144

20

14 157

103 819

145 491

Market
(%)

share

0 %

0 %

1,1 %

5,7 %

7,9 %

19.8.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 271/7

(60)

(61)

(62)

the decumulation of

it
In the absence of any new information submitted,
follows from the data above that, even taking into
account the decumulation of non-dumped imports, as
explained in recital 59, the criteria of Article 3(4) of
the basic Regulation are still met with regard to the
imports originating in the PRC and
cumulation of
Australia. Therefore,
the non-
dumped imports does not affect the findings relating to
the appropriateness of the cumulative assessment of the
effects of the dumped imports concerned, as set out in
the provisional Regulation, especially in the light of the
fact that the level of undercutting found in the provi-
sional Regulation corresponds to the level of under-
cutting found for
that
remain after decumulation of the non-dumped imports.
Finally,
the market share as regards dumped imports
from Australia, as set out in recitals 107 to 111 of the
provisional Regulation, is hereby confirmed.

exporting producers

those

In the absence of any new information submitted in
addition to the above, the findings relating to the cumu-
lative assessment of the effects of the dumped imports
concerned and the market share of these imports, as set
out in recitals 107 to 111 of the provisional Regulation,
are hereby confirmed.

4.2. Prices of imports and undercutting

It is recalled that, in making its provisional findings, the
Commission had, as set out in recitals 112 to 114 of the
provisional Regulation, compared the ex-works prices of
the Community industry with those of the exporting
producers in the countries concerned at cif Community
frontier level, taking into account customs duties, and
with adjustments for handling costs and different levels
of trade.

(63) On the basis of new cif Community frontier prices
calculated for the exporting producers in Australia (see
recital 21) and the PRC (see recital 52), and due to new
exchange rates used (see recitals 12 to 13), new under-
cutting margins were calculated.

(64)

the products
The new margins by which imports of
concerned
concerned originating
undercut
average prices,
expressed as a percentage of the latter, are the following:

the Community industry's

countries

in the

are not

PRC, as presented in recital 113 of the provisional Regu-
lation,
significant. The
considered to be
conclusion drawn on the level of undercutting in the
provisional Regulation is therefore confirmed.

(66)

Some exporting producers argued that the adjustments
made for handling costs and different levels for trade
(1 %) were insufficient. According to these exporting
producers, the adjustments made were not sufficient to
cover the real costs incurred on importation of
the
goods.

(67) However, the adjustments were based on actual

any new evidence

infor-
In the
mation collected during
level of
absence of
adjustments made was incorrect, i.e. not based on facts
collected, the arguments of these exporting producers are
rejected. The level of adjustment made in the provisional
Regulation is hereby confirmed.

investigation.
the

that

the

(68)

In the absence of any information submitted in addition
to the above, the findings in respect of prices of imports
and undercutting as set out in recitals 112 to 114 of the
provisional Regulation are confirmed.

5. SITUATION OF THE COMMUNITY INDUSTRY

(69)

It is recalled that in recital 147 of the provisional Regu-
lation, the Commission provisionally concluded that the
Community industry had suffered material injury within
the meaning of Article 3 of the basic Regulation.

(70) Many exporting producers questioned the interpretation
of the figures relating to the situation of the Community
industry as presented in recitals 117 to 144 of the provi-
sional Regulation. They stated that the figures did not
injury. These exporting producers
show any material
claimed that
instead showed a massive
increase of production volumes, production capacity,
sales volumes and average prices since the start of the
period considered (1999), which should lead to the
the Community industry has not
conclusion that
suffered material injury.

the figures

— Australia: 9,5 % to 13,8 %,

(71)

— PRC: 10,49 % to 14,09 %.

(65)

The differences in comparison with the level of under-
cutting for the exporting producers in Australia and the

if

The exporting producers also referred to the fact that
consumption had increased by 37 % during the period
considered (recital 106 of the provisional Regulation).
They claimed that,
the Community industry under
these advantageous circumstances could not obtain a
level of efficiency, which could ensure a sustainable
profit margin, even though being confronted with
imports from third countries,
the poor performance
had to be attributed to factors within the Community
industry itself rather that to competition from imports.

L 271/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

19.8.2004

(72)

It is noted that none of the exporting producers has
questioned the figures relating to the situation of the
Community industry as such, but rather their interpre-
tation.

(73) When analysing the development of

the Community
industry's economic indicators between 1999 and the
the Community
IP, one must bear
industry was in a seriously depressed state in 1999
with losses of 16,4 % due to dumped imports of the
product
Indonesia, Malaysia,
Republic of Korea, Taiwan and Thailand.

concerned from India,

in mind that

(74) As stated in recital 129 of the provisional Regulation,
anti-dumping duties were imposed on imports of the
Indonesia, Malaysia,
product
Republic of Korea, Taiwan and Thailand in 2000 (1).

concerned from India,

(75)

(76)

to the imposition of

the anti-dumping
Subsequent
the Community market stabilised
measures in 2000,
and the
the Community
indicators
economic
industry improved as a result of the measures imposed.
The Commission emphasised this particular development
when,
it
concluded that by 2001 the Community industry had
recovered from past dumping.

in recital 143 of the provisional Regulation,

for

it

In these circumstances, in order to measure the effects of
dumped imports from the countries concerned,
is
considered that the relevant economic indicators have
to be particularly examined from the time when the
Community industry had fully recovered from past
dumping, which in this
case was 2001. When
examining the relevant economic factors from 2001, it
emerges that, contrary to the above submissions, but as
found already by the Commission in its provisional
findings (recitals 135 and 146 of the provisional Regu-
lation), the Community industry did show a significant
decrease in profit, price depression and a significant loss
in market share, especially from 2002 and during the IP.

(77)

In the absence of any other information submitted in
addition to the above, the findings in respect of the
situation for the Community industry, as set out
in
recitals 117 to 144 of the provisional Regulation, are
hereby confirmed.

E. CAUSATION

1. EFFECT OF THE DUMPED IMPORTS

(79)

It is recalled that in recitals 150 to 153 of the provisional
Regulation, the Commission concluded that there was a
causal link between dumped imports from the countries
concerned and the material
injury suffered by the
Community industry.

(80)

(81)

(82)

Since one of the exporting producers in the PRC was
found not to have sold at dumped prices during the IP,
and the dumping margin for the cooperating exporting
producers in Pakistan was found to be below the de
from these
minimis
exporting producers should be decumulated from the
effects of dumped imports.

export volumes

threshold,

the

The exports to the Community by the Chinese exporting
producer concerned represented less than 5 % of
the
imports volumes originating in the PRC during the IP
(less than 1 % in terms of market share of Community
consumption). The decumulation of the exports from this
exporter is therefore considered to have a marginal effect
on the causal link established in the investigation leading
up to the provisional Regulation.

The exports to the Community by the cooperating
exporting producers
in Pakistan represented 4 % in
terms of market share of Community consumption in
the IP, and were therefore considered to have been
significant. Still, as compared to total imports from the
countries concerned, the exports originating in Pakistan
only represented 33,4 % of the total
imports from the
countries concerned, i.e. 66,7 % of the imports from the
countries concerned were still found to have been sold at
prices with a dumping margin above the de minimis
threshold.
link
still exists between dumped imports from Australia and
the PRC and the material
injury suffered by the
Community industry.

It is therefore considered that a causal

6. CONCLUSION

(78)

In view of the above, it is concluded that the Community
industry has suffered material injury within the meaning
of Article 3 of the basic Regulation.

(1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1742/2000 (OJ L 199, 5.8.2000, p.
48) and Council Regulation (EC) No 2604/2000 (OJ L 301,
30.11.2000, p. 21).

(83)

Some exporting producers claimed that
there was a
positive correlation between the Community industry's
and the exporting producers' prices,
increases
and decreases occurred simultaneously. According to
these exporting producers, this showed that the price
decreases suffered during the last
two years by the
Community industry were not due to competition from
dumped imports but rather adjustments to changes in
the costs for raw materials.

in that

19.8.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 271/9

(84)

(85)

It is recalled that approximately two thirds of the cost of
production consists of raw materials (see recital 162 in
the provisional Regulation). In this context, as both the
exporting producers and the Community industry rely on
the same raw material, it is considered that the question
whether or not prices react simultaneously to changes in
the underlying cost structure is not considered relevant in
In any event, as will be shown below, an
isolation.
analysis of
the actual prices does not confirm that
there was a positive correlation.

(88)

Recitals 162 to 172 of the provisional Regulation set out
in detail an analysis of the possible contribution of the
cost of raw materials to the injury suffered by the
Community industry.
It should furthermore be noted
that, an analysis of the prices of dumped imports from
the
the
Community industry had recovered from past dumping
shows the following:

2001 when

concerned

countries

after

— prices of

imports of the product concerned origi-
nating in Australia decreased from EUR 868/tonne
in 2002 to EUR 838/tonne during the IP, or by
– 3,4 %,

— prices of

imports of the product concerned origi-
nating in the PRC increased from EUR 788/tonne
in 2002 to EUR 825/tonne during the IP, or by
+ 4,5 %.

(89)

The

Community

period.
by
than 1 % during
it cannot be concluded that

(86) Whereas the increase in the price of imports from the
PRC (+ 4,5 %) coincides with the price development over
the same period for the main raw material, PTA (+ 5,1 %
(see recital 168 in the provisional Regulation)), the prices
of imports originating in Australia decreased over the
same
prices
this period.
increased
Therefore,
there was a
positive correlation between the Community industry's
and the exporting producers' prices, as the price devel-
opment from the three countries is not coherent. In this
context, it should also be recalled that the Commission
had found a significant undercutting of the Community
industry's sales prices by all exporting producers in the
course of the investigation.

industry's

less

(87)

provisional Regulation

is
is to be noted that

In the absence of any information submitted in addition
to the above, the conclusion drawn in respect of the
effects of dumped imports in recitals 150 to 153 of
hereby
the
confirmed.
the exports by one
However,
exporting producer
in the PRC whose exports were
found to be dumped in the provisional Regulation,
at dumped prices.
have been found not
Furthermore,
the cooperating
exporting producers in Pakistan whose exports were

the dumping margin of

to sell

it

(90)

(91)

found to be dumped in the provisional Regulation was
found to be below the de minimis threshold. The effect of
these exports should therefore no longer be assessed
under
the
effect of other factors.

the effect of dumped imports but under

2. EFFECT OF OTHER FACTORS

the

threshold,

export volumes

Since one of the exporting producers in the PRC was
found not to have sold at dumped prices during the IP,
and the dumping margin for the cooperating exporting
producers in Pakistan was found to be below the de
from these
minimis
exporting producers should be decumulated from the
total volume of dumped imports. However, the prices
of these exporting producers were found to significantly
undercut the Community industry's average sales prices.
As mentioned in recitals 81 and 82, the non-dumped
volumes of imports from the countries concerned repre-
sented
Community
consumption. It can therefore not be excluded that the
exports to the Community by this exporting producer in
the PRC and the cooperating exporting producers in
Pakistan also have
significantly contributed to the
material injury suffered by the Community industry.

4 % and

5 % of

between

Some exporters claimed that the Commission had not
sufficiently investigated the effect of the depreciation of
the USD and RMB against
the EUR. These exporters
claimed that, due to the depreciation of the USD and
the RMB against the EUR during the IP, the exporters
had gained market shares in the Community by keeping
their prices in USD, which effectively entailed a reduction
in the price expressed in EUR. Based on the foregoing,
the exporting producers expressed doubts whether the
material
injury suffered by the Community industry
had been caused by dumped imports or by imports at
prices which were lower due to the currency effect.

Currency fluctuations in isolation are normally not taken
into account in an anti-dumping investigation as they
can not be considered to be of a lasting nature. Never-
theless, the effects of currency fluctuations are, in effect,
included in the analysis insofar they had an effect on the
cost of raw materials consumed by the Community
industry (recitals 162 to 173 in the provisional Regu-
lation) and on the price of dumped imports (recitals
150 to 153 in the provisional Regulation).

It is recalled that significant levels of dumping have been
found from exporters in Australia and the PRC during
the investigation (see recitals 21 and 52). Moreover, it is
also recalled that exporting producers from Australia and
the PRC have been found to undercut the prices of the
Community industry by significant amounts (see recital
64).

L 271/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

19.8.2004

(92)

It cannot be excluded that non-dumped imports origi-
nating in the PRC and imports originating from the
cooperating exporting producers
in Pakistan, whose
dumping margin was found to be below the de minimis
threshold, could contribute to the injury suffered by the
Community industry. This effect, however, is not such as
to break the causal
link established in the provisional
Regulation between dumped imports in the countries
injury suffered by the
concerned and the material
in the absence of any
Community industry. Therefore,
new information submitted, the conclusions drawn in
respect of the effect of dumped imports in recitals 150
to 153 and in respect of the effect of other factors in
recitals 154 to 178 of the provisional Regulation are
hereby confirmed.

F. COMMUNITY INTEREST

1.

INTEREST OF THE COMMUNITY INDUSTRY

(93)

In the absence of any information submitted with respect
of the interest of the Community industry, the findings
as set out
in recitals 183 to 184 of the provisional
Regulation are hereby confirmed.

(98)

(99)

2.

INTEREST OF UNRELATED IMPORTERS

of users was explained under the heading ‘Preliminary
remarks’ in recitals 190 to 192 of the provisional Regu-
lation.
this
In the absence of any new information,
description is hereby confirmed.

4.2. Preform/bottle converters

is recalled that

(recital 196 of

the Commission in its provisional
It
findings
the provisional Regulation)
could not establish whether it would be in the interest
of the preform/bottle converters to impose anti-dumping
that,
duties. This conclusion was based on the fact
whereas
converters
two cooperating preform/bottle
supported the introduction of anti-dumping measures,
the Association of Plastic Converters opposed it.

to the

imposition of provisional

Subsequent
anti-
dumping measures, no new submissions, nor a request
for a hearing, were made by the Association of Plastic
Converters. On this basis, it cannot be concluded that the
interests
converters would
preform/bottle
constitute a compelling reason against the imposition
of anti-dumping measures. The findings as set out in
recitals 193 to 195 of the provisional Regulation are
therefore confirmed.

the

of

(94) One

submission from an unrelated importer was
received. In addition, a hearing with another importer
the first
(agent) was also held. The arguments of
importer
exporting
the
producers and have been discussed in recital 70. The
arguments of the second importer (agent) are discussed
under recital 102, as they coincide with the arguments of
two mineral water producers.

coincided with those of

(95)

In the absence of any further information submitted with
respect of the interest of the unrelated importers, the
findings as set out in recitals 185 to 187 of the provi-
sional Regulation are hereby confirmed.

3.

INTEREST OF SUPPLIERS

(96)

In the absence of any information submitted with respect
of the interest of the Community suppliers, the findings
as set out
in recitals 188 to 189 of the provisional
Regulation are hereby confirmed.

4.3. The mineral and spring water producers

(100) After disclosure of

the basis upon which provisional
measures were imposed, a clerical error has been
rectified by including L'Européenne d'embouteillage on the
list of cooperating users. This user opposed the intro-
duction of provisional measures. Consequently,
there
were two rather than one mineral and spring water
producers opposing the imposition of anti-dumping
duties, while two others remained in favour.

(101)

It is recalled that in the investigation leading up to provi-
sional duties,
the Commission had concluded the
following as regards filled mineral water bottles:

— the cost of PET for mineral and spring water
producers represented approximately 30 % of their
manufacturing costs (see recital 198 in the provi-
sional Regulation),

4.

INTEREST OF USERS

4.1. Preliminary remarks

(97)

The manner in which Community consumption of the
product concerned was distributed between various types

— the cost of PET at the level of the end-consumer only
represented 3 cents, or 6-10 % of the retail price (see
recital 199 in the provisional Regulation),

19.8.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 271/11

— a 10 % increase in the price of PET would entail a
possible maximum price increase of 0,6 % to 1 % at
the level of end-consumer if all the costs are passed
on. This increase was not considered significant in
the provisional Regulation because it could either
be absorbed by the downstream industry or passed
on to retailers or end-consumers (see recital 202 of
the provisional Regulation).

(102) Subsequent to the disclosure of the provisional findings,
two mineral and spring water producers and one
(the group) made a joint submission. The
importer
group claimed that:

— the interest of the small and medium-sized preform/
bottle converters had not been duly taken into
account. They claimed that
increases
resulting from the imposition of measures could
not be passed on to soft drink producers but had
to be absorbed by preform/bottle converters, which
would negatively affect the financial stability for small
and medium-sized preform/bottle converters,

the price

— the Commission had overstated the retail price for a
bottle of mineral water in the provisional Regulation,
thereby underestimating how significant the cost of
PET is for a bottle of mineral water. Rather than 6-
10 % of the retail price, as the Commission indicated,
the group claimed that the cost of PET was around
20 % of the retail price. Hence, the group claimed
that
the
impact that increases of the costs for PET had on
the downstream industry,

the Commission had

underestimated

— the

risk

for outsourcing

from the

European

Community had not sufficiently been considered.

(103) Concerning the group's claim that price increases on PET
could not be passed on to the next level of users (i.e. to
in the case of preform/
retailers, end-consumers and,
bottle converters,
this claim
was not substantiated. In addition, no retailers nor any
consumer organisations have made themselves known
during the investigation. This argument
therefore
rejected.

to soft drink producers),

is

they
retail prices have been re-investigated. However,
were found to be in the range presented in the provi-
sional Regulation. This argument is therefore rejected.

(105) As concerns the risk of outsourcing,

are

the place

at which they

it is recalled that
health regulations in respect of the bottling of mineral
water require that preform bottles should be in principle
produced at
filled.
Accordingly, preforms used by water producers are self-
produced close to the blowing and filling lines. Hence,
the risk for any outsourcing of preform/bottling capacity
would be limited to the case of preforms for soft drinks
producers, which account for only about 40 % of the
total
concerned.
it cannot be
Furthermore, as noted in recital 99,
the preform/bottle
interests of
the
concluded that
converters would constitute a compelling reason against
the imposition of anti-dumping measures.
In these
circumstances,
the group's argument concerning the
alleged risk for outsourcing of bottling/converting
capacity is rejected.

consumption

product

the

of

(106)

In the absence of any new information submitted in
addition to the above, the findings as set out in recitals
197 to 202 of the provisional Regulation are hereby
confirmed.

4.4. The soft drink producers

(107)

In the absence of any new information submitted with
respect of the interest of the soft drink producers, the
findings as set out in recitals 203 to 206 of the provi-
sional Regulation are hereby confirmed.

4.5. Shortages of PET in the Community market

(108)

the

In the absence of any new information submitted with
respect of
claimed shortages of PET in the
Community market, the findings as set out in recitals
207 to 209 of the provisional Regulation are hereby
confirmed.

(104) Concerning the alleged overstatement of the retail price
by the Commission in the provisional Regulation (which
would entail an underestimation of
the effects that
increases of PET had on the downstream industry), the

5. CONCLUSION ON COMMUNITY INTEREST

(109)

the conclusions drawn in the provisional
In view of
the submissions
Regulation and taking into account
made by the various parties,
it is concluded that there
are no compelling reasons not to impose definitive anti-
dumping measures against dumped imports of PET origi-
nating in the countries concerned.

L 271/12

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

19.8.2004

G. DEFINITIVE ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES

(110) Based on the methodology explained in recitals 212 to
215 of the provisional Regulation, an injury elimination
level was calculated for the purposes of establishing the
level of measures to be imposed.

for

the

(111) When calculating the injury margin in the provisional
Regulation,
the Community
target profit
industry was set at 7 %, a level which originated from
the investigation leading to the imposition of anti-
product
dumping measures
on
concerned originating in,
It
was, at that time, based on an estimate on the level of
profit that the Community industry could expect in the
absence of dumping and a level which was considered
necessary to ensure the viability of the industry.

of
the
India in 2000.

imports
inter alia,

target profit of 7,6 % is more appropriate when calcu-
lating the injury margin rather than 7 % used in the
provisional Regulation.

(113)

In the absence of any new comments on this subject,
other than to the amendment above, the methodology
set out in recitals 212 to 215 of the provisional Regu-
lation is hereby confirmed.

1. DEFINITIVE MEASURES

(114)

In the light of the foregoing and in accordance with
Article 9(4) of the basic Regulation, a definitive anti-
dumping duty should be imposed at the level of the
dumping margin calculated, since they were in all cases
lower than the injury margins.

(112) However, in the present investigation, it was found, based
on evidence, that a profit level of 7,6 % could be achieved
in the absence of dumping. Hence, it is considered that a

(115) On the basis of the above, the definitive duties should be

as follows:

Country

Company

Injury elimi-
nation margin

Dumping
margin

Anti-dumping
duty rate

Proposed anti-
dumping duty

Australia

Leading Synthetics Pty Ltd

Novapex Australia Pty Ltd

All other companies

19,8 %

26,3 %

26,3 %

PRC

Sinopec
Yizheng
Fibre Company Ltd

Chemical

27,3 %

7,8 %

15,9 %

15,9 %

22,9 %

7,8 %

15,9 %

15,9 %

22,9 %

EUR 66/t

EUR 128/t

EUR 128/t

EUR 184/t

Changzhou Worldbest Radici
Co. Ltd

27,1 %

0 %

0 %

EUR 0/t

Jiangyin Xingye Plastic Co. Ltd

20,9 %

Far Eastern Industries Shanghai
Ltd

21,2 %

18,4 %

2,6 %

18,4 %

EUR 157/t

2,6 %

EUR 22/t

Yuhua Polyester Co. Ltd. of
Zhuhai

Guangdong Kaiping Polyester
Enterprises Group Co.
and
Guangdong Kaiping Chunhui
Co. Ltd

Yibin Wuliangye Group Push
Co. Ltd.
(Sichuan) and Yibin
Wuliangye Group Import &
Export Co. Ltd (Sichuan)

Hubei
Fibres Industry Co. Ltd

Changfeng

Chemical

27,3 %

22,9 %

22,9 %

EUR 184/t

27,3 %

22,9 %

22,9 %

EUR 184/t

27,3 %

22,9 %

22,9 %

EUR 184/t

26,2 %

18,5 %

18,5 %

EUR 151/t

All other companies

Pakistan

Gatron (Industries) Ltd

Novatex Ltd

All other companies

27,3 %

22,1 %

22,1 %

22,1 %

22,9 %

22,9 %

EUR 184/t

0 %

0 %

0 %

0 %

0 %

0 %

EUR 0/t

EUR 0/t

EUR 0/t

19.8.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 271/13

duty

countrywide

(116) The individual anti-dumping duty rates specified in this
Regulation were established on the basis of the findings
of the present investigation. Therefore, they reflect the
situation found during that
investigation with respect
to these companies. These duty rates (as opposed to
the
other
companies’) are thus exclusively applicable to imports
of products originating in the country concerned and
produced by the
specifically mentioned.
Imported products produced by any other company
not specifically mentioned by its name and address in
the operative part of this Regulation,
including entities
related to those specifically mentioned, cannot benefit
from these rates and shall be subject to the duty rate
applicable to ‘all other companies’.

companies

applicable

‘all

to

(117) Any claim requesting the application of these individual
anti-dumping duty rates (e.g. following a change in the
name of the entity or following the setting-up of new
production or sales entities) should be addressed to the
Commission (1) forthwith with all relevant information,
in particular any modification in the company's activities
linked to production, domestic and export sales asso-
ciated with e.g. that name change or that change in the
production and sales entities. If appropriate, the Regu-
lation will accordingly be amended by updating the list
of companies benefiting from individual duty rates.

2. UNDERTAKINGS

cooperating

(119) Subsequent to the adoption of provisional anti-dumping
measures, one
in
Australia offered a price undertaking in accordance
with Article 8(1) of the basic Regulation. In this under-
taking, the exporting producer in question has offered to
sell the product concerned at or above price levels that
eliminate the injurious effect of dumping.

exporting producer

(120) The Commission, by Decision 2004/600/EC (2) accepted
the undertaking offered by the exporting producer
concerned. The reasons for accepting this undertaking
are set out in that Decision.

3. COLLECTION OF PROVISIONAL DUTIES

(121)

the amounts secured by way of

In view of the magnitude of the dumping margins found
and in the light of the level of the material injury caused
it is considered necessary
to the Community industry,
that
the provisional
anti-dumping duty,
imposed by Regulation (EC) No
306/2004, should be collected at the rate of the duty
definitely imposed. Where the definitive duties are higher
than the provisional duties, only the amounts secured at
the level of the provisional duties should be definitively
collected,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

(118) As mentioned in recital 162 in the provisional Regu-
lation, PET prices can and do fluctuate in line with fluc-
tuations in crude oil prices, but this should not of itself
entail a higher duty. It was therefore considered appro-
priate to impose duties in the form of a specific amount
per tonne. These amounts result from the application of
the anti-dumping duty rate to the cif export prices Used
for the calculation of the injury elimination level.

A definitive anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on
1.
imports of polyethylene
terephthalate having a viscosity
number of 78 ml/g or higher, according to the ISO Standard
1628-5, classified under CN code 3907 60 20 and originating
in Australia, the People's Republic of China and Pakistan.

2.
The rate of the definitive anti-dumping duty applicable to
the net free-at-Community-frontier price for products manu-
factured by the companies listed below shall be as follows:

(1) European Commission

Directorate-General for Trade
Direction B
Office J-79 5/16
B-1049 Brussels.

(2) See page 38 of this Official Journal.

L 271/14

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

19.8.2004

Country

Company

Anti-dumping duty
(EUR/t)

TARIC additional code

Australia

Leading Synthetics Pty Ltd

Novapex Australia Pty Ltd

All other companies

PRC

Sinopec Yizheng Chemical Fibre Company Ltd

Changzhou Worldbest Radici Co. Ltd

Jiangyin Xingye Plastic Co. Ltd

Far Eastern Industries Shanghai Ltd

Yuhua Polyester Co. Ltd. of Zhuhai

Enterprises
Guangdong Kaiping
Group Co. and Guangdong Kaiping Chunhui
Co. Ltd

Polyester

Yibin Wuliangye Group
and
(Sichuan)
Import & Export Co. Ltd (Sichuan)

Ltd
Yibin Wuliangye Group

Push Co.

Hubei Changfeng Chemical Fibres Industry Co.
Ltd

All other companies

Pakistan

Gatron (Industries) Ltd

Novatex Ltd

All other companies

66

128

128

184

0

157

22

184

184

184

151

184

0

0

0

A503

A504

A999

A505

A506

A507

A508

A509

A511

A512

A513

A999

A514

A515

A999

3.
The application of the individual duty rates specified for
the 16 companies mentioned in paragraph 2 shall be condi-
the
tional upon presentation to the customs authorities of
Member States of a valid commercial
invoice, which shall
conform to the requirements set out in Annex 1. If no such
invoice is presented,
the duty rate applicable to all other
companies shall apply.

5.
Notwithstanding the provisions in paragraph 2, the defi-
nitive duty shall not apply to imports declared for release into
free circulation in accordance with the provisions of Article 2.

Unless otherwise

6.
concerning customs duties shall apply.

specified,

the provisions

in force

4.
In cases where goods have been damaged before entry
into free circulation and, therefore, the price actually paid or
payable is apportioned for the determination of the customs
to Article 145 of Commission Regulation
value pursuant
(EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for
the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92
establishing the Common Customs Code (1) the amount of anti-
dumping duty, calculated on the basis of paragraph 2, shall be
reduced by a percentage which corresponds to the apportioning
of the price actually paid or payable.

(1) OJ L 253, 11.10.1993, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by
L 343,

(EC) No 2286/2003 (OJ

Commission Regulation
31.12.2003, p. 1).

Article 2

Imports declared for release into free circulation by companies
which offered undertakings
accepted by and named in
Commission Decision 2004/600/EC shall be exempt from the
anti-dumping duties imposed by Article 1, provided that they
are manufactured, shipped and invoiced directly by the said
companies
the
Community; and provided that such imports are accompanied
by a commercial invoice containing at least the elements listed
in Annex 2. Exemption from the duty shall further be condi-
tional on the goods declared and presented to customs corre-
sponding precisely to the description on the commercial
invoice.

independent

customer

first

the

to

in

19.8.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 271/15

Article 3

the present Regulation. The amounts secured in excess of the
definitive rate of anti-dumping duties shall be released.

Amounts secured by way of provisional anti-dumping duty
pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 306/2004 on imports of poly-
ethylene terephthalate falling within CN Code 3907 60 20 origi-
nating in Australia, the People's Republic of China and Pakistan
shall be definitively collected at the rate definitively imposed by

A correction of the provisional anti-dumping duty imposed on
imports of polyethylene terephthalate falling within CN Code
3907 60 20 originating in the People's Republic of China shall
apply for the following companies, since the corrected duty
would have been lower than the provisional duty imposed:

Country

Company

PRC

Yuhua Polyester Co. Ltd of
Zhuhai

Kaiping
Guangdong
Polyester Enterprises Group
Co. and Guangdong Kaiping
Chunhui Co. Ltd

Provisional anti-dumping
duty as imposed by Regu-
lation (EC) No 306/2004
(EUR/t)

Corrected provisional
anti-dumping duty

TARIC additional
code

188

191

183

183

A509

A511

provisional

The
on these
companies shall only be definitively collected at the rate of
the corrected provisional anti-dumping duty.

anti-dumping

imposed

duty

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, 13 August 2004.

For the Council
The President

B. BOT

L 271/16

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

19.8.2004

ANNEX 1

The valid commercial invoice referred to in Article 1(3) of this Regulation must include a declaration signed by an officer
of the company, in the following format:

1. the name and function of the official of the company which has issued the commercial invoice;

2. the following declaration:

‘I, the undersigned, certify that the [volume] of polyethylene terephthalate sold for export to the European Community
covered by this invoice was manufactured by [company name and address] [TARIC additional code] in [country]; I
declare that the information provided in this invoice is complete and correct.’;

3. Date and signature.

19.8.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 271/17

ANNEX 2

Elements to be indicated on the commercial invoice referred to in Article 2

The following elements shall be indicated in the commercial invoice accompanying sales of the product concerned, which
are subject to an undertaking and for which an exemption to the anti-dumping duty is claimed:

1. the heading ‘COMMERCIAL INVOICE ACCOMPANYING GOODS SUBJECT TO AN UNDERTAKING’;

2. the name of the company referred to in Article 2, issuing the commercial invoice;

3. the commercial invoice number;

4. the date of issue of the commercial invoice;

5. the TARIC additional code under which the goods on the invoice are to be customs cleared at the Community

frontier;

6. the exact description of the goods, including:

— the product code number (PCN),

— CN code,

— quantity (in tonnes);

7. the description of the terms of the sale, including:

— price per tonne,

— the applicable payment terms,

— the applicable delivery terms,

— total discounts and rebates;

8. the name of the company acting as an importer to which the invoice is issued directly by the company;

9. the name of the official of the company that has issued the commercial invoice and the following signed declaration:

‘I, the undersigned, certify that the sale for direct export to the European Community of the goods covered by this
invoice is being made within the scope and under the terms of the undertaking offered by [company name and
address], [TARIC additional code], and accepted by the European Commission through Decision 2004/600/EC. I
declare that the information provided in this invoice is complete and correct.’