Proposal for a Council Regulation amending Council Regulation (EC) No 176/2000 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1015/94
Date: 2004-09-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Japan, anti-dumping legislation, originating product, recording equipment, retroactivity of a law

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 15.09.2004 
COM(2004) 595 final 

Proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION 

amending Council Regulation (EC) No 176/2000 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 
1015/94 

(presented by the Commission) 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
  
1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 

The Council, by Regulation (EC) No 176/2000 exempted certain professional camera 
models from the application of the definitive anti-dumping duty in accordance with 
Article 1(3)(e) of Regulation (EC) No 1015/94 and Regulation (EC) No 2042/2000. 
Regulation (EC) No 176/2000 entered into force the day following its publication in 
the Official Journal of the European Communities.  

Subsequently, the Commission received information that it would be appropriate to 
apply  Regulation  (EC)  No  176/2000  retroactively  from  the  date  of  receipt  of  the 
relevant application for exemption of said models by the Commission services.  

It  was  not  the  Community  Institutions’  intention  to  impose  a  definitive  duty  on 
professional  camera  models  in  principle  exempted  thereof.  It  was  also  considered 
that retroactive exemption was granted in prior similar cases, i.e. where professional 
camera  models  were  imported  prior  to  the  entering  into  force  of  the  relevant 
exemption, but after the request being made.  

Therefore, it was concluded that in accordance with established Community practice, 
the  Annex  exempting  the  professional  camera  models  produced  and  exported  by 
Ikegami  and  having  been  published  by  Regulation  (EC)  No  176/2000  should  be 
applied  retroactively  from  the  date  of  receipt  of  the  relevant  application  for 
exemption by the Commission services. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
Proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION 

amending Council Regulation (EC) No 176/2000 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 
1015/94 

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, 

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, 

Having  regard  to  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  384/96  of  22  December  1995  on  protection 
against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community1 (the ‘basic 
Regulation’),  

Having  regard  to  the  proposal  submitted  by  the  Commission  after  consulting  the  Advisory 
Committee2, 

Whereas:  

A. PREVIOUS PROCEDURE 

The Council, by Regulation (EC) No 1015/94 (as subsequently amended)3, imposed a 
definitive  anti-dumping  duty  on  imports  of  television  camera  systems  (“TCS”) 
originating in Japan. The Council subsequently confirmed the definitive anti-dumping 
duty by Regulation (EC) No 2042/20004, in accordance with Article 11(2) of the basic 
Regulation.  

In Article 1(3)(e) of Regulation (EC) No 1015/94 and Regulation (EC) No 2042/2000 
(‘the definitive Regulations’), the Council specifically excluded from the scope of the 
anti-dumping  duty  camera  systems  which  are  listed  in  the  Annex  to  the  definitive 
Regulations  (‘the  Annex’),  representing  high-end  professional  cameras  systems 
technically  falling  within  the  product  definition  under  Article  1(2)  of  the  definitive 
Regulations, but which cannot be regarded as television camera systems. 

One  exporting  producer,  namely  Ikegami  Tsushinki  Co.  Ltd.  (“Ikegami”),  requested 
by letter, received by the Commission on 15 April 1999, to add certain new models of 
professional  camera  systems  including  their  accessories  to  the  Annex  and  thus  to 
exempt them from the scope of the anti-dumping duties. In January 2000, the Council 

OJ L 56, 6.3.1996, p. 1 as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 461/2004 (OJ L 77, 13.3.2004, p. 12). 
OJ C […], […], p. […]. 
OJ L 111, 30.4.1994, p. 106  as  last  amended  by  Regulation  (EC)  No  176/2000  (OJ L 22, 27.1.2000, 
p. 29). 
OJ L 244, 29.9.2000, p. 38  as  last  amended  by  Regulation  (EC)  No  825/2004  (OJ L 127, 29.4.2004, 
p. 12). 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

1 
2 
3 

4 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
by  Regulation  (EC)  No  176/20005  (the  “amending  Regulation”)  granted  this  request 
and amended Regulation (EC) No 1015/94 accordingly. In accordance with Article 2 
of Regulation (EC) No 176/2000, this amendment entered into force the day following 
that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities, i.e. the 28 
January 2000. 

B. PRESENT EXAMINATION 

The Community Institutions received information that it would be appropriate to apply 
the  amending  Regulation,  in  so  far  as  it  amended  the  Annex  to  Regulation  (EC)  No 
1015/94 retroactively. 

Indeed,  one  exporting  producer,  namely  Ikegami  had  to  pay  the  definitive  anti-
dumping  duty  for  all  exports  of  its  professional  camera  systems  subject  to  the 
amending Regulation but made prior to the date of entry into force of this Regulation, 
i.e.  prior  to  the  28  January  2000,  although  these  models  have  subsequently  been 
exempted  from  the  duty  in  accordance  with  Article  1(3)(e)  of  the  definitive 
Regulations. 

In this context, the exporting producer concerned referred also to the prior practice of 
the  Community  Institutions,  according  to  which  an  amendment  of  the  Annex  was 
generally  applied  retroactively  to  the  date  of  the  request  whenever  appropriate. 
Therefore,  the  exporting  producer  concerned  claimed  that  the  amendment  of  the 
Annex pursuant to the amending Regulation should be applied from the date of receipt 
by the Commission of the relevant request for exemption from the definitive duty, i.e. 
the  15  April  1999  in  accordance  with  the  consistent  practice  of  the  Community 
Institutions. 

The  Commission  examined  whether  the  retroactive  application  of  the  amending 
Regulation would indeed be appropriate. In this respect it was first considered that all 
professional  camera  models  mentioned  in  recital  (5)  have  indeed  been  qualified  as 
professional  camera  systems.  In  accordance  with  Article  1(3)(e)  of  the  definitive 
Regulations  these  cameras  are  exempted  from  the  definitive  anti-dumping  duty  by 
virtue of their inclusion in the Annex. 

It  is  noted  that  a  professional  camera  system  falling  within  Article  1(3)(e)  of  the 
definitive Regulations is exempted, from the date it has been explicitly included in the 
Annex by way of amending the definitive Regulations, from the definitive duty. In this 
context, it is assumed that exporting producers know in advance, i.e. prior to any first 
exportation  into  the  Community,  their  cycles  of  production  and  whether  their  new 
models should qualify as professional cameras within the meaning of Article 1(3)(e), 
and consequently whether they should be included in the Annex and an application to 
that effect be made. 

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

(7) 

(8) 

(9) 

Notwithstanding the above, it was not in the Community Institutions’ intention that the 
definitive anti-dumping duty be applicable to imports of professional camera systems 
which  are  eventually  found  to  be  exemptible  from  this  duty  by  the  application  of 
Article  1(3)(e).  Therefore,  where  appropriate,  the  necessity  for  a  retroactive 

5 

OJ L 22, 27.1.2000, p. 29. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
(10) 

application  of  a  Regulation  exempting  certain  professional  camera  models  has  been 
recognised  from  the  date  of  the  receipt  of  such  a  request,  which  allowed  the 
Community  institutions  to  properly  monitor  the  accuracy  of  the  classifications.  This 
was the case, in particular, where professional camera models have been imported in 
the Community prior to the entering into force of the Regulation amending the Annex 
but after the date of the exemption request. 

In  the  present  case,  it  was  shown  that  Ikegami  imported  certain  professional  camera 
systems,  prior  to  the  publication  of  the  amending  Regulation,  but  after  it  lodged  its 
exemption  request,  which  have  subsequently  been  exempted  by  the  application  of 
Article  1(3)(e)  of  the  definitive  Regulations.  The  amending  Regulation  entered  into 
force  the  day  after  its  publication,  i.e.  on  28  January  2000.  However,  as  mentioned 
above, it has not been in the Community Institutions’ intention that the definitive anti-
dumping  duties  apply  to  camera  systems  which  are  found  to  be  exemptible  after  a 
request has been lodged to that effect with the Commission. In fact, the Commission, 
immediately after the imposition of the definitive measures and the creation of the first 
Annex in 1994, actually informed the exporting producers concerned that it is intended 
to  reimburse  definitive  anti-dumping  duties  paid  for  imports  of  professional  camera 
systems  eventually  found  to  be  falling  under  Article  1(3)(e)  between  a  fully 
documented request for exemption and the corresponding publication of the amended 
Annex. In this context, it was considered the retroactive application of the amending 
Regulation, in so far as it amended the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 1015/94 would 
bring  the  current  situation  in  line  with  the  consistent  practice  of  the  Community 
Institutions.  

(11)  The Community industry and Ikegami were informed accordingly and granted a time 
period to comment on the Commission services determination. None of the interested 
parties objected to the above conclusions.  

C. CONCLUSION 

(12)  Considering  the  above,  the  Community  Institutions  concluded  that  the  retroactive 
application of the Annex as amended by the amending Regulation is warranted. 

(13)  Given  the  above  the  Annex  as  amended  by  Regulation  (EC)  No  176/2000  should 
apply to imports of the following professional camera models produced and exported 
to the European Community by Ikegami from the date of receipt by the Commission 
of the relevant request for exemption from the definitive anti-dumping duty for these 
models, i.e. the 15 April 1999: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

camera head HC-400 

camera head HC-400W 

viewfinder VF15-46 

operational control unit RCU-390 

camera adapter CA-400 

camera control unit MA-200A 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 

Article 1 

Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 176/2000 shall be replaced by the following: 

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

(2) For the products of Ikegami Tsushinki Co. Ltd. listed below, this Regulation shall apply 
from 15 April 1999: 

–  camera head HC-400 

–  camera head HC-400W 

–  viewfinder VF15-46 

–  operational control unit RCU-390 

–  camera adapter CA-400 

–  camera control unit MA-200A” 

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

Article 2 

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

Done at Brussels,  

For the Council 
The President 

EN 

6 

   EN