Proposal for a Council Regulation imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of silicon carbide originating in the People’s Republic of China following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96, and terminating the investigations concerning the anti-dumping measures applicable to imports of silicon carbide originating in the Russian Federation and Ukraine
Date: 2006-07-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: China, Russia, Ukraine, anti-dumping duty, anti-dumping legislation, anti-dumping measure, import, originating product, semi-metal

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 24.7.2006 
COM(2006) 415 final 

Proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION 

imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of silicon carbide originating in the 
People’s Republic of China following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of 
Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96, and terminating the investigations concerning the 
anti-dumping measures applicable to imports of silicon carbide originating in the 
Russian Federation and Ukraine  

(presented by the Commission) 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 

1)  CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL 

• 

Grounds for and objectives of the proposal 

This  proposal  concerns  the  application  of  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  384/96  of  22 
December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of 
the European Community, as last amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 2117/2005 
of 21 December 2005 ("the basic Regulation") in the proceeding concerning imports of 
silicon carbide originating in the People’s Republic of China, The Russian Federation 
and  Ukraine  following  an  expiry  review  pursuant  to  Article  11(2)  of  Council 
Regulation (EC) No 384/96. 

• 

General context 

This proposal is made in the context of the implementation of the basic Regulation and 
is the result of an investigation which was carried out in line with the substantive and 
procedural requirements laid out in the basic Regulation. 

• 

Existing provisions in the area of the proposal 

There are no existing provisions in the area of the proposal. 

• 

Consistency with other policies and objectives of the Union 

Not applicable. 

2)  CONSULTATION OF INTERESTED PARTIES AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

• 

Consultation of interested parties 

Interested  parties  concerned  by  the  proceeding  have  already  had  the  possibility  to 
defend their interests during the investigation, in line with the provisions of the basic 
Regulation. 

• 

Collection and use of expertise 

There was no need for external expertise. 

• 

Impact assessment 

This proposal is the result of the implementation of the basic Regulation. 

The  basic  Regulation  does  not  foresee  a  general  impact  assessment  but  contains  an 
exhaustive list of conditions that have to be assessed. 

3)  LEGAL ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSAL 

• 

Summary of the proposed action 

On  26  May  2005,  the  Commission  initiated  an  expiry  review  of  the  anti-dumping 
measures  in  force  in  respect  of  imports  of  silicon  carbide  originating  in  the  People’s 
Republic of China, the Russian Federation and Ukraine together with an interim review 
of the anti-dumping measures applicable to imports of the same product originating in 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
the Russian Federation and limited to the form of the measures. 

The  review investigation  found  continuing dumping of the product  concerned for the 
People’s  Republic  of  China,  which,  should  measures  be  lifted,  would  result  in  the 
recurrence  of injury  to the  Community industry. At  the same time  neither continuing 
dumping  nor  the  likelihood  of  recurrence  of  dumping  of  the  product  concerned  was 
found from imports originating in the Russian Federation and Ukraine. It was further 
established  that  the  lapse  of  measures  as  far  as  imports  originating  in  Russia  and 
Ukraine are concerned, would not be against the interest of the Community. 

Therefore,  it  is  suggested  that  the  Council  adopts  the  attached  proposal  for  a 
Regulation in order to prolong the existing measures against the People’s Republic of 
China and to terminate the measures against the Russian Federation and Ukraine. 

• 

Legal basis 

Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  384/96  of  22  December  1995  on  protection  against 
dumped  imports  from  countries  not  members  of  the  European  Community,  as  last 
amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 2117/2005 of 21 December 2005. 

• 

Subsidiarity principle 

The proposal falls under the exclusive competence of the Community. The subsidiarity 
principle therefore does not apply. 

• 

Proportionality principle 

The proposal complies with the proportionality principle for the following reasons: 

The form of action is described in the above-mentioned basic Regulation and leaves no 
scope for national decision. 

Indication  of  how  financial  and  administrative  burden  falling  upon  the  Community, 
national governments, regional and local authorities, economic operators and citizens is 
minimized and proportionate to the objective of the proposal is not applicable. 

• 

Choice of instruments 

Proposed instruments: regulation. 

Other means would not be adequate for the following reason: 

Other  means  would  not  be  adequate  because  the  basic  Regulation  does  not  foresee 
alternative options. 

4)  BUDGETARY IMPLICATION 

The proposal has no implication for the Community budget. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION 

imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of silicon carbide originating in the 
People’s Republic of China following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of 
Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96, and terminating the investigations concerning the 
anti-dumping measures applicable to imports of silicon carbide originating in the 
Russian Federation and Ukraine  

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, 

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, 

Having  regard  to  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  384/96  of  22  December  1995  on  protection 
against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (the ‘basic 
Regulation’)1 and in particular Articles 11(2) and 11(3) thereof, 

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

Whereas: 

1. 

PROCEDURE 

1.1 

Previous investigations, measures in force and on-going investigations 

(1) 

By  Regulation  (EC)  No  821/942,  following  an  expiry  review  in  accordance  with 
Article  14  and  15  of  Regulation  2423/883,  the  Council  prolonged  the  imposed 
definitive anti-dumping duties on imports of silicon carbide (‘SiC’) originating in the 
People’s  Republic  of  China  (‘PRC’),  Poland,  the  Russian  Federation  (‘Russia’)  and 
Ukraine.  At  the  same  time,  the  Commission,  by  Decision  94/202/EC4,  accepted  an 
undertaking  offered  by  the  Government  of  Russia,  in  conjunction  with  V/O 
Stankoimport, Moscow, Russia. 

1 

2 

3 
4 

OJ L 56, 6.3.1996, p.1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2117/2005 (OJ No L 340, 
23.12.2005, p.17) 
OJ  L  94,  13.4.1994,  p.21,  Regulation  as  last  amended  by  Regulation  (EC)  No  1786/97  (OJ  L  254, 
17.9.1997, p.6) 
OJ L 209 , 02.08.1988, p.1. 
OJ L 94, 13.4.1994, p.32 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
 
 
                                                 
(2) 

(3) 

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

5 

6 
7 
8 
9 
10 

11 
12 
13 

In  May  2000,  by  Regulation  (EC)  No  1100/20005,  the  Council  again  prolonged  the 
definitive  anti-dumping  duty  on  imports  of  SiC  originating  in  the  PRC,  Russia  and 
Ukraine following an expiry review and also prolonged the undertaking offered by the 
Russian government in conjunction with V/O Stankoimport, Moscow, Russia accepted 
by Commission Decision 94/202/EC. 

The investigation mentioned above in recital (1) leading to the imposition of definitive 
anti-dumping  duties  and  the  acceptance  of  undertakings  from  certain  exporters 
concerned  by  this  investigation,  and the expiry reviews concluded in 1994 and 2000 
mentioned above in recitals (1) and (2) will hereinafter be referred as to “the original 
investigations”. 

In 2004, by Regulation (EC) 991/20046, the Council provided for the exemption from 
the  anti-dumping  duties  of  imports  into  the  new  Member  States  that  acceded  to  the 
European  Union  on  1  May  2004  (‘the  EU-10’)  made  under  the  terms  of  special 
undertaking  offers  (‘enlargement  undertakings’),  and  authorised  the  Commission  to 
accept those enlargement undertakings. On this basis, by Decisions 2004/498/EC7 and 
2004/782/EC8,  the  Commission  accepted  the  undertakings  offered  by  the  Ukrainian 
exporting  producer  Open  Joint  Stock  Company  ‘Zaporozhsky  Abrasivny  Combinat”. 
The acceptance of this undertaking expired on 20 May 2005. 

In  January  2004  the  Commission  initiated  a  partial  interim  review9  requested  by 
Zaporozhsky  Abrasivny  Combinat,  the  Ukrainian  exporting  producer.  The  applicant 
had alleged that following a significant change of circumstances it should be granted 
market  economy  treatment  (‘MET’)  and  that  its  dumping  margin  was  significantly 
below the level of the measures in force. However, following an investigation, it was 
found that the company did not meet the criteria to be granted MET (Article 2(7)(c) of 
Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  384/96  of  22  December  1995  on  protection  against 
dumped imports from countries not member of the European Community10 (‘the basic 
Regulation’)) and the investigation was subsequently terminated.11 

Finally,  on  30  June  200512,  the  Commission  initiated  an  anti-dumping  proceeding 
concerning  imports  of  SiC  originating  in  Romania,  further  to  a  complaint  lodged  by 
the  European  Chemical  Industry  Council  (‘CEFIC’)  on  behalf  of  producers 
representing 100 % of the total Community production of SiC. However, further to the 
withdrawal  of  the  complaint  by  CEFIC  on  1st  March  2006,  the  investigation  was 
terminated by Commission Decision EC/423/200613. 

OJ L 125 of 26.5.2000, p.3, as last amended by Regulation (EC) Nr 991/2004 (OJ L 182 of 19.5.2004, 
p.18) 
OJ L 182, 19.5.2004, p.18 
OJ L 183, 20.5.2004, p.88 
OJ L 344, 20.11.2004, p.37 
OJ C 3, 7.1.2004, p.4 
OJ  L  56,  6.3.1996,  p.1.  Regulation  as  last  amended  by  Regulation  (EC)  No  2117/2005  (OJ  L  340, 
23.12.2005, p.17). 
Termination through Council Regulation (EC) No 779/2005 (L 131 of 25.5.2005, p. 18) 
OJ C 159, 30.6.2005, p.4 
OJ L 168, 21.06.2006, p.37 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
1.2 

Request for an expiry review 

(7) 

(8) 

(9) 

Following  the  publication  of  a  notice  of  impending  expiry  of  the  anti-dumping 
measures  in  force  of  SiC  originating  in  the  PRC,  Russia  and  Ukraine14,  the 
Commission  received,  on  24  February  2005,  a  request  to  review  these  measures 
pursuant to Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation. At the same time, the Commission 
received also a request to review the form of the measures applicable to imports of the 
product  concerned  originating  in  Russia  pursuant  to  Article  11(3)  of  the  basic 
Regulation. 

These requests were lodged by the European Chemical Industry Council (‘CEFIC’) on 
behalf  of  producers  representing  100  %  of  the  total  Community  production  of  SiC. 
The  request  for  an  expiry  review  was  based  on  the  grounds  that  the  expiry  of  the 
measures  would  be  likely  to  result  in  a  continuation  or  recurrence  of  dumping  and 
injury to the Community industry. The request for an interim review was based on the 
fact that the form of the measures would be inappropriate and would not eliminate the 
injurious effects of the dumping. 

Having determined, after consulting the Advisory Committee, that sufficient evidence 
existed for the initiation of an expiry review pursuant to Articles 11(2) and an interim 
review  pursuant  to  Article  11(3)  of  the  basic  Regulation,  the  Commission  initiated 
both reviews on the same date15. 

1.3 

Investigation 

(10)  The  Commission  officially  advised  the  exporting  producers,  importers,  raw  material 
producers, users known to be concerned and their associations, the representatives of 
the  exporting  countries  and  the  Community  producers  of  the  initiation  of  the  expiry 
and  the  interim  review.  Interested  parties  were  given  the  opportunity  to  make  their 
views  known  in  writing  and  to  request  a  hearing  within  the  time  limit  set  out  in  the 
notice of initiation. 

(11) 

In  view  of  the  large  number  of  Chinese  exporting  producers  and  importers  in  the 
Community not related to an exporting producer in one of the countries concerned, it 
was considered appropriate, in conformity with Article 17 of the basic Regulation, to 
examine  whether  sampling  should  be  used.  In  order  to  enable  the  Commission  to 
decide whether sampling would indeed be necessary and, if so, to select a sample, the 
above  parties  were  requested,  pursuant  to  Article  17(2)  of  the  basic  Regulation,  to 
make  themselves known  within  two weeks of  the  initiation  of  the  proceeding  and  to 
provide the Commission with the information requested in the notice of initiation. 

(12)  No  Chinese  exporting  producer  submitted  the  requested  information  and  none 
cooperated  in  the  present  proceeding.  It  was  thus  decided  that  sampling  was  not 
necessary with regard to the Chinese producers. 

14 
15 

OJ C 254, 14.10.2004, p.3 
OJ C 129, 26.5.2005, p.17 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
(13)  Six unrelated importers in the Community provided the information requested in the 
notice  of  initiation  and  expressed  their  willingness  to  cooperate  in  the  further 
investigation.  From  the  above  six  importers,  three  companies  were  selected  for  the 
sample.  These  importers  represented  the  largest  representative  volume  of  imports  of 
known  importers  in  the  Community  (98%),  which  could  be  investigated  within  the 
time available. 

(14)  Questionnaires were therefore sent to the three sampled Community importers, to two 
Community producers, to eighteen Community users, to sixteen raw material suppliers 
and  to  the  two  known  exporting  producers  in  the  Ukraine  and  in  the  Russian 
Federation.  In  addition,  two  producers  in  Brazil,  which  was  selected  as  the  potential 
analogue country, were contacted and received a questionnaire. 

(15)  Full  replies  to  the  questionnaires  were  received  from  the  three  sampled  Community 
importers, seven users, two raw material producers and two exporting producers in the 
countries concerned, as well as from two producers in the analogue country. 

(16)  The  Commission  sought  and  verified  all  the  information  deemed  necessary  for  its 
investigation,  and  carried  out  verification  visits  at  the  premises  of  the  following 
companies: 

Community producers: 

– 

– 

Kollo Silicon carbide B.V. (Netherlands), ESK-SIC GmbH (Germany) 

Navarro SiC, S.A. (Spain), 

Producers in the exporting countries: 

– 

– 

JSC Zaporozhsky Abrasivny Combinat, Zaporozhsky (Ukraine) 

JSC Volzhsky Abrasive Combinat, Volzhsky (Russia) 

Producers in the analogue country: 

– 

– 

Saint-Gobain Materials Cerámicas Ltda, Minas Gerais (Brazil)  

Treibacher Schleifmittel Brasil Ltda, Sao Paolo (Brazil) 

Importers in the Community: 

– 

– 

Imexco-Ullrich GmbH (Germany) 

Smyris Abrasivi (Italy) 

Users the Community: 

–  Morganite Crucible Limited (United Kingdom) 

– 

TGA Ltd (Czech Republic) 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
(17)  The investigation regarding the likelihood of a continuation or recurrence of dumping 
and  injury  covered  the  period  from  1  April  2004  to  31  March  2005  (‘investigation 
period’  or  ‘IP’).  The  examination  of  the  trends  relevant  for  the  assessment  of  a 
likelihood  of  a  continuation  or  recurrence  of  injury  covered  the  period  from  1st 
January 2001 up to the end of the IP (‘period considered’). 

(18)  All  the  parties  concerned  were  informed  of  the  essential  facts  and  considerations  on 
the basis of which the conclusions of this review were based. They were also granted a 
period  within  which  to  make  representations  subsequent  to  this  disclosure.  The 
representations  received,  within  the  deadlines,  were  carefully  considered  and  where 
deemed appropriate, taken into account for the findings. 

2. 

PRODUCT CONCERNED AND LIKE PRODUCT 

2.1 

Product concerned 

(19)  The product concerned is the same as that in the original investigations which led to 
the  imposition  of  measures  currently  in  force,  i.e.  silicon  carbide  (SiC).  SiC  is 
currently classifiable within CN code 2849 20 00. 

(20)  SiC is produced by heating silicon and coke (or petroleum coke) at high temperatures 
(up  to  2000°C).  The  output  of  this  process  is  crude  SiC  which  is  usually  further 
processed for its final end-uses. The production process of SiC is such that the output 
automatically comprises a variety of grades related to different content concentration 
of silicon. The different grades can be segregated into two main grades: crystalline and 
metallurgical. The crystalline grade is considered to be of higher quality because it has 
higher silicon content. The crystalline grade is further classified under the types black 
and green. 

(21)  The crystalline grade is normally used in the manufacturing of abrasive tools, grinding 
wheels,  high-quality  refractory  products,  technical  ceramics,  while  the  metallurgical 
grade is normally used in foundry and blast-furnace operations as a silicon carrier. As 
in  the  previous  investigations,  both  grades  have  to  be  considered  as  forming  one 
product for the purpose of this investigation. 

2.2 

Like product 

(22)  As  established  in  the  original  investigations,  the  current  investigation  confirmed  that 
the  product  concerned  and  the  products  manufactured  and  sold  by  the  exporting 
producers  on  their  domestic  markets,  as  well  as  those  manufactured  and  sold  by  the 
Community producers on the Community market and by the producer in the analogue 
country on the domestic market of the analogue country have the same basic physical 
and  chemical  characteristics  and  end  uses  and  are  therefore  considered  to  be  like 
products within the meaning of Article 1(4) of the basic Regulation. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
LIKELIHOOD  OF  A  CONTINUATION  AND/OR  RECURRENCE  OF 

3. 
DUMPING 

3.1 

Preliminary remarks 

(23) 

In this expiry review, full cooperation from the two known producers in Ukraine and 
the  Russian  Federation  was  obtained.  However,  as  mentioned  in  recital  (12),  no 
producer came forward from the PRC. 

3.2 

Dumping of imports during the investigation period 

3.2.1  Analogue country 

(24)  Since the Ukraine (16) and the PRC were not considered as market economy countries 
during the investigation period (and in the preceding investigations), normal value had 
to be established in accordance with Article 2(7)(a) of the basic Regulation, i.e. based 
on  information  obtained  in  a  market  economy  third  country  where  the  product  was 
produced and sold domestically. Moreover, it is recalled that the exporting producer in 
Ukraine had not been able to obtain MET in an interim review which was concluded 
just before the initiation of this expiry review (see recital (5)). 

(25) 

In  the  initiation  of  this  expiry  review,  it  was  envisaged  to  use  Brazil  as  an  analogue 
country  from  where  information  about  production  costs  and  domestic  sales  could  be 
obtained. It is recalled that Brazil has also been used in the previous expiry review. 

(26)  The investigation has confirmed that Brazil is still an appropriate analogue country for 

the following reasons: 

(27)  First,  the  size  of  its  domestic  market  makes  Brazil  a  representative  country  for  the 
establishment  of  normal  value  for  the  two  countries  concerned.  Second,  domestic 
prices in Brazil are governed by normal market forces given the level of demand in the 
market  and  the  existence  of  competing  producers.  Third,  the  basic  physical  and 
chemical characteristics of the like product produced in Brazil can be considered to be 
identical  to  the  product  exported  from  the  two  countries  concerned.  Finally,  no 
arguments against the use of Brazil as an analogue country were put forward. 

(28)  Therefore it was concluded that Brazil was a reasonable and appropriate choice as an 
analogue country in order to establish normal value for imports of SiC originating in 
the PRC and the Ukraine. 

3.2.2  Normal Value  

3.2.2.1 Normal Value for exporting producers in the PRC and the Ukraine 

(29) 

It  was  first  examined  whether  the  domestic  sales  by  the  Brazilian  producers,  overall 
and per product type, were made at volumes which were representative as compared to 
the volumes exported by the PRC and the Ukraine respectively. 

16 

The Ukraine was granted Market Economy Status through Council Regulation (EC) 2117/2005 (OJ No 
340  of  23.12.2005,  p.  17).  The  new  status  only  applies  to  investigations  initiated  as  from  1  January 
2006. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                 
(30) 

(31) 

(32) 

It was found that the volumes of domestic sales by the Brazilian producers exceeded 
considerably  the  export  sales  to  the  Community  by  exporting  producers  in  the  PRC 
and the Ukraine, both overall and by product type. 

It  was  then  examined  whether  the  domestic  sales  of  each  of  the  two  cooperating 
producers 
in  Brazil,  Saint-Gobain  Materials  Cerámicas  Ltda  and  Treibacher 
Schleifmittel  Brasil  Ltda,  to  independent  customers  had  been  made  in  the  ordinary 
course of trade, pursuant to Article 2(4) of the basic Regulation. 

It was found that, for both companies, the weighted average selling price of all sales 
during the IP, was higher than the weighted average unit cost of production. Therefore, 
all domestic sales were regarded as having been made in the ordinary course of trade. 
In addition, in order to ensure a fair comparison between prices in Brazil and normal 
value in the PRC and the Ukraine, adjustments were made in order to take into account 
of any differences in PCN or level of trade. 

(33) 

In accordance with Article 2(1) of the basic Regulation, normal value was based on the 
weighted  average  prices  of  the  two  Brazilian  producers’  sales  to  independent 
customers on their domestic market. 

(34)  Subsequent  to  the  definitive  disclosure,  CEFIC  questioned  the  accuracy  of  the 
determination of the normal value claiming that according to their information, sales 
prices in the Brazilian domestic market were above the export price from the Ukraine 
to  the  Community  market.  However,  this  claim  was  not  supported  by  substantiated 
documentary  evidence  and  had  to  be  rejected.  Indeed,  the  adjustments  mentioned  in 
recital (32) above allowed ensuring fair calculation of normal value. 

3.2.2.2 Normal Value for exporting producers in Russia 

(35) 

(36) 

It was first examined whether the volumes, overall and per product type, of domestic 
sales by the exporting producer in Russia were representative, i.e. represented at least 
5 % of the volumes exported to the Community. 

It was found that, compared to the overall volume of sales, and for some of the product 
types, the volume of domestic sales represented at least 5% of the volumes exported to 
the Community. For those product types where the volume of domestic sales was less 
than  5%  of  the  volumes  exported  to  the  Community,  the  normal  value  had  to  be 
constructed pursuant to Article 2(3) of the basic Regulation. 

(37)  For  those  product  types  where  the  volumes  of  domestic  sales  represented  5%  of  the 
volumes  exported,  it  was  examined  whether  the  domestic  sales  of  the  Russian 
producer  to  independent  customers  had  been  made  in  the  ordinary  course  of  trade, 
pursuant  to  Article  2(4)  of  the  basic  Regulation.  This  was  done  by  establishing  the 
proportion  of  domestic  sales  to  independent  customers,  of  each  exported  type  of  the 
product concerned, not sold at a loss on the domestic market during the investigation 
period. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
(a)  For  those  product  types  where  more  than  80%,  by  volume,  of  sales  on  the 
domestic market were not below unit costs, i.e. where the average sales price of the 
product type concerned was equal to or higher than the average production cost for 
the product type concerned, normal value was calculated as the average price of all 
domestic  sales  of  the  product  type  in  question  irrespective  of  whether  these  sales 
were profitable or not. 

(b)  For those product types where at least 10% but no more than 80%, by volume, 
of  sales  on  the  domestic  market  were  not  below  unit  costs,  normal  value  was 
calculated as the weighted average sales price of those transactions which were made 
at or above unit costs of the type in question. 

(c)  For  those  product  types  where  less  than  10%,  by  volume,  was  sold  on  the 
domestic  market  at  a  price  not  below  unit  cost,  it  was  considered  that  the  product 
type  concerned  was  not  sold  in  the  ordinary  course  of  trade  and  therefore,  normal 
value had to be constructed in accordance with Article 2(3) of the basic Regulation. 

(38)  Normal  values  were  constructed  in  accordance  with  Article  2(6)  of  the  basic 
Regulation on the basis of the manufacturing cost of the type concerned, to which was 
added  an  amount  of  selling,  general  and  administrative  (SG&A)  expenses  and  a 
margin  of profit.  The  amount of  SG&A  was that incurred  by the exporting  producer 
for the like product and the amount for profit equated to the average profit realised by 
the exporting producer on sales of the like product in the ordinary course of trade. 

3.2.3  Export price  

PRC 

(39)  As  mentioned  in  recital  (12),  no  exporting  producers  in  the  PRC  cooperated  in  the 
investigation.  As  a  result,  export  prices  had  to  be  established  on  the  basis  of  facts 
available in accordance with Article 18(1) of the basic Regulation, i.e. information in 
the complaint. 

Ukraine and Russia 

(40)  The export prices for exporting producers in Ukraine and Russia were established in 
accordance  with  Article  2(8)  of  the  basic  Regulation,  on  the  basis  of  export  prices 
actually paid or payable by independent customers in the Community. 

(41)  When  calculating  the  export  price  for  the  Russian  exporter  for  those  transactions 
which  were  handled  by  Stankoimport  (i.e.  imported  AD-free  under  the  Quantitative 
Undertaking  (QT)),  all  expenses  incurred  as  a  result  of  Stankoimport’s  involvement 
have been deducted in order to arrive at the export price at ex-works level. 

(42)  CEFIC contested the findings with regard to the export prices determined for Ukraine 
arguing that prices charged for Ukrainian imports would be much lower. In support of 
their claim, they submitted certain price offers. This claim, however, had to be rejected 
as price offers can not be taken into consideration without proof that the transaction(s) 
finally  materialised.  In  any  event,  as  mentioned  above  at  recital  (40),  export  prices 
retained  for  dumping  calculation  were  those  charged  by  the  exporting  producer 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
concerned. These prices were verified during the on spot investigation at the premises 
of the company concerned. 

3.2.4  Comparison 

(43)  The  normal  values  and  the  export  prices  were  compared  on  an  ex-works  basis.  In 
accordance  with  Article  2(10)  of  the  basic  Regulation,  to  achieve  a  fair  comparison 
between the normal value and the export price, adjustments were made in respect of 
transport costs, level of trade and packing cost which were claimed and demonstrated 
to affect prices and price comparability. 

3.2.5  Dumping margin  

(44) 

In accordance with Article 2(11) and (12) of the basic Regulation, the dumping margin 
was established on the basis of a comparison of the weighted average normal value of 
each product type with the weighted average export price of the corresponding type. 

PRC 

(45)  On  the  basis  of  facts  available,  in  accordance  with  Article  18(1)  of  the  basic 
Regulation,  i.e.  information  in  the  complaint,  the  dumping  margin  has  been 
established in the same order as the previous investigation, i.e. around 50 %. 

(46)  The dumping margin for exports of SiC from Ukraine during the IP was found to be 

below the de minimis threshold of Article 9(3) of the basic Regulation. 

Ukraine 

Russia 

(47) 

It  is  recalled  that  Russia  has  a  QT  since  1986.  The  QT  has  enabled  one  Russian 
importer, Stankoimport, to import into the Community a fixed quantity (fixed in % of 
Community consumption) into the Community free of anti-dumping duties. Quantities 
above  this  threshold  have  been  subject  to  anti-dumping  duties.  In  the  dumping 
calculations  performed,  no  distinctions  have  been  made  between  those  quantities 
which  were  exported  through  the  QT  (77  %)  and  those  which  were  subject  to  the 
antidumping duty (23 %). 

(48)  The  dumping  margin  for  exports  of  SiC  from  Russia  during  the  IP  was  found  to  be 

below the de minimis threshold of Article 9(3) of the basic Regulation. 

3.3 

Developments of imports should measures be repealed  

3.3.1  PRC  

(49)  As  has  already  been  explained,  no  exporting  producers  cooperated  in  this 
investigation.  Thus,  the  likely  scenario  of  what  would  happen  if  measures  were 
allowed to lapse has been based on facts available, in particular the complaint and data 
from COMEXT (COMEXT is an electronic database of foreign trade of the European 
Communities). 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
Relationship between Chinese export prices to third countries and the price level in the 
Community 

(50)  The main third countries to which Chinese exports were directed during the IP were 
the  United  States  of  America  and  Japan.  Information  in  the  complaint  suggests  that 
Chinese  CIF-prices  to  the  United  States  of  America,  for  the  grade  ‘Macro  Black’, 
expressed in Euro, were in the range of Euro 650/ton. Moreover, Chinese CIF-prices 
to  Japan  for  the  grade  ‘Macro  Green’,  expressed  in  Euro,  were  in  the  range  of  Euro 
770/ton. Price statistics published in business journals supports the accuracy of these 
price quotations by Chinese exporters. 

(51)  Moreover,  it  was  found  that  the  average  export  prices  from  the  PRC  to  the  United 
States of America, as obtained from the COMEXT database, were significantly below 
the  normal  value  obtained  from  the  analogue  country  in  this  investigation,  which 
indicates  that  these  exports  may  also  have  been  made  at  dumped  prices  during  the 
investigation period. 

(52)  Given  that  the  average  price  of  the  Community  Industry  (around  Euro  1000  ‘Macro 
Black’  and  around  Euro  1500  for  ‘Macro  Green’)  is  considerably  higher,  Chinese 
exporting producers would, in the absence of measures, have an important incentive to 
divert  significant  export  quantities  from  their  present  third  country  markets  to  the 
Community market. 

(53) 

It  should  also  be  recalled  that  Chinese  exports  of  the  product  concerned  to  the  EU 
were found to be dumped in the original investigation and continued to be dumped at 
the same high levels during the IP of the current investigation. There is no reason to 
believe that this behaviour would change. 

(54)  Moreover, the information available on normal value and prices to third countries, as 
explained  above,  supports  the  conclusion  that  there  is  likelihood  that,  if  measures 
would lapse, Chinese exporters would continue their dumping practises. 

(55)  To  conclude,  there  is  likelihood  that,  should  measures  be  repealed,  Chinese  exports 
which  at  present  are  destined  to  third  country  markets  are  redirected  to  the 
Community. Moreover, should measures be repealed, there is a clear risk for dumping 
of the quantities exported. 

Unused capacities and stocks 

(56) 

In the request for this review, CEFIC (referring to information collected and published 
in  business  journals)  has  estimated  the  total  production  capacity  in  the  PRC  to  be 
between  600.000  and  700.000  tons.  The  actual  production  has  been  estimated  to  be 
around  440.000  tons,  leaving  an  unused  capacity  of  between  160.000  and  260.000 
tons. There is no information about stocks. 

(57)  On  the  basis  of  the  above,  it  is  clear  that  exporting  producers  in  the  PRC  have  a 
significant  spare  capacity  to  utilise  for  increased  production.  To  conclude,  should 
measures  be  repealed,  exporting  producers  would  very  likely  start  to  utilise  their 
significant unused capacity for exports to the Community. 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
3.3.2  Russia 

(58)  As the only known exporting producer in Russia has co-operated in this investigation, 
the likely scenario of what would happen if measures were allowed to lapse has been 
mainly based on information supplied by the exporting producer’s verified reply to the 
questionnaire. 

Relationship between prices in the Community and prices within Russia 

(59) 

It  should  first  be  mentioned  that  the  prevailing  price  level  within  the  Community  is 
already  subject  to  a  significant  influence  from  imports  from  Russia  given  the  QT  in 
place,  as  the  Russian  exporter  is  already  satisfying  around  10%  of  Community 
consumption. 

(60)  When comparing the prevailing price level on the domestic market in Russia with the 
prevailing price level in the Community, the price level in Russia is generally lower. 
However, given that the quantities that the Russian producer has been able to export 
free from antidumping duties under the QT were pre-set, the Russian producer has had 
an incentive to export the crystalline grades (triggering higher prices per tonne) to the 
Community,  leaving  metallurgical  grades  for  its  domestic  market  and  for  other 
destinations).  Therefore  the  real  price  differential  between  the  same  grades,  if  any, 
would be smaller than what a comparison between average price levels suggests. 

(61)  To conclude, while the generally higher price level in the Community would normally 
trigger an increase in exports to the Community should measures be allowed to lapse, 
this  scenario  does  not  appear  to  be  likely  in  the  present  case.  Indeed,  given  the 
existence  of  the  QT,  the  potential  increase  of  imports  of  especially  high-grade  SiC 
should not be overestimated as the Russian exporter already has had the opportunity to 
export significant quantities of SiC and has had the incentive to export high-grade SiC. 
Thus,  an  increase  of  imports  of  SiC  is  likely  to  be  limited  both  in  quantities  and  in 
types of SiC (metallurgical grades) and would in any event in all likelihood not be at 
dumped prices. 

Relationship between export prices to third countries and prices within Russia 

(62)  More than 75% of the exports to third countries by the Russian producers are destined 
for the United States of America. When comparing the domestic prices and the export 
prices  to  the  United  States  of  America,  the  price  levels  of  the  exports  to  the  United 
States of America are, on average, higher. It should be recognised, however, that the 
mix of grades of the products sold for export and those sold on the domestic market 
are probably different (likelihood of exports containing higher value-per-tonne grades 
to  cover  the  transport  costs  involved),  which  makes  it  difficult  to  draw  conclusions 
from such a comparison. Nevertheless, it is noted that these exports are not subject to 
antidumping  measures  and  that  there  are  no  indications  that  such  exports  would  be 
dumped. 

Relationship between export price to third countries and the price level in the Community 

(63)  When comparing the Russian exporter’s export prices to its main third country market, 
the  United  States  of  America,  with  the  Russian  exporter’s  export  prices  to  the 
Community  market,  it  is  important  to  recall  the  QT  in  place.  As  explained  above, 

EN 

14 

   EN 

 
given the pre-set quantities that the Russian exporter has been able to export to the EC, 
it  has  had  an  incentive  to  export  high  value-per-tonne  grades  to  the  Community 
market. 

(64)  Similarly and as explained in recital (62) above, it can be assumed that also the exports 
to  the  United  States  of  America,  given  the  transport  costs  involved,  contain  mainly 
high  value-per-tonne  grades.  Thus,  this  puts  the  average  selling  price  to  the 
Community market and to the United States market on a reasonably comparable basis. 

(65)  Having compared the average selling price to the Community market with the average 
selling  price  to  the  market  of  the  United  States  of  America,  the  prices  to  the  United 
States market have been found to be, on average, higher. 

(66)  To  conclude,  there  seems  to  be  no  apparent  incentive  for  the  Russian  producer  to 
divert its quantities presently sold on its main export market, the United States, to the 
Community market, should measures be repealed. 

Unused capacities and stocks 

(67)  The capacity of the exporting producer in Russia is limited to 62.000 tons. During the 
IP,  it  was  found  to  work  close  to  full  capacity,  having  increased  its  utilisation  rate 
during  the  reference  period.  The  stocks  were  found  to  be  normal  for  this  kind  of 
business. 

(68)  Given the technology used by the Russian producer (a technology using ‘train cars’ as 
place of processing, which are marshalled between electricity installations and places 
to  unloading/sorting),  it  is  unlikely  that  the  exporting  producer  would  be  able  to 
expand in the near future. 

(69)  To  conclude,  should  measures  be  allowed  to  lapse,  there  are  no  indications  that  the 
Russian  producer  would  be  able  to  increase  its  production  in  order  to  increase  its 
exports to the Community. 

3.3.3  Ukraine 

(70)  As  the  only  known  exporting  producer  in  the  Ukraine  has  cooperated  in  this 
investigation,  the likely scenario of what would  happen  if  measures  were  allowed  to 
lapse  has  been  mainly  based  on  information  supplied  by  the  exporting  producer’s 
verified reply to the questionnaire. 

Unused capacities and stocks 

(71)  The capacity of the exporting producer in Ukraine is limited to 23.000 tons. During the 
IP,  it  was  found  to  work  close  to  full  capacity,  having  increased  its  utilisation  rate 
during  the  reference  period.  The  stocks  were  found  to  be  normal  for  this  kind  of 
business. 

(72)  Given the technology used by the Ukrainian producer (same as the Russian producer 
which is explained in recital (68), it is unlikely that that the exporting producer would 
be able to expand in the near future. 

EN 

15 

   EN 

 
(73)  CEFIC claimed that the capacity of the exporting producer would be as high as 32.000 
tons.  However,  this  argument  was  based  on  hypothetical  information  without  taking 
into  considerations  standstill  periods  for  maintenance  and  repair,  nor  taking  into 
account the specificities of the producing company concerned which is located in an 
urban area and submitted to environmental constraints. On these grounds, the capacity 
as established in recital (71) above was confirmed and the claim by CEFIC had to be 
rejected. 

(74)  To  conclude,  should  measures  be  allowed  to  lapse,  there  are  no  indications  that  the 
Ukrainian  producer  would  be  able  to  increase  its  production  in  order  to  increase  its 
exports to the Community. 

Relationship between prices in the Community and prices within the Ukraine and third 
countries 

(75)  When comparing the prevailing price level on the domestic market in the Ukraine with 
the  prevailing  price  level  in  the  Community,  and  prices  to  third  countries,  the  price 
level in the Ukraine and to third countries are, on average, lower. 

(76)  However,  a  meaningful  comparison  between  the  Ukrainian  market,  third  country 
markets and the Community market was not possible because the product mix is very 
different  and  average  prices  are  therefore  not  comparable.  Moreover,  the  domestic 
market  in  the  Ukraine  is  limited  in  size  and  the  Ukrainian  producer  is  not  able  to 
produce all the various (high-value) grades as the Community producers. 

(77) 

It could therefore not be established whether, should measures be allowed to lapse, the 
Ukrainian  exporter  would  have  an  incentive  to  divert  volumes  from  its  domestic 
market or from its export markets to the Community market. However, in view of the 
findings on dumping, and in the light of the overall higher price level prevailing in the 
Community, it is concluded that, even if exports to the Community market increased, 
these  exports  would  in  all  likelihood  not  be  made  at  dumped  prices.  Moreover,  the 
increase would in any event be limited (estimated at less than 10.000 tons), given the 
limited capacity of the Ukrainian exporter. 

3.4 

Conclusions on likelihood of a continuation or recurrence of dumping  

3.4.1  PRC 

(78) 

It  is  recalled  that  no  exporting  producers  in  the  PRC  have  cooperated  in  the 
investigation. 

(79)  On the basis of facts available, it was found that Chinese exporters are still dumping 
and  would  be  likely  to  continue  their  dumping  practices  towards  the  Community 
market should measures be allowed to lapse. 

(80)  Therefore,  it  was  found  that  there  is  a  likelihood  of  continuation  of  dumping  by 

exporting producers in the PRC should measures be allowed to lapse. 

EN 

16 

   EN 

 
3.4.2  Ukraine 

(81) 

It is recalled that the Ukrainian exporter has been found not to export at dumped prices 
during the investigation period and there are no indications that such situation would 
change if measures were allowed to lapse. 

(82)  Furthermore, it was found that, although exports from the Ukraine to the Community 
may  increase,  should  measures  be  repealed,  such  increase  is  expected  to  be  limited. 
Indeed, given the limited capacity that the Ukrainian producer holds, this increase of 
exports  to  the  Community  is  assumed  to  be  less  than  10.000  tons  and  would  in  all 
likelihood not be made at dumped prices. 

(83)  Therefore,  it  is  considered  that  there  is  no  likelihood  of  recurrence  of  dumping  of 

imports originating in the Ukraine. 

3.4.3  Russian Federation 

(84) 

It is recalled that during the investigation period, the Russian producer has been found 
not to export at dumped prices and there are no indications that such situation would 
change if measures were allowed to lapse. 

(85)  Furthermore, it is recalled that the Russian exporting producer has been able to supply 
the Community market with a fixed quantity of SiC through a QT for many years. The 
quantities exported through this channel have amounted to, during the IP, around 17% 
of  the  Russian  producer’s  total  capacity.  Thus,  the  Russian  exporting  producer  is 
already well established on the market, i.e. a sudden increase of imports originating in 
Russia is therefore highly unlikely. 

(86)  Moreover, since the prices at which the Russian exporting producer has sold to third 
countries  were  found  to  be  higher  than  those  at  which  quantities  were  sold  to  the 
Community,  the  risk  for  trade  diversion  of  significant  quantities  to  the  Community 
market appears to be relatively small. 

(87)  Finally,  it  was  found  that  the  Russian  exporting  producer  was  working  close  to  full 

capacity and has a limited ability to increase its capacity. 

(88)  For  these  reasons,  it  is  considered  that  there  is  no  risk  of  recurrence  of  dumping  of 

imports originating in the Russian Federation. 

(89)  Given  the  findings  for  Ukraine  and  Russia,  the  proceeding  should  be  terminated 

against these countries. 

4. 

DEFINITION OF THE COMMUNITY INDUSTRY 

(90)  The structure of the Community industry changed since the last expiry review, i.e. the 
former German producer Elektroschmelzwerk Kempten GmbH, München, split in two 
related companies, one located in the Netherlands and the other in Germany. Only the 
former is producing and processing the crude SiC, the latter one further processes SiC 
produced by Kollo Silicon carbide B.V. but the final product remains the like product. 
Moreover, ESK-SIC GmbH sells its own SiC but also SiC produced by Kollo Silicon 
carbide B.V. Therefore both companies are considered as forming one group. 

EN 

17 

   EN 

 
4.1 

Community production 

(91)  Within  the  Community,  the  like  product  is  manufactured  by  two  producers  which 
constitute  the  total  Community  production  within  the  meaning  of  Article  4(1)  of  the 
basic Regulation. 

4.2 

Community industry 

(92)  The following European Community producers have supported the request: 

– 

Kollo Silicon carbide B.V. (Netherlands), with its related company ESK-
SIC GmbH (Germany). 

– 

Navarro SiC, S.A. (Spain) 

(93)  As above Community producers represent 100% of the Community production of the 
like product, it is concluded that the complainant producers constitute the Community 
industry within the meaning of Articles 4(1) and 5(4) of the basic Regulation. 

5. 

SITUATION ON THE COMMUNITY MARKET 

5.1 

Preliminary remarks 

(94)  The examination of the impact of the imports concerned on the Community industry 
included  an  evaluation  of  the  economic  factors  and  indices  having  a  bearing  on  the 
state of the industry as listed in Article 3(5) of the basic Regulation. 

5.2 

Consumption in the Community market 

(95)  The apparent Community consumption was established on the basis of the volume of 
imports  of  the  product  concerned  from  the  countries  concerned  and  all  other  third 
countries  and  the  volumes  of  sales  in  the  Community  market  of  the  Community 
industry. 

(96)  The volume of imports was determined on the basis of Eurostat figures corresponding 

to the relevant CN code during the period considered. 

(97)  On  this  basis,  Community  consumption  has  slightly  increased  from  217  137  tons  in 
2001 to 226 450 tons in the IP, i.e. an increase by 4 % over the period considered. The 
trend is showed in table 1. 

(98)  The  consumption  trend  did  however  not  evolve  steadily.  It  is  noted  that  it  first 
decreased  from  2001  to  2003  where  it  fell  by  10%.  From  2003  onwards,  however, 
consumption  increased  again  by  more  than  10%  up  to  the  IP  where  it  exceeded  the 
level of 2001. 

(99)  The decrease at the beginning of the period considered is to a large extent explained by 
the  replacement  of  SiC  by  other  products  such  as  ferro-silicone  and  industrial 
diamond, which were less expensive at that time.  

(100)  From  2003  onwards,  however,  in  line  with  a  price  decrease  of  SiC,  consumption 

increased again. 

EN 

18 

   EN 

 
Table 1 

2001 

2002 

2003 

2004 

IP 

Community 
consumption (tons) 

217 137 

205 231 

194 486 

218 919 

226 450 

Index 

100 

95 

90 

101 

104 

5.3 

Volume, market share and prices of imports from the PRC 

(101)  The  volumes  and  market  shares  of  imports  of  the  product  concerned  from  the  PRC 
developed as set out below in table 2. Since the exporting producer in the PRC did not 
cooperate,  the  price  and  volume  trends  were  based  on  information  available  in 
accordance with Article 18 of the basic Regulation. Given that no other more reliable 
information was available volume trends were based on Eurostat statistics. 

(102)  The volume of imports originating in the PRC amounted to 1205 tons and represented 
a market share of 0.6% in 2001. In 2002 the volume of imports increased slightly and 
reached  a  level  of  1467  tons,  corresponding  to  a  market  share  of  0.7%,  before 
declining to 651 tons during the IP, corresponding to a market share of 0.3%. 

(103)  Prices of imports from the PRC decreased slightly. However, it should be noted that 
given  the  low  quantities  exported  from  the  PRC,  the  export  prices  could  not  be 
considered as representative, as they may relate to very specific product types or very 
specific  customers.  Therefore  no  meaningful  conclusion  could  be  drawn  on  price 
trends  on  the  basis  of  Eurostat  figures.  However,  on  the  basis  of  the  information 
submitted in the complaint regarding prices, it could be established that Chinese prices 
(ranging  from  624  to  1814  Euro/ton  depending  on  the  grade  and  the  quality)  were 
undercutting EC prices by more than 30%. 

Table 2 

2001 

2002 

2003 

2004 

Volume of imports from the PRC (tons) 

1205 

1467 

1465 

787 

IP 

651 

Market share of imports from the PRC 

0.6% 

0.7% 

0.8% 

0.4% 

0.3% 

5.4 

Imports from other countries concerned by the present review 

(104)  In order to present a complete picture of the situation on the Community market, the 
trends of imports of SiC from other countries were also examined. It should be noted, 
however, that, as regards prices, the data are not comparable given the differences in 
the product mix, resulting in huge price differentials. 

EN 

19 

   EN 

 
 
 
5.4.1  Russia 

(105)  The evolution of imports from Russia is as follows: 

Table 3 

2001 

2002 

2003 

2004 

IP 

Volume of imports from Russia (tons) 

21 901 

24 368 

21 061 

20 457 

21 810 

Market share of imports from Russia 

10.1% 

11.9% 

10.8% 

9.3% 

9.6% 

Prices of imports from Russia (EUR/ton) 

Index: 2001=100 

453 

100 

465 

103 

477 

105 

464 

102 

480 

106 

(106)  The  volume  of  imports  from  Russia  decreased  slightly  from  21  901  tons  in  2001, 
corresponding to a market share of 10.1%, to 21 810 tons in the IP, corresponding to a 
market  share  of  9.6%.  Average  prices  of  imports  from  Russia  increased  by  6.0% 
between 2001 and the IP, i.e. from 453 Euro/ton to 480 Euro/ton. A significant volume 
of  imports  originating  in  Russia  were  made  out  of  the  quantitative  undertaking 
mentioned in recital (2). It is to be reminded that an anti-dumping duty of 23.3% was 
applicable to all imports exceeding the anti-dumping-duty-free quantities fixed by the 
before mentioned undertaking. 

5.4.2  Ukraine 

(107)  The evolution of imports from Ukraine is as follows: 

Table 4 

2001 

2002 

2003 

2004 

IP 

Volume of imports from Ukraine (tons) 

4 956 

6 760 

7 829 

8 491 

7 718 

Market share of imports from Ukraine 

2.3% 

3.3% 

Prices of imports from Ukraine (EUR/ton) 

Index: 2001=100 

504 

100 

502 

99 

4% 

469 

93 

3.9% 

3.4% 

468 

96 

489 

97 

(108)  The  volume  of  imports  from  Ukraine  increased  from  4  956  tons  in  2001, 
corresponding to a market share of 2.3%, to 7 718 tons in the IP, corresponding to a 
market  share  of  3.4%.  Average  prices  of  imports  from  Ukraine  decreased  by  3.0% 
between  2001  and  the  IP,  i.e.  from  504  Euro/ton  to  489  Euro/ton.  Except  for  a 
significant percentage of imports made within the quantitative undertaking mentioned 
in recital (4) between 2004 and 2005, an anti-dumping duty of 24% was applicable to 
imports originating in Ukraine during the period considered. 

EN 

20 

   EN 

 
 
 
5.5 

Imports from other third countries not concerned by the present review 

5.5.1  Romania 

(109)  As mentioned above in recital (6), on 30 June 2005, the Commission initiated an anti-
dumping proceeding concerning imports of the same product originating in Romania, 
further  to  a  complaint  lodged  by  CEFIC.  However,  further  to  the  withdrawal  of  the 
complaint by the complainant Community industry this investigation was terminated. 

(110)  The evolution of imports from Romania is as follows: 

Table 5 

2001 

2002 

2003 

2004 

IP 

Volume of imports from Romania (tons) 

14 173 

15 694 

22 844 

38 459 

42 387 

Market share of imports from Romania 

6.5% 

7.6% 

11.7% 

17.6% 

18.7% 

Prices of imports from Romania(EUR/ton) 

Index: 2001=100 

439 

100 

468 

107 

465 

106 

445 

101 

456 

104 

(111)  The volume of imports from Romania rose from 14 173 tons in 2001, corresponding to 
a market share of 6.5%, to 42 387 tons in the IP, corresponding to a market share of 
18.7%. Average prices of imports from Romania increased by 3.9% between 2001 and 
the IP, i.e. from 439 Euro/ton to 456 Euro/ton.  

5.5.2  Norway 

(112)  The evolution of imports from Norway is as follows: 

Table 6 

2001 

2002 

2003 

2004 

IP 

Volume of imports from Norway (tons) 

60 496 

43 400 

32 520 

38 160 

38 550 

Market share of imports from Norway 

27.9% 

21.1% 

16.7% 

17.4% 

17.0% 

Prices of imports from Norway (EUR/ton) 

Index: 2001=100 

971 

100 

919 

95 

963 

99 

898 

93 

973 

100 

(113)  The  volume  of  imports  from  Norway  decreased  from  60  496  tons  in  2001, 
corresponding to a market share of 27.9%, to 38 550 tons in the IP, corresponding to a 
market  share  of  17.0%.  Average  prices  of  imports  from  Norway  remained  stable 
between 2001 and the IP, i.e. from 971 Euro/ton in 2001 to 973 Euro/ton during the IP. 

EN 

21 

   EN 

 
 
 
5.5.3  Other third countries not mentioned above 

(114)  The evolution of imports from other third countries not mentioned above is as follows: 

Table 7 

2001 

2002 

2003 

2004 

IP 

44 473 

52 143 

48 354 

44 804 

48 271 

of 

Volume 
from 
countries  not  mentioned  above 
(tons) 

imports 

Market  share  of  imports  from 
countries not mentioned above  

Prices  of  imports  from  countries 
not mentioned above (EUR/ton) 

Index: 2001=100 

20.5% 

25.4% 

24.9% 

20.5% 

21.3% 

630 

100 

618 

558 

560 

552 

98 

89 

89 

88 

(115)  The volume of imports from other third countries increased slightly from 44 473 tons 
in  2001,  corresponding  to  a  market  share  of  20.5%,  to  48  271  tons  in  the  IP, 
corresponding to a market share of 21.3%. Average prices of imports from other third 
countries not mentioned above decreased from 630 Euro/ton in 2001 to 552 Euro/ton 
in the IP. 

5.6 

Conclusion 

(116)  The investigation revealed that imports from Russia and Ukraine remained relatively 
stable,  in  terms  of  market  share  as  well  as  in  terms  of  average  prices.  It  further 
revealed that import quantities of Chinese SiC were too small to draw any meaningful 
conclusion  on  price  trends  for  SiC  of  any  grade.  Therefore,  information  available  to 
the  Commission,  i.e.  the  complaint,  was  used  and  revealed  that  Chinese  prices  were 
significantly undercutting EC prices. 

(117)  It also showed that imports from Romania practically replaced imports from Norway 
in  quantitative  terms  as  the  market  share  of  Romanian  imports  increased  at  similar 
levels than imports from Norway decreased. While imports from Norway were made 
at higher average prices than those of the Community industry (Euro 973/ton) possibly 
due to the high quality grades, import prices from Romania were at significantly lower 
level  (Euro  456/ton).  In  this  context  it  has  to  be  noted,  however,  that  imports  from 
Romania refer almost exclusively to the less expensive metallurgical grade, so that no 
comparison with average prices from other countries can be made. 

(118)  As to the development of imports originating in other third countries, it can be noted 
that the average price followed a decreasing trend, whereas the quantity imported into 
the  Community  as  well  as  the  market  share  remained  stable  during  the  period 
considered. 

EN 

22 

   EN 

 
 
6. 

ECONOMIC SITUATION OF THE COMMUNITY INDUSTRY  

6.1 

Preliminary remark 

(119)  One  Community  producer  sold  part  of  its  output  to  a  related  producer  which  further 
processed  SiC  and  sold  it  as  the  like  product  on  the  free  market.  In  the  following 
analysis,  however,  sales  between  these  related  parties  have  not  been  taken  into 
account. In particular, it was considered that any parallel analysis of captive sales and 
sales  on  the  free  market  is  not  necessary,  since  sales  of  the  further  processed  goods 
remain  sales  of  the  like  product.  Thus,  taking  into  consideration  captive  sales  would 
lead to double counting. Likewise, any profit or loss made on the free market by the 
second producer for sales of the further processed SiC would be compensated by any 
profit or loss made by the first producer in the captive market, as both producers are 
considered as one economic entity.  

6.2 

Production 

(120)  Production in volume by the Community industry increased by 4% during the period 
considered.  Production  went  down  in  2002,  in  line  with  a  decrease  of  consumption. 
From 2002 onwards the production volume evolved positively. 

6.3 

Production capacity and capacity utilisation rates 

(121)  After  a  decrease  in  capacity  utilisation  between  2001  and  2002,  capacity  utilisation 
rates  have  slightly  increased  since  that  year  and  over  the  period  considered  by  3 
percentage  points.  As  capacity  of  production  remained  unchanged  throughout  the 
period  considered,  this  development  is  in  line  with  the  development  in  production 
volume. Capacity utilisation was always above 75% during the period considered. 

6.4 

Sales prices and factors affecting domestic prices 

(122)  Unit sales prices of the Community industry increased slightly between 2001 and the 
IP (less than 5%). They reached an exceptional peak in 2002, but decreased since then 
to  relatively  stable  levels  slightly  above  the  level  of  2001.  The  peak  in  the 
Community’s  sales  prices  in  2002  is  explained  by  an  increase  in  production  cost 
during the same period which the Community industry had to reflect in its sales prices 
accordingly.  Subsequently,  partly  due  to  the  decrease  in  the  Community  industry’s 
production cost, partly due to the continued price pressure on the Community market, 
the Community industry’s sales prices decreased again. 

6.5 

Stocks  

(123)  Stocks have slightly decreased over the period considered; i.e. by 1%, although they 
increased  significantly  over  the  period  2002-2003  before  decreasing  to  its  level  of 
2001 during the IP. This increase has to be explained by the decrease in sales volume 
as explained in recital (124). From 2003 onwards, stocks decreased not only due to the 
increase in sales on the Community market but also to an increase of the Community 
industry’s export sales. Notwithstanding this development, it was considered that the 
level  of  stocks  has  been  kept  at  a  very  reasonable  level  during  the  entire  period 
considered. 

EN 

23 

   EN 

 
6.6 

Sales volume and market share 

(124)  Sales of the like product by the Community industry on the Community market have 
overall  declined  by  4%  during  the  period  considered.  As  Community  consumption 
increased  by  4%  during  the  period  considered,  such  decrease  of  sales  has  been 
translated in a loss of market shares of the Community industry i.e. 2.6%. 

6.7 

Investments 

(125)  Investments  had  an  increasing  trend  and  doubled  over  the  period  considered.  It  was 
found that investments concerned replacement, and maintenance but also development 
of products for new applications. 

6.8  Growth  

(126)  Overall,  it  has  to  be  noted  that  the  Community  industry’s  market  shares  in  the  free 
market  fell  (see  recital  (124)),  whereas  the  overall  market  grew  by  4%.  The 
Community  industry  has  therefore  not  been  able  to  participate  in  the  growth  of  the 
market. 

6.9 

Employment and wages 

(127)  Employment decreased by 7% during the period considered. Total wages decreased by 
2%  during  the  period  considered.  On  the  other  hand  the  weighted  average  salary 
increased because severance payments had to be made for laid off workers. Moreover, 
in  order  to  fully  benefit  from  the  investments  made  in  terms  of  equipment,  skilled 
workers had to be hired causing thus an increase in labour cost. 

6.10  Productivity  

(128)  Productivity  per  employee,  measured  as  output  per  employee,  increased  during  the 
period  considered  by  12%.  This  improvement  in  productivity  mirrors  the  level  of 
investments carried out in machinery as well as the reduction of employees. 

6.11  Cash flow, ability to raise capital  

(129)  Cash flow increased during the period considered by 10%. 

(130)  The Community producers did not face any problems to raise capital. They financed 
their  activities  through  loans  from  related  companies  and  banks.  Self  financing  was 
also used.  

6.12  Return on net assets 

(131)  Return  on  net  assets  was  calculated  by  expressing  the  pre-tax  net  profit  of  the  like 
product sold in the Community as a percentage of the net book value of fixed assets 
allocated to the like product sold in the Community. It showed a similar development 
as profitability (see recital (132) below). 

EN 

24 

   EN 

 
6.13  Profitability 

(132)  Profitability  of  the  Community  industry,  expressed  as  a  percentage  of  net  sales, 
showed  a  sharp  downward  trend  from  2001  to  2003,  where  the  already  low  profit 
margin  more  than  halved.  Profitability  then  went  up  without,  however,  reaching  its 
level  of  2001.  During  the  IP,  the  profits  realised  by  the  Community  industry 
represented slightly more than half of the level reached in 2001. In 2002, the rise in 
prices could not countervail the rise in cost of production nor the loss caused by lower 
sales  volumes.  2003  showed  even  lower  figures  as  prices  decreased  while  sales 
volumes  decreased  even  more.  In  2004  and  during  the  IP,  the  profitability  of  the 
Community industry improved due to an important rise in sales volume while the price 
level was stable. 

6.14  Magnitude of dumping margin  

(133)  As  concerns  the  impact  on  the  Community  industry  of  the  magnitude  of  the  actual 
margin  of  dumping,  no  meaningful  conclusion  can  be  drawn  given  the  low  level  of 
imports from the PRC. 

6.15  Recovery from the effects of past dumping 

(134)  While the indicators examined above show some improvement in the situation of the 
Community industry further to the imposition of anti-dumping measures in 2000, they 
also evidence the negative trends of some indicators which show that the Community 
industry is still in a fragile and vulnerable situation. 

6.16  Conclusion 

(135)  Between 2001 and the IP, the following indicators developed positively: sales prices, 
capacity utilisation and production volume of the Community industry increased while 
closing stocks decreased slightly. Productivity increased significantly. Investments and 
cash flow also showed positive trends. 

(136)  Conversely,  the  following  indicators  developed  negatively:  sales  volume  decreased, 
cost  of  production  per  ton  and  average  labour  cost  per  employee  increased  while 
employment decreased. Profitability and return on net assets eroded as well. 

(137)  Overall,  the  situation  of  the  Community  industry  is  mixed:  while  some  indicators 
show positive developments, some others show a negative trend. If one compares the 
above trends with the ones described in the Regulation (EC) No 1100/2000, it is clear 
that  the  introduction  of  the  anti-dumping  measures  in  2000  enabled  the  Community 
industry to stabilize its situation, but not to fully recover from its injurious situation. 
Although the Community industry, following positive developments, started to invest 
in  new  equipment  destined  to  new  applications,  it  should  be  stressed  that  due  to  the 
highly price sensitive market, its market share and profitability decreased. 

(138)  The Community industry has benefited from a rise in its unit price of SiC from 2001 to 
the  end  of  the  IP.  The  initial  rise  should  have  compensated  the  rise  in  cost  of 
production due to the restructuring and the efficiency related expenses. However, the 
increase in the selling price could not compensate the rise in the cost of production and 
profit margins therefore decreased. 

EN 

25 

   EN 

 
(139)  Although consumption in the Community increased by 4% over the period considered, 
the  Community  industry's  market  share  decreased  by  2.6%,  i.e.  the  Community 
industry was not able to benefit from this increase in consumption. 

(140)  On the other hand, the Community industry’s export performance improved during the 
period considered as its export sales increased significantly over the period considered; 
i.e.  by  more  than  25%.  This  development  shows  that  the  Community  industry 
produces  a  competitive  product  successful  on  third  country  markets  although  in 
competition with other imports. 

(141)  When comparing the situation of the Community industry at the beginning and at the 
end  of  the  period  considered,  a  number  of  injury  indicators,  such  as  capacity  and 
capacity  utilisation,  stocks  and  market  share  are  at  similar  levels.  Other  indicators, 
such  as  sales  volume,  cost  of  production,  profitability,  return  on  investments  and 
employment  show  clear  negative  trends  while  only  few  indicators,  i.e.  unit  sales 
prices,  productivity,  investments  and  cash  flow  show  positive  trends.  It  is  therefore 
concluded that the situation of the Community industry although stabilised during the 
period considered, as compared to the period preceding the imposition of measures in 
2000, is still in a fragile situation. In particular, the clear negative trend in profitability 
which  did  still  not  reach  an  acceptable  level  during  the  IP  as  well  as  the  decreased 
market share of the Community industry indicate that it could not fully recover from 
the effects of injurious dumping. 

7. 

LIKELIHOOD OF CONTINUATION OR RECURRENCE OF INJURY 

(142)  As  explained  in  recitals  (56)  to  (57),  the  exporting  producers  in  the  PRC  have  the 
potential to substantially raise their exports volume to the Community by redirecting 
current  export  volumes  to  third  countries  to  the  more  attractive  Community  market 
and/or  by  using  their  significant  spare  capacities.  Indeed,  significant  capacities  are 
available  reaching  more  than  200  000  tons  which  represents  almost  100%  of 
Community  consumption.  It  is  therefore  likely  that  substantial  quantities  of  Chinese 
SiC will penetrate the Community market to regain lost market share and increase it 
further should measures be repealed. 

(143)  During the whole period under consideration the North American market continued to 
be a key area of interest for PRC. While there is just one crude SiC producer in North 
America  left  with  a  capacity  of  50  000  tons,  the  consumption  in  this  area  is  in  the 
region  of  250  000  tons.  The  PRC  is  providing  80  %  of  imports  of  US  crude  silicon 
carbide  imports  and  57%  of  SiC  grain  imports,  followed  by  Brazil  (12%),  Norway 
(10%) and Germany (6%). Even if PRC would be able to take over the import share in 
the US of the other third countries, the spare capacities in the PRC would still remain 
sufficient  to  flood  the  Community  market  with  low  price  SiC  should  measures  be 
repealed.  Indeed,  the  development  on  the  US  market  where  no  anti-dumping  duties 
were in force, will very likely be mirrored on the Community market should measures 
be repealed. 

(144)  Since none of the Chinese exporting producers co-operated, information on the likely 
Chinese price levels should measures be repealed was based on information available 
in  accordance  with  Article  18  of  the  basic  Regulation.  In  this  regard,  information 
submitted  in  the  complaint,  import  statistics  and  other  information  available  on  the 
market was used. Thus, and as mentioned above in recital (56), the information in the 

EN 

26 

   EN 

 
complaint  suggests  that  export  prices  to  the  USA  and  Japan  for  high  quality  grades 
were significantly below the prices for similar grades of the Community industry. 

(145)  This trend was confirmed by other sources of information which show Chinese export 
prices to other third countries such as the USA and South Africa significantly below 
the  export  prices  to  the  Community  as  recorded  in  Eurostat,  i.e.  540  Euro/ton  for 
crystalline  grades  (97%  minimum)  and  123  Euro/ton  for  metallurgical  grades.  It 
should  be  stressed  that  Chinese  exporters  are  able  to  produce  and  export  all  kind  of 
high quality SiC to the EC. The investigation revealed that one of the most valuable 
and  cost  intensive  SiC  was  sold  to  the  EC  at  1500  Euro/ton  duties  exclusive,  which 
amounts to 2400 Euro/ton import duty and AD duty included. Even the latter price is 
significantly  below  the  price  offered  by  the  Community  producers.  In  more  general 
terms,  Eurostat  statistics  show  that,  historically,  export  prices  from  China  to  the 
Community were very low, i.e. approximately between 250 and 500 Euro/ton. Thus, it 
can be expected that Chinese SiC would enter the market again at very low prices if 
measures lapsed. 

(146)  This can be confirmed by the fact that, in 2006, after the substantial reduction of the 
export license fees by the Chinese authorities, i.e. ranging from 125 to 208 Euro/ton 
down to 25.8 Euro/ton, export prices to other third countries for the product concerned 
were down to levels which would undercut even more the current Community industry 
price level. 

(147)  Furthermore,  it  is  likely  that,  in  order  to  be  able  to  significantly  increase  their  sales, 
using the huge spare capacity, and gain a substantial market share in the Community, 
Chinese  exporting  producers  will  have  to  undercut  prices  of  imports  from  third 
countries  as  well.  This  will  increase  price  pressure  and  not  only  prevent  the 
Community  industry  from  recovering  fully  from  the  past  injury  but  also  lead  to  a 
severe deterioration of its still fragile situation. 

(148)  For  the  reasons  set  out  in  the  above  mentioned  recitals,  it  has  been  determined  that 
there  is  a  likelihood  that  Chinese  exporting  producers  will  resume  exports  in 
significant  quantities  to  the  Community  at  dumped  prices  considerably  undercutting 
the EC prices to regain lost market shares should measures against the PRC be allowed 
to lapse. 

(149)  Therefore  it  was  concluded  that  there  is  a  likelihood  of  recurrence  of  injurious 
dumping should measures against imports of SiC originating in the PRC be allowed to 
lapse. 

8. 

COMMUNITY INTEREST 

8.1 

Introduction 

(150)  According  to  Article  21  of  the  basic  Regulation,  it  was  examined  whether  the 
maintenance  of  the  existing  anti-dumping  measures  would  be  against  the  interest  of 
the Community as a whole. The determination of the Community interest was based 
on an appreciation of all the various interests involved. 

EN 

27 

   EN 

 
(151)  It  should  be  recalled  that,  in  the  previous  investigation,  the  prolongation  of  the 
measures was considered not to be against the interest of the Community. During the 
original  investigation,  a  significant  number  of  the  cooperating  users  and  importers 
were in favour of the continuation of the measures. 

(152)  In  the  present  proceeding,  no  cooperating  user,  no  importer  and  no  raw  material 
producer  opposed  the  continuation  of  the  measures  against  the  PRC  for  reasons 
outlined below in recitals (153), (159) and (160) to (171). 

8.2 

Interest of the Community industry 

8.2.1  Impact of the continuation of the measures 

(153)  Despite the partial recovery of the Community industry since  the imposition of anti-
dumping measures in 2000, it is clear that these measures have not yet fully had the 
expected remedial effects on the Community industry. 

(154)  In  case  measures  against  imports  of  SiC  originating  in  the  PRC  are  maintained,  a 
further  price  depression  on  the  Community  market  would  be  avoided  and  the 
Community industry would be able to reach a reasonable price level and to improve its 
financial situation. This is mainly due to the fact that the Community industry invested 
heavily  in  processing  capacities  of  certain  types  of  SiC  destined  to  new  applications 
fields such as diesel particle filters. This will, in all likelihood, allow them to increase 
their sales prices and volume in the future and to regain lost market share. 

(155)  The  Community  industry  has  proven  to  be  a  structurally  viable  industry.  This  was 

confirmed by improved export performance and it efforts of restructuring. 

(156)  For  the  reasons  set  out  above,  it  can  be  reasonably  expected  that  the  Community 
industry  will  continue  to  benefit  from  the  measures  and  further  recover  by  reaching 
reasonable profit margins. In this light, it was concluded that it would be in interest of 
the  Community  industry  to  maintain  measures  against  imports  of  SiC  originating  in 
the PRC. 

8.2.2  Impact of the expiry of the measures 

(157)  In contrast, should measures on imports of SiC originating in the PRC expire, massive 
imports of Chinese SiC at dumped prices are expected to enter the Community market, 
causing  a  significant  price  pressure  on  the  Community  market.  Under  these 
circumstances, it is likely that the Community industry will start again to suffer injury 
from  increased  imports  at  dumped  prices  which  will  also  result  in  a  loss  of  market 
shares  and  a  deterioration  of  its  economic  situation  which  is  still  fragile.  In  such  a 
scenario, the disappearance of the Community industry is not excluded. 

(158)  It was therefore concluded that it would be in the interest of the Community interests 

to maintain measures against imports of SiC originating in the PRC. 

EN 

28 

   EN 

 
8.3 

Interest of importers 

(159)  As  outlined  in  recital  (13)  above  the  three  sampled  importers  in  the  Community  not 
related to an exporting producer filled in a questionnaire. These importers represented 
98% of the import volumes of known importers in the Community. They opposed the 
continuation of the anti-dumping measures in force against Russia and Ukraine but did 
not  take  any  specific  position  with  regard  to  the  anti-dumping  measures  in  force 
against the PRC. 

(160)  It  is  recalled  that  in  the  original  investigation  it  was  found  that  the  impact  of  the 
imposition  of  measures  on  importers  would  not  be  significant.  This  has  been 
confirmed  by  the  present  investigation.  Indeed,  since  the  imposition  of  measures,  no 
significant  change  of  the  economic  situation  of  importers  has  been  found  and  this  is 
not expected to change if measures are maintained. The verified information submitted 
by  the  importers  has  also  shown  that  they  realised  reasonable  profit  margins  despite 
the anti-dumping duty in force. 

(161)  On  the  basis  of  the  above,  it  was  concluded  that  the  continuation  of  measures 
applicable to imports of SiC originating in the PRC would not have a significant effect 
on the situation of importers. 

8.4 

Interest of users 

(162)  As  outlined  in  recitals  (14)  to  (16)  above  eighteen  users  in  the  Community 
representing  around  30%  of  the  total  Community  consumption  provided  basic 
information  related  to  their  purchases  of  the  product  concerned  and  expressed  their 
willingness to cooperate. Finally, seven users submitted full questionnaire replies, two 
of which were investigated on-spot. In this context it has to be noted that the majority 
of  the  cooperating  users  were  processors,  and  only  one  end-user.  None  of  the  co-
operating  users  took  any  specific  position  as  regards  the  anti-dumping  measures  in 
force against the PRC. 

(163)  SiC  is  used  in  a  wide  variety  of  applications  and  therefore  a  large  number  of  user 
industries  are  concerned  such  as  abrasive  and  polishing  applications  as  well  as 
refractory segment for crystalline material. In the metallurgical segment SiC is used as 
an alloy. 

(164)  In  examining  the  possible  effect  of  the  imposition  of  measures  on  users,  it  was 
concluded  in  the  original  investigation  that  in  view  of  the  low  level  of  co-operation 
and comments submitted, measures in force did not have a significant negative impact 
on their business. 

(165)  The current review investigation confirmed the findings as far as SiC originating in the 
PRC is concerned. Indeed, the analysis of the questionnaire replies revealed that users 
do not have to expect any cost increase should measures be maintained. As measures 
at the same level are already in force since 1986, the maintenance of these measures 
would not change the current situation of the users. In any case, since measures against 
Russia and Ukraine are terminated, the position of the users having additional sources 
of supply, will rather improve. 

EN 

29 

   EN 

 
(166)  It is also recalled that since the imposition of measures on imports of SiC originating 

in PRC no significant change of the economic situation of users could be observed. 

(167)  Certain interested parties claimed that the continuation of the measures on imports of 
SiC originating in the PRC would lead to increased imports of finished products using 
Chinese  SiC.  However,  no  such  increase  has  been  observed  during  the  period 
considered despite the anti-dumping measures in force against the PRC. There were no 
indications  that  such  an  increase  of  imports  of  finished  products  was  imminent  or 
foreseeable in the near future. Therefore this argument has to be rejected. 

(168)  Some  users  argued  that  there  would  be  a  shortage  of  supply  should  measures  be 
maintained against all three countries which were subject to the present investigation. 
However, in this respect it is recalled that the measures currently in force have not led 
to any shortage of supply. Moreover, since anti-dumping measures against Russia and 
Ukraine are terminated, new sources of supply can enter the Community without any 
anti-dumping duties. Finally, it is recalled that the purpose of anti-dumping duties is 
not to prevent imports of SiC from PRC to enter the Community market, but to ensure 
fair conditions of trade. For these reasons, this argument has to be rejected. 

(169)  On  the  basis  of  the  above,  it  was  concluded  that  the  continuation  of  measures 
applicable to imports of SiC originating in the PRC would not have a significant effect 
on the situation of users. 

8.5 

Interest of upstream industry 

(170)  The  Commission  received  two  replies  to  the  questionnaire  from  suppliers  of  raw 
materials to the Community industry. Both stated  that  anti-dumping  measures  would 
have a rather limited impact on their business. 

(171)  The investigation confirmed these assessments. It is therefore concluded that there are 
no  compelling  reasons  of  the  upstream  industry  against  the  continuation  of  the 
measures against imports of SiC originating in the PRC. 

8.6 

Conclusion on Community interest  

(172)  From the foregoing it was concluded that if measures would lapse, the situation of the 

Community industry would deteriorate, which may even lead to its disappearance. 

(173)  As  for  importers,  users  and  raw  material  producers  of  SiC,  it  was  found  that  the 
imposition of the measures on imports of SiC originating in the PRC did not have any 
undue negative effects on their economic situation. 

(174)  It is therefore concluded that there are no compelling reasons of Community interest 

against the continuation of the measures on imports of SiC originating in the PRC. 

9. 

INTERIM REVIEW  

(175)  Given the findings with regard to Russia and as outlined above in recitals (84) to (89), 
the  anti-dumping  proceedings  against  this  country  will  be  terminated  and  the  anti-
dumping measures in force will be repealed. 

EN 

30 

   EN 

 
(176)  It follows that the interim review mentioned in recital (7) of this Regulation limited to 
the  examination  of  the  form  of  the  measures  in  force  against  Russia  should  also  be 
terminated. 

10. 

ANTI - DUMPING MEASURES 

(177)  All  parties  were  informed  of  the  essential  facts  and  considerations  on  the  basis  of 
which the maintenance of the existing measures is based. They were granted a period 
to  make  representations  subsequent  to  this  disclosure.  No  comments  were  received 
which were of a nature to change the above conclusions. 

(178)  It  follows  from  the  above  that,  as  provided  for  by  Article  11(2)  of  the  basic 
Regulation, the antidumping measures applicable to imports of SiC, originating in the 
PRC should be maintained. 

(179)  Finally, as outlined above, the proceedings related to imports of SiC originating in the 

Russian Federation and in Ukraine should be terminated and the measures repealed. 

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 

Article 1 

The anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of silicon carbide originating in the Russian 
Federation  and  Ukraine  falling  within  CN  code  2849  20  00  is  hereby  terminated  and  anti-
dumping measures imposed on those countries by Council Regulation (EC) No 1100/2000 are 
repealed. 

Article 2 

(1) 

(2) 

A definitive anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on imports of silicon carbide falling 
within CN Code 2849 20 00 originating in the People’s Republic of China. 

The  rate  of  the  duty  applicable  to  the  net,  free-at-Community-frontier  price,  before 
duty, shall be as follows: 

Country 

Rate of duty (%) 

People’s Republic of China 

52.6 

(3) 

The provisions in force concerning customs duties shall apply. 

EN 

31 

   EN 

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

Article 3 

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

Done at Brussels,  

For the Council 
The President 

EN 

32 

   EN