Proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain polyethylene terephthalate originating in India, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Republic of Korea, Thailand and Taiwan following an expiry review and a partial interim review pursuant to Article 11(2) and Article 11(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96
Date: 2007-01-25
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: India, Indonesia, Malaysia, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, anti-dumping duty, anti-dumping legislation, originating product, plastics

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 25.1.2007 
COM(2007) 25 final 

Proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION 

imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain polyethylene 
terephthalate originating in India, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Republic of Korea, Thailand 
and Taiwan following an expiry review and a partial interim review pursuant to Article 
11(2) and Article 11(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96  

(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  certain  polyethylene  terephthalate  originating  in  India, 
Indonesia, Malaysia, the Republic of Korea, Thailand and Taiwan. 

•  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. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3)  LEGAL ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSAL 

•  Summary of the proposed action 

On 1 December 2005, the Commission announced by a notice (‘notice of initiation’), 
published  in  the  Official  Journal  of  the  European  Union1,  the  initiation  of  an  anti-
dumping  proceeding  concerning  imports  into  the  Community  of  certain  polyethylene 
terephthalate  originating  in  India,  Indonesia,  Malaysia,  the  Republic  of  Korea, 
Thailand and Taiwan.  

The  anti-dumping  proceeding  was  initiated  following  a  request  for  review  lodged  on 
30 August  2005  by  the  Polyethylene  Terephthalate  (PET)  Committee  of  Plastics 
Europe (‘the applicant’) on behalf of producers representing a major proportion, in this 
case  more  than  90  %,  of  the  total  Community  production  of  certain  polyethylene 
terephthalate. 

The  enclosed  Commission  proposal  for  a  Council  Regulation  contains  the  definitive 
conclusions regarding dumping, injury, causality and Community interest.  

Member States were consulted during the Anti-Dumping Committees of January 16th. 
25 Member States were in favour of the proposed course of action and 2 opposed. 

It  is  proposed  that  the  Council  adopt  the  attached  proposal  for  a  Regulation  which 
should  be  published  in  the  Official  Journal  of  the  European  Union  on  28  February 
2007 at the latest. 

•  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 reason(s): 

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. 

1 

OJ C 304, 1.12.2005, Notice of initiation (2005/C 304/04 ), p. 9. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
•  Choice of instruments 

Proposed instruments: Regulation. 

Other means would not be adequate for the following reason(s). 

The above-mentioned basic Regulation does not foresee alternative options. 

4)  BUDGETARY IMPLICATION 

The proposal has no implication for the Community budget. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION 

imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain polyethylene 
terephthalate originating in India, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Republic of Korea, Thailand 
and Taiwan following an expiry review and a partial interim review pursuant to Article 
11(2) and Article 11(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96  

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 Community2 ('the basic 
Regulation'), and in particular Articles 11(2) and 11(3) thereof, 

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

Whereas: 

A. 

PROCEDURE 

1.  Measures in force 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

2 

3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 

On  27  November  20003,  the  Council  imposed  definitive  anti-dumping  duties  on 
imports  of  certain  polyethylene  terephthalate  ('PET')  originating  in  India,  Indonesia, 
Malaysia, the Republic of Korea, Taiwan and Thailand ('the countries concerned'). The 
measures  imposed  had  been  based  on  an  anti-dumping  investigation  ('the  original 
investigation') initiated pursuant to Article 5 of the basic Regulation. 

On 13 August 20044, the Council imposed definitive anti-dumping duties on imports 
of certain PET originating in Australia and the People's Republic of China ('PRC') and 
terminated the proceeding on imports of PET originating in Pakistan. 

Council  Regulation  2604/2000,  as  referred  to  in  recital  (1)  has  been  amended  by 
Council  Regulations  (EC)  No  496/20025,  823/20046,  83/20057  and  1646/20058.  The 

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). 
Council Regulation (EC) No 2604/2000, 30.11.2000, p. 21. 
Council Regulation (EC) No 1467/2004, 19.08.2004, p. 1. 
OJ L 78, 21.3.2002, p. 4. 
OJ L 127, 29.4.2004, p. 7. 
OJ L 19, 21.1.2005, p. 1. 
OJ L 266, 11.10.2005, p. 10. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
amendments  were  the  results  of  either  review  investigations  initiated  pursuant  to 
Article 11(3) and (4) of the basic Regulation or of price undertakings being accepted 
under Article 8(1) of the basic Regulation. 

2. 

Request for reviews 

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

(7) 

(8) 

(9) 

Following  the  publication  of  a  notice  of  impending  expiry9,  the  Commission,  on 
30 August 2005, received a request to review the measures in force pursuant to Article 
11(2)  of  the  basic  Regulation  ('expiry  review'),  and  to  partially  review  the  measures 
imposed  on  imports  from  Taiwan  and  on  imports  from  three  exporting  producers  in 
Korea pursuant to Article 11(3) of the basic Regulation ('partial interim review'). 

The  request  was  lodged  by  the  Polyethylene  Terephthalate  Committee  of  Plastics 
Europe ('the applicant') on behalf of producers representing a major proportion, in this 
case more than 90 %, of total Community production of PET.  

The  request  for  the  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 the partial interim review of the measures on imports from Taiwan and 
imports originating from three exporting producers in Korea (Daehan Synthetic Fiber 
Co. Ltd., SK Chemicals Co. Ltd. and KP Chemical Corp.) was based on the grounds 
that the level of the measures was not sufficient to counteract the injurious dumping. 

Having determined, after consulting the Advisory Committee, that sufficient evidence 
existed for the initiation of the two reviews, pursuant to Article 11(2) and 11(3) of the 
basic Regulation respectively, the Commission initiated these reviews on 1 December 
200510. 

A  Notice  regarding  the  scope  of  the  interim  review  was  published  in  the  Official 
Journal on 2 June 200611 making clear that the scope of the partial interim review also 
included all related companies. 

3. 

Parallel investigation 

(10)  On 1 December 2005, the Commission also initiated a review pursuant to Article 18 of 
Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  2026/9712  on  the  countervailing  measures  in  force  on 
imports of PET originating in India. 

4. 

Parties concerned by the investigation  

(11)  The Commission officially advised the exporting producers, the representatives of the 
exporting  countries,  importers,  Community  producers,  users  and  the  applicant  of  the 
initiation  of  the  expiry  review  and  the  partial  interim  review.  Interested  parties  were 

9 
10 
11 
12 

OJ C 52, 2.3.2005, p. 2. 
OJ C 304, 1.12.2005, p. 9. 
OJ C129, 2.6.2006, p. 23. 
Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  2026/97  (OJ  L  288,  21.10.1997,  p.1)  on  protection  against  subsidised 
imports  from  countries  not  members  of  the  European  Community,  as  last  amended  by  Council 
Regulation (EC) No 461/2004 (OJ L 77, 13.3.2004, p.12). 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
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. All interested parties, who so 
requested  and  showed  that  there  were  particular  reasons  why  they  should  be  heard, 
were granted a hearing. 

(12) 

In  view  of  the  apparent  large  number  of  Indian,  Indonesian,  Korean  and  Taiwanese 
exporting  producers  as  well  as  Community  producers  and  importers  listed  in  the 
request for the expiry review and the number of Taiwanese exporting producers listed 
in the request for the interim review, 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 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 15 days of the initiation of the 
reviews and to provide the Commission with the information requested in the notice of 
initiation. 

(13)  After  examination  of  the  information  submitted,  given  the  low  number  of  exporting 
producers  in  India,  Indonesia,  the  Republic  of  Korea  and  Taiwan  indicating  their 
willingness to co-operate, it was decided that sampling was not necessary as regards 
exporting producers in these four countries. 

(14)  Having examined the information submitted by Community producers and importers, 
and considering that their number was not excessive, it was decided to include all of 
them and that sampling was not necessary. 

(15)  Questionnaires were therefore sent to all known exporting producers in the countries 

concerned, importers, suppliers, Community producers and users. 

(16)  Replies to the questionnaires were received from 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

three exporting producers in India, 

three exporting producers in Indonesia (although only two of these decided to 
accept a verification visit), 

two exporting producers in Malaysia, 

four exporting producers in the Republic of Korea, 

three  exporting  producers  in  Taiwan  (although  only  two  of  these  decided  to 
accept a verification visit), 

one exporting producer in Thailand, 

two suppliers in the Community, 

twelve Community producers, 

ten converters/users. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
It  was  also  found  that  one  non-cooperating  Indonesian  exporting  producer  had 
changed its name since the publication of the measures in force. This concerned P.T. 
Bakrie Kasei Corp. to P.T. Mitsubishi Chemical Indonesia.  

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

(a) 

India 

Exporting producers 

– 

– 

– 

Pearl Engineering Polymers Ltd., Delhi, 

SENPET, formerly Elque Polyesters Ltd., Calcutta, 

Futura Polyesters Ltd., Chennai; 

Related exporter 

– 

Plastosen Ltd., Calcutta, (related to SENPET, formerly Elque Polyesters Ltd.); 

(b) 

Indonesia 

Exporting producers 

– 

– 

P.T. Polypet Karyapersada, Jakarta, 

P.T. Petnesia Resindo, Tangerang; 

(c)  Malaysia 

Exporting producers 

–  MPI Polyester Industries Sdn. Bhd., Selangor, 

– 

Hualon Corporation (M) Sdn. Bhd. Kuala Lumpur; 

(d)  Republic of Korea 

Exporting producers 

– 

– 

– 

– 

SK Chemicals Co. Ltd., Seoul, 

Huvis Corp., Seoul (related to SK Chemicals Co Ltd.), 

KP Chemicals Corp., Seoul, 

Honam Petrochemicals Corp., Seoul (related to KP Chemicals Co Ltd); 

Related traders/importers located in Korea 

– 

SK Networks Ltd., Seoul (related to SK Chemicals Co Ltd.), 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
– 

Lotte  Trading  Ltd.,  Seoul,  Republic  of  Korea  (related  to  KP  Chemicals  Co 
Ltd), 

– 

Lotte Daesan Ltd., Seoul, Republic of Korea (related to KP Chemicals Co Ltd); 

Related traders/importers located in the Community 

– 

SK  Networks  Deutschland  GmbH,  Frankfurt/Main,  Germany  (related  to  SK 
Chemicals Co Ltd.), 

– 

SK Eurochem, Warsaw, Poland (related to SK Chemicals Co Ltd.); 

(e)  Taiwan 

Exporting producers 

– 

– 

Shinkong Synthetic Fibers Corporation, Taipei, 

Far Eastern Textile Ltd., Taipei; 

(f)  Thailand 

Exporting producer 

– 

Bangkok Polyester Public company Ltd, Bangkok, Thailand; 

(g)  Community producers 

– 

Voridian BV (The Netherlands), 

–  M & G Polimeri Italia Spa (Italy), 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

Equipolymers Srl (Italy), 

La Seda de Barcelona SA (Spain), 

Novapet SA (Spain), 

Selenis Industria de Polímeros SA (Portugal), 

Selenis Itália Spa (Italy); 

(h)  Community Suppliers 

– 

Interquisa SA (Spain); 

(i)  Unrelated importers in the Community 

– 

Global Service International SRL (Italy); 

(j)  Community users 

– 

Coca Cola Enterprises Europe Ltd (Belgium). 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
(18)  The investigation of the likelihood of continuation and/or recurrence of dumping and 
injury for the expiry review covered the period from 1 October 2004 to 30 September 
2005 ('review investigation period' or 'RIP'). The examination of trends relevant for the 
assessment  of  the  likelihood  of  a  continuation  or  recurrence  of  injury  covered  the 
period  from  1  January  2002  up  to  the  end  of  the  RIP  ('period  considered').  The 
investigation period for the partial interim review pursuant to Article 11(3) of the basic 
Regulation concerning imports from Taiwan and from three exporting producers in the 
Republic of Korea is the same as that of the expiry review. 

B. 

PRODUCT CONCERNED 

1. 

Product concerned 

(19)  The  product  concerned  is  the  same  as  in  the  original  investigation  i.e.  PET  with  a 
coefficient  of  viscosity  of  78  ml/g  or  higher,  according  to  the  ISO  Standard  1628-5 
originating  in  the  countries  concerned.  It  is  currently  classifiable  within  CN  Code 
3907 60 20. 

2. 

Like product 

(20)  As  in  the  original  investigation  and  the  review  investigation,  it  was  found  that  the 
product concerned, PET produced and sold on the domestic markets in the countries 
concerned  and  PET  produced  and  sold  by  the  Community  producers  have  the  same 
basic  physical  and  chemical  characteristics  and  uses.  Therefore,  these  products  are 
considered  to  be  like  products  within  the  meaning  of  Article  1(4)  of  the  basic 
Regulation. 

C. 

LIKELIHOOD OF A CONTINUATION AND/OR RECURRENCE OF DUMPING 

1.  Dumping of imports during the investigation period – General principles 

(21) 

In  accordance  with  Article  11(2)  of  the  basic  Regulation,  it  was  examined  whether 
dumping  was  currently  taking  place  and  whether  or  not  the  expiry  of  the  measures 
would be likely to lead to a continuation of dumping. 

General methodology 

(22)  The general methodology set out below has been applied to all exporting producers in 
the  countries  concerned  and  is  the  same  as  in  the  original  investigation.  The 
presentation of the findings of dumping for each of the countries concerned therefore 
only describes what is specific for each exporting country. 

Normal value  

(23)  For  the  determination  of  normal  value,  it  was  first  established,  for  each  exporting 
producer, whether its total domestic sales of the product concerned were representative 
in comparison with its total export sales to the Community. In accordance with Article 
2(2) of the basic Regulation, domestic sales were considered representative when the 
total  domestic  sales  volume  of  each  exporting  producer  was  at  least  5  %  of  its  total 
export sales volume to the Community. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
(24)  Subsequently, those types of the product concerned sold domestically by the exporting 
producers  having  overall  representative  domestic  sales,  and  that  were  identical  or 
directly comparable to the types sold for export to the Community, were identified. 

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

(26)  An examination was also made whether the domestic sales of each type of PET could 
be regarded as having been made in the ordinary course of trade, pursuant to Article 
2(4)  of  the  basic  Regulation.  This  was  done  by  establishing  for  each  exporting 
producer in the countries concerned, the proportion of profitable sales to independent 
customers on the domestic market, of each exported type of the product concerned on 
the domestic market during the investigation period. 

(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. 

(27) 

In  the  cases  where  normal  values  had  to  be  constructed,  they  were  constructed  in 
accordance  with  Article  2(6)  of  the  basic  Regulation,  i.e.  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  of  profit  equated  to  the  average  profit  realised  by  the  exporting  producer  on 
sales of the like product in the ordinary course of trade. 

Export price  

(28) 

In all cases where the product concerned was exported to independent customers in the 
Community,  the  export  price  was  established  in  accordance  with  Article  2(8)  of  the 
basic Regulation, namely on the basis of export prices actually paid or payable. 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
(29) 

In cases where sales were made via a related importer or trader, the export price was 
constructed  on  the  basis  of  the  resale  prices  of  that  related  importer  to  independent 
customers.  Adjustments  were  made  for  all  costs  incurred  between  importation  and 
resale  including  sales,  general  and  administrative  expenses,  and  a  reasonable  profit 
margin, in accordance with Article 2(9) of the basic Regulation. The appropriate profit 
margin was established on the basis of information provided by unrelated cooperating 
traders/importers operating on the Community market. 

Comparison  

(30)  The  normal  value  and  export  price  were  compared  on  an  ex-works  basis.  For  the 
purpose of ensuring a fair comparison between the normal value and the export price, 
due allowance in the form of adjustments was made for differences affecting the price 
and  price  comparability  in  accordance  with  Article  2(10)  of  the  basic  Regulation. 
Appropriate  adjustments  were  granted  in  all  cases  where  they  were  found  to  be 
reasonable, accurate and supported by evidence. 

Dumping margin  

(31) 

In accordance with Article 2(11) and (12) of the basic Regulation, a dumping margin 
was  calculated  for  each  cooperating  exporting  producer,  by  comparing  the  weighted 
average normal value with the weighted average export price. 

(32)  For those countries where the level of co-operation was found to be high (above 80 % 
of all volumes imported to the Community during the RIP), and where there was no 
reason to believe that any exporting producer abstained from cooperating, the residual 
dumping  margin  was  set  at  the  level  of  the  cooperating  exporting  producer  with  the 
highest dumping margin in order to ensure the effectiveness of the measures. 

(33)  For  those  countries  where  the  level  of  co-operation  was  found  to  be  low  (less  than 
80 %  of  all  volumes  imported  to  the  Community  during  the  RIP),  the  residual 
dumping  margin  was  determined  in  accordance  with  Article  18  of  the  basic 
Regulation, i.e. on the basis of facts available. 

2.  Dumping of imports during the investigation period – Country specific findings  

India 

Preliminary remarks 

(34)  Three out of five known exporting producers co-operated with the investigation. The 
two  non-cooperating  companies  account  for  more  than  80  %  of  India's  total  PET 
production and around 25 % of India's exports to the Community. The share of Indian 
exports to the Community in relation to Community consumption amounted to 0.3 % 
in  the  RIP.  Two  of  the  three  cooperating  exporters  hold  price  undertakings  with 
respect to their PET exports to the Community, which were concluded pursuant to the 
original investigation.  

(35)  With regards to two cooperating companies it was found that their Community export 
prices  were  in  compliance  with  the  minimum  prices  set  by  the  undertakings.  These 
prices  clearly  exceeded  the  ones  charged  for  sales  to  third  countries'  markets.  The 
latter  sales  were  made  in  much  larger  quantities  than  Community  exports.  This 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
indicates  that  the  prices  charged  to  Community  customers  do  not  reflect  the  normal 
pricing behaviour of the Indian price undertaking holders. 

Dumping margin 

(36)  With  respect  to  exports  to  the  Community,  the  dumping  margins  of  the  three 
cooperating exporting producers were found to be in a range between no dumping and 
17 %. It should be noted that the exporting  producer with no dumping holds a  price 
undertaking and that the quantity of its Community exports was very small (less than 
10 %) in proportion to its third country exports. In the original investigation including 
subsequent reviews dumping margins were in a range between 14.7 % and 51.5 %.13 
However,  as  the  imported  quantities  were  indeed  very  small,  the  main  focus  of  the 
analysis is on the likelihood of recurrence of dumping. 

Indonesia 

Preliminary remarks 

(37)  The  investigation  established  that  there  were  five  producers  of  PET  in  Indonesia 
during  the  RIP.  As  mentioned  in  recital  (16)  above,  three  companies  submitted 
completed questionnaire responses but only two companies accepted verification visits 
at their premises. As it was thus impossible to verify whether the data submitted by the 
third company in the questionnaire reply was correct, this company did not co-operate 
properly in the investigation within the meaning of Article 18 of the basic Regulation. 
The company was informed accordingly and was given the opportunity to comment on 
this finding.  

(38)  One of the cooperating companies had a very small quantity of sales to the EU market 
but these were made to one specialist user in the medical sector. Therefore, neither the 
volume  nor  the  unit  price  of  these  sales  was  considered  to  be  representative.  Apart 
from  this  very  small  volume,  no  other  sales  were  recorded  in  Eurostat  on  the  EU 
market originating from Indonesia. 

Normal value, export price and dumping margin  

(39)  As the two cooperating companies made no representative sales on the EU market in 
the RIP, and the Eurostat import statistics showed that there were no further imports 
from Indonesia, no dumping margin could be established. 

Malaysia 

Preliminary remarks 

(40)  Two Malaysian PET producers co-operated in the investigation. Only one of them had 
exports to the Community, representing 100 % of the total Malaysian exports of PET 
to the Community. Total imports of the product concerned from Malaysia were small, 
i.e. in the range of 2000-4000 tonnes when compared to the Community market as a 
whole.  

13 

Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  2604/2000,  27.11.2000,  recital  125  and  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No 
496/2002, 18.3.2002, recital 19. 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Normal value  

(41)  For the exporting producer with exports to the Community in the RIP, domestic sales 
of  the  like  product  were  representative.  Normal  value  was  based  on  prices  paid  or 
payable,  in  the  ordinary  course  of  trade,  by  independent  customers  in  Malaysia,  in 
accordance with Article 2(1) of the basic Regulation. 

(42)  The  investigation  revealed  that  the  company's  reported  cost  of  manufacturing  was 
underestimated  as  factory  overhead  costs  (including  depreciation,  rent  expenses, 
salaries and maintenance) actually incurred during the RIP were reclassified to SG&A 
expenses. The company argued that this practise was made in order to reflect the low 
capacity utilisation rate of its production facilities. However, actual costs incurred do 
also  include  the  reclassified  factory  overhead  costs.  The  fact  that  the  company 
operated at a fraction of its full capacity of production does not mean that costs arising 
from such facilities are not incurred. Indeed, such costs were listed in the company's 
accounting  records  and  since  they  were  directly  linked  to  production  of  the  like 
product, a correction of the reported cost of manufacturing had to be completed.  

Export price  

(43)  For  the  same  exporting  producer,  export  prices  were  established  on  the  basis  of  the 
prices  actually  paid  by  unrelated  customers  in  the  Community  in  accordance  with 
Article 2(8) of the basic Regulation.  

Comparison 

(44)  To  ensure  a  fair  comparison,  allowances  were  made  for  differences  in  transport, 
insurance, handling, loading and ancillary cost and credit costs where applicable and 
justified.  

Dumping margin  

(45)  To calculate the dumping margin, the weighted average normal values were compared 
to the weighted average export price to the Community of the product concerned. 

(46)  This  comparison  showed  the  existence  of  dumping  of  around  5  %  for  the  one 
exporting  producer  that  exported  to  the  Community  in  the  RIP.  However,  as  the 
imported  quantities  were  indeed  very  small,  the  main  focus  of  the  analysis  is  on  the 
likelihood of recurrence of dumping. 

Korea 

Preliminary remarks 

(47) 

It  is  recalled  that  the  interim  review  was  limited  to  dumping  as  concerns  Daehan 
Synthetic  Fiber  Co  Ltd.,  SK  Chemicals  Co  Ltd.  and  KP  Chemicals  Corp.  Full 
questionnaire replies were received from these three companies. 

(48)  Moreover,  companies  related  to  one  of  the  aforementioned  exporting  producers  also 
made  themselves  known.  Thus,  questionnaire  replies  were  also  received  from  the 
exporting producers Honam Petrochemicals and Huvis Corp. 

EN 

14 

   EN 

 
(49)  Prior  to  the  on-the-spot  investigation,  Daehan  Synthetic  Fiber  Co  Ltd.  informed  the 
Commission  of  its  decision  to  cease  the  production  of  PET  in  Korea.  Consequently, 
the company decided to cancel the planned verification visit. Since this company thus 
failed to cooperate within the meaning of Article 18 of the basic Regulation, it should 
be subject to the residual dumping margin.  

(50)  According to the request, there are ten producers in Korea which have the capacity to 
produce PET. Out of these ten producers, five (including Daehan Synthetic Fiber Co 
Ltd) made themselves known to the Commission and submitted questionnaire replies 
to  the  Commission.  Out  of  the  other  five  non-cooperating  producers,  one  had  co-
operated with the Commission in the original investigation. 

(51)  The  export  volumes  of  the  four  cooperating  exporting  producers  plus  the  unverified 
quantities exported by Daehan Synthetic Fiber Co Ltd. represented close to 100 % of 
all  Korean  exports  during  the  RIP  from  Korea  to  the  Community  as  recorded  by 
Eurostat. 

(52)  As seen from recitals (16) and (17), the four cooperating exporting producers that fully 

co-operated in the investigation were the following: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

SK Chemicals Co. Ltd., Seoul, 

Huvis Corp., Seoul (related to SK Chemicals Co Ltd.),  

KP Chemicals Corp., Seoul,  

Honam Petrochemicals Corp., Seoul (related to KP Chemicals Co Ltd).  

(53) 

In  order  to  avoid  any  circumvention  in  the  future,  dumping  margins  have  been 
calculated on a group-wide basis. 

Normal value  

(54)  For all  types  of  PET exported by the Korean exporting  producers, it was possible to 
establish normal value on the basis of the prices paid or payable in the ordinary course 
of trade by independent customers on the domestic market, in accordance with Article 
2(1) of the basic Regulation. 

Export price  

(55)  Two of the Korean exporting producers made export sales to the Community directly 
to  independent  customers,  via  related  companies  located  in  Korea  and  related 
importers  located  in  the  Community.  Consequently,  in  the  latter  situation,  a 
constructed  export  price  has  been  established  pursuant  to  Article  2(9)  of  the  basic 
Regulation.  

Comparison 

(56)  Allowances  for  differences  in  transport,  insurance,  handling  charges,  commissions, 
credit, packing, customs duties (duty drawback) and bank charges have been granted 
where justified and duly supported by evidence.  

EN 

15 

   EN 

 
Allowance for duty draw back and credit cost 

(57)  Two  of  the  Korean  exporting  producers  made  a  claim  for  duty  drawback  on  the 
grounds  that  import  charges  were  borne  by  the  like  product  when  intended  for 
consumption  in  the  exporting  country  but  were  refunded  when  the  product  was  sold 
for export to the Community. In each case, the amount claimed was found to be higher 
than  the  amount  of  duty  borne  by  the  like  product  in  the  domestic  market  and 
therefore,  the  allowances  were  adjusted  accordingly.  The  methodology  used  in  the 
present investigation was compatible with the conditions set out in Article 2(10)(b) of 
the basic Regulation insofar as it accurately reflected the actual import level of duties 
borne by the like product.  

(58) 

In  addition,  both  exporting  producers  claimed  credit  costs  on  the  basis  of  the  actual 
credit period taken by customers under the ‘open account’ payment system used on the 
Korean  domestic  market.  It  was  found  that  under  such  a  system,  generally,  the 
exporting producers did not actually grant specific credit periods and furthermore, the 
credit periods taken could not be accurately determined, as receipts could not be linked 
to specific invoices. In these circumstances, these allowances could not be granted. 

Dumping margin  

(59)  As provided by Article 2(11) and (12) of the basic Regulation, the weighted average 
normal values of each type of the product concerned exported to the Community were 
compared  to  the  weighted  average  export  price  of  each  corresponding  type  of  the 
product concerned. 

(60)  This  comparison  showed  the  existence  of  de  minimis  dumping  for  the  exporting 

producers that exported to the Community in the RIP.  

Taiwan 

Preliminary remarks  

(61)  Two  out  of  four  known  exporting  producers  co-operated  with  the  investigation.  The 
two  cooperating  companies  account  for  more  than  80  %  of  Taiwan's  total  PET 
production  and  99  %  of  Taiwan's  total  exports  to  the  Community.  The  share  of 
Taiwan's exports to the Community in relation to Community consumption amounted 
to 1.2 % as regards the RIP. 

(62)  A  third  Taiwanese  exporting  producer  initially  filed  a  questionnaire  response  but 
ceased further co-operation prior to the on-the-spot verification. The company's failure 
to  allow  Commission  officials  to  verify  its  questionnaire  response  on-spot  is 
tantamount  to  not  cooperating  with  the  investigation.  By  virtue  of  Article  18  of  the 
basic Regulation this company should be subject to the residual dumping margin.  

Normal value 

(63)  For all types of PET exported by the Taiwanese exporting producers, it was possible to 
establish  normal  values  on  the  basis  of  the  prices  paid  or  payable  in  the  ordinary 
course of trade by independent customers on the domestic market, in accordance with 
Article 2(1) of the basic Regulation. 

EN 

16 

   EN 

 
Export price  

(64)  Both  cooperating  Taiwanese  exporting  producers  made  direct  export  sales  to 
independent  Community  customers.  Export  prices  could  be  assessed  on  the  basis  of 
the  prices  paid  or  payable  by  these  customers  according  to  Article  2(8)  of  the  basic 
Regulation. 

Comparison 

(65)  Allowances  for  differences  in  transport,  insurance,  handling  charges,  credit,  packing 

and bank charges were applied.  

Dumping margin  

(66)  As provided by Article 2(11) and (12) of the basic Regulation, the weighted average 
normal values of each type of the product concerned exported to the Community were 
compared  to  the  weighted  average  export  price  of  each  corresponding  type  of  the 
product concerned.  

(67)  On the basis of such comparison, the dumping margin found was below the de minimis 
margin  in  the  case  of  Far  Eastern  Textile.  In  case  of  Shinkong,  the  dumping  margin 
amounted  to  6.5  %.  However,  for  Far  Eastern  Textile,  the  investigation  showed  that 
the  comparison  of  the  weighted  average  normal  value  with  the  weighted  average 
export  prices  did  not  reflect  the  full  degree  of  dumping  being  practised.  Indeed,  the 
investigation  showed  that  significant  volumes  (around  25  %  of  all  exports  to  the 
Community)  were  made  at  significantly  low  prices  and  were  concentrated  on  one 
customer.  In  addition,  exports  to  all  Community  destinations  were  made  at 
significantly  decreased  prices  during  the  last  four  months  of  the  RIP  in  comparison 
with  the  first  eight  months  of  the  RIP.  Therefore,  another  comparison  methodology 
had to be applied. An important difference was found between the dumping margins 
resulting from a comparison average-to-average against the comparison transaction-to-
average. With regard to the transaction-to-transaction comparison, it was not found to 
be  an  appropriate  alternative  comparison  method  because  the  process  of  selecting 
individual transactions in order to make such a comparison was considered arbitrary in 
this case. Thus, a comparison on the basis of the transaction-to-average was made in 
accordance with Article 2(11) of the basic Regulation. Thus a clear pattern of exports 
differing by customer and by time existed. 

(68)  On  that  basis,  the  dumping  margin  resulting  from  the  transaction-to-average 
comparison  is  considered  for  the  sake  of  the  further  analysis  on  the  continuation  of 
dumping. In case of Shinkong, the difference between the dumping margins calculated 
according  to  the  two  methodologies  was  not  significant  and  no  patterns  were  found. 
Therefore,  the  dumping  margin  resulting  from  the  average-to-average  comparison 
should be considered for that company.  

(69)  Subsequently,  the  dumping  margins  established  for  the  two  cooperating  exporting 

producers are as follows: 

Far Eastern Textile Ltd 

Shinkong Synthetic Fibers Corp. 

3.5 % 

6.5 % 

EN 

17 

   EN 

 
When  expressed  on  a  specific  basis,  these  percentage  margins  correspond  to  the 
following specific duties: 

Far Eastern Textile Ltd 

Shinkong Synthetic Fibers Corp. 

36.3 EUR/t 

67 EUR/t 

The  residual  duty  should  be  based  on  the  presently  applicable  residual  duty  for 
Taiwan given that no change in circumstances was found in that respect. It amounts 
to 143.4 EUR/t. 

(70)  As  regards  the  two  companies  that  failed  to  co-operate  with  the  investigation,  it  is 
considered that information available should be applied in accordance with Article 18 
of the basic Regulation. In fact, these companies should be allocated the residual duty.  

Thailand 

Preliminary remarks 

(71)  Only one Thai producer of PET co-operated in the investigation and had no exports to 
the Community during the RIP. According to Eurostat, import volumes originating in 
Thailand were negligible during the RIP. However, it is known that there were at least 
three other PET producers in Thailand during the RIP which did not co-operate in the 
investigation. 

(72) 

In the absence of exports of PET to the Community by the only cooperating producer, 
no dumping calculation could be made for the cooperating producer.  

3.  Developments of imports should measures be repealed  

Preliminary remarks 

(73) 

In order to establish whether dumping would be likely to recur should the measures be 
repealed, the pricing behaviour of the cooperating exporting producers to other export 
markets  and  their  production,  capacity  and  stocks  were  examined.  The  analysis  was 
based  on  the  information  available,  i.e.  the  information  provided  and  verified  in  the 
questionnaire  replies  by  the  cooperating  producers  mentioned  in  section  A.4.  An 
analysis  was  also  made  as  to  the  pricing  behaviour,  production  and  production 
capacity of other exporting producers in the countries concerned by the proceedings. 
This  analysis  was  based  on  market  intelligence  data  supplied  by  the  Community 
industry  and  exporting  producers,  Eurostat  imports  statistics  and  when  available, 
export statistics from the countries concerned.  

India  

Preliminary remarks 

(74)  The likely scenario of what would happen if measures were repealed has been based 

on 

– 

the verified questionnaire replies by the three cooperating exporting producers 
that fully co-operated with the investigation and  

EN 

18 

   EN 

 
– 

a  market  intelligence  report  produced  by  an  independent  consultancy  and 
submitted by the applicant. 

Relationship between prices in the Community and prices within India 

(75)  Prices  in  the  Community  were  generally  lower  than  Indian  domestic  prices.  Exports 
are  likely  to  be  made  at  prices  that  are  at  least  slightly  lower  than  the  current 
Community  prices.  Should  measures  be  repealed,  it  is  likely  that  exports  to  the 
Community  would  be  made  at  dumped  prices  assuming  that  the  same  price  levels 
would be maintained.  

Relationship between export prices to third countries and prices within India 

(76) 

Indian export prices to third countries were generally lower than its domestic prices. 
This price difference amounted to up to 24 % of the export price level. This indicates 
that  exports  to  the  Community  may  be  made  at  equally  dumped  prices  should 
measures be repealed. The margins found are indeed higher than the current level of 
dumping to the EC found as described above. It is noted that (1) this current level of 
dumping found to the EC was established on the basis of small export volumes and (2) 
that some of these exports were made under the terms of a price undertaking which has 
had a correcting effect on the level of export prices. Should measures be repealed, it is 
thus probable that the margin of dumping would even be higher. 

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

(77) 

Indian  export  prices  to  third  countries  were  generally  below  the  price  level  in  the 
Community. Therefore if measures were repealed, Indian exporters are likely to export 
PET in larger quantities to the Community and at prices approaching those charged to 
third countries during the  RIP. As a consequence, it appears likely  that  the dumping 
established  with  regard  to  exports  to  the  Community  for  the  RIP  may  even  increase 
should measures be repealed. 

Unused capacities and stocks 

(78)  Considering spare capacities, it is reiterated that the two largest Indian producers did 
not co-operate with the investigation. It was found though that their overall capacities 
amounted  to  around  23  %  of  the  Community  consumption  during  the  RIP.  On  the 
basis  of  information  available  the  unused  part  of  their  capacities  is  substantial, 
reaching  between  80,000  and  130,000  tonnes.  In  addition,  the  three  cooperating 
producers also dispose  of some  unused capacities.  To  conclude, there are substantial 
spare  capacities  available  in  India.  The  Indian  market  is  also  characterised  by  an 
excess of supply. In this context, producers may choose to redirect excess quantities to 
the  Community  at  continuously  and  increasingly  dumped  prices  if  measures  are 
repealed.  

Conclusion on India 

(79)  Should measures be repealed, it appears that unused capacities are likely to be directed 
to  the  Community.  Given  the  price  relationships  found,  particularly  the  price 

EN 

19 

   EN 

 
relationship  between  prices  in  the  Community  and  prices  within  India,  such 
Community exports are likely to be made at dumped prices.  

Indonesia 

Relationship between prices in the Community and prices within Indonesia 

(80)  Prices  in  the  Community  were  generally  higher  than  those  achieved  by  the  two 
cooperating  Indonesian  exporting  producers  on  their  domestic  market.  This  would 
suggest  that  it  would  be  an  attractive  alternative  for  the  Indonesian  exporting 
producers  to  shift  sales  to  the  Community  should  the  anti-dumping  measures  be 
repealed.  

Relationship between export prices to third countries and prices within Indonesia 

(81)  For  Polypet,  which  was  operating  at  a  loss  on  all  markets,  domestic  prices  were  not 
seen as reliable and hence a normal value had to be constructed based on its cost of 
production plus a normal profit. A profit margin of 7 %, equivalent to the margin used 
in the original investigation was used for the calculations. A 25.0 % price difference 
was  identified  between  this  constructed  normal  value  and  the  export  prices  to  third 
countries.  The  fact  that  export  prices  were  lower  than  normal  value  by  this  amount 
suggests  a  likelihood  of  recurrence  of  dumping  on  the  Community  market  should 
measures be repealed. 

(82)  Petnesia  was  operating  at  around  breakeven  during  the  RIP  and  normal  value  was 
therefore  calculated  using  both  domestic  sales  and  a  constructed  normal  value  using 
the same method as described above for Polypet. The difference between the normal 
values and the export price to third countries was between 5-10 % (for these methods). 
The  fact  that  export  prices  were  lower  than  normal  value  by  this  amount  suggests  a 
likelihood  of  recurrence  of  dumping  on  the  Community  market  should  measures  be 
repealed. 

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

(83)  The sales prices of the Community producers for sales in the EU were established at 
€1058 in the RIP. In the same period, the sales prices of the Indonesian exporters were 
€911  to  third  country  markets.  Therefore  sales  on  the  EU  market  were  16  %  higher 
than on other markets. This would suggest that it would be an attractive alternative for 
the  Indonesian  exporting  producers  to  shift  sales  to  the  Community  should  the  anti-
dumping measures be repealed. 

Unused capacities and stocks 

(84)  As mentioned above, five producers were operating in Indonesia during the RIP. The 
market  intelligence  report  shows  324.000  tonnes  of  production  in  Indonesia  and  the 
cooperating  producers  represented  around  47  %  of  this.  Information  from  the 
cooperating  producers  and  market  intelligence  suggest  that  unused  capacities  were 
around 10 % of total capacity or around 37.000 tonnes. This represents around 1.5 % 
of Community consumption. 

(85) 

Information from the cooperating producers showed that stocking of PET was low.  

EN 

20 

   EN 

 
(86) 

In respect to unused capacities and stocks, the investigation showed that a significant 
volume of PET could be made available for sale on the Community market. 

Conclusion on Indonesia 

(87)  The  assessment  of  the  above  mentioned  factors  showed  that  there  was  a  substantial 
difference in price between those realised by the Indonesian producers in third country 
markets and their normal value.  

(88)  Furthermore, the export prices of the cooperating exporting producers on third country 
markets and the Indonesian domestic market are considerably lower than Community 
industry sales prices in the Community. Taken together with the availability of spare 
capacity,  there  is  therefore  an  incentive  for  the  Indonesian  exporting  producers  to 
increase  sales  to  the  Community  market  should  measures  be  repealed  and  that  these 
sales are likely to be dumped.  

Malaysia 

Preliminary remarks 

(89)  While the total estimated production and sales of the product concerned by Malaysian 
producers  is  estimated  at  around  120.000  tonnes,  the  total  consumption  of  PET  in 
Malaysia  is  only  around  60.000  tonnes.  With  a  domestic  market  that  is  capable  of 
consuming only about half of the total production and sales, it is clear that Malaysian 
producers of the product concerned are in general dependent on export markets for the 
continuation of operations at current capacities. 

Relationship between the domestic prices level and the price level in the Community 

(90)  The  investigation  revealed  that  domestic  prices  were  about  10  to  20  %  lower  than 
average prices charged on the Community market. There is no reason to conclude that 
this would change should the measures be repealed.  

Relationship between the domestic prices level and export prices to third countries 

(91)  The  information  provided  by  both  the  cooperating  exporters  mentioned  above  in 
recital  (17),  showed  that  exports  to  third  countries  were  made  in  large  volumes 
accounting for 67 % of total sales in the RIP.  

(92)  For  one  Malaysian  exporter,  which  had  exported  to  the  Community,  the  weighted 
average  export  prices  to  third  countries  were  below  the  weighted  average  normal 
values,  which  were  established  for  its  dumping  calculation,  and  also  appeared  to  be 
lower  than  the  sales  prices  to  the  Community.  This  indicates  that  this  Malaysian 
exporter  also  sells  its  PET  at  probably  dumped  prices  to  third  country  markets,  and 
that the price difference is even higher than the one found on the European market.  

(93)  For  the  other  exporter,  which  had  no  exports  to  the  Community  in  the  RIP,  the 
investigation revealed that average export prices to third countries were below the cost 
of  production,  which  also  indicates  that  the  like  product  is  also  dumped  on  third 
markets. 

EN 

21 

   EN 

 
(94)  The above indicates a strong likelihood of a recurrence of dumping on exports to the 

Community should the measures be repealed. 

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

(95)  The  information  provided  by  the  cooperating  exporters  mentioned  above  in  recital 
(17), showed that exports to third countries were made at a weighted average export 
price significantly below the Community industry sales prices in the Community.  

(96)  With  the  prevailing  price  level,  it  can  therefore  be  concluded  that  the  Community 
would be considered as an attractive market for producing exporters in Malaysia. On 
this basis it is considered that there would be an economic incentive for a shift from 
exports  to  third  countries  to  the  more  profitable  Community  market  should  the 
measures be repealed. Should sales shift to the Community these are also likely to be 
at dumped prices. 

Unused capacities and stocks 

(97)  The  investigation  revealed  that  the  capacity  utilisation  of  the  two  sole  cooperating 
producers was very low during the RIP, i.e. in the range of between 30-80 %. On this 
basis,  it  can  be  concluded  that  there  are  significant  spare  capacities  in  Malaysia. 
Should measures be repealed, there would be an incentive for the Malaysian exporting 
producers  to  use  this  spare  capacity  and  increase  export  sales,  notably  to  the 
Community. 

(98)  The two cooperating exporting producers were found to have a normal level of stock. 
It  is  however  noted  that  stocks  cannot  be  considered  a  meaningful  indicator  because 
the  production  of  PET  in  Malaysia  is  mostly  based  on  orders  from  customers. 
Therefore, stocks are mainly made up of PET that is waiting to be shipped to already 
known customers. 

Conclusion on Malaysia 

(99)  The  investigation  has  shown  that  one  of  the  cooperating  producers  continued  its 

dumping practices despite the measures in force.  

(100)  Furthermore,  the  weighted  average  export  prices  of  the  cooperating  exporting 
producers on third country markets and the prices of sales on the domestic market are 
also  considerably  lower  than  the  prevailing  price  level  in  the  Community.  Taken 
together  with  the  low  capacity  utilisation,  there  is  therefore  an  incentive  for  the 
Malaysian  exporting  producers  to  shift  to  the  Community  market  at  likely  dumped 
prices should measures be repealed.  

Korea  

Relationship between prices in the Community and prices within Korea  

(101)  In recital (60) above, it has been explained that the dumping margins found for all four 
of the cooperating exporting producers were below de minimis. It is recalled that these 
exports took place during the period when two of the cooperating exporters were able 
to  export  at  zero-duty  to  the  Community.  As  the  exports  from  these  four  exporting 

EN 

22 

   EN 

 
producers  represented  close  to  100  %  of  all  imports  of  PET  during  the  RIP  (as 
reported by Eurostat), there seems to be a low risk of recurrence of dumping by any of 
the exporting producers which co-operated in the investigation.  

(102)  The investigation has shown that prices on the Korean domestic market charged by the 
cooperating companies are higher than those charged by the Community industry on 
the Community market. There is no reason to believe that those domestic prices found 
for  the  cooperating  companies  were  not  representative  or  that  non-cooperating 
exporting producers sell at significantly lower prices on the domestic market than the 
cooperating  companies.  Moreover,  it  is  likely  that  the  non-cooperating  companies 
which did not sell to the EC would sell at low prices to regain lost market share on the 
EC  market.  This  suggests  a  likelihood  of  recurrence  of  dumping  from  the  non-
cooperating companies, should measures be repealed. It is also noted that these non-
cooperating  companies  exported  to  the  community  in  the  original  investigation  in 
quantities that were not insignificant.  

Relationship between export prices to third countries and prices within the Republic 
of Korea 

(103)  For  the  cooperating  exporting  producers,  a  price  difference  between  the  prevailing 
price  level  on  the  Korean  domestic  market  and  their  exports  to  third  countries  of 
around  5  %  was  found.  Still,  given  that  they  have  had  the  possibility  to  export 
unlimited quantities of PET to the Community at zero duty, the risk for trade diversion 
to the Community appears to be rather low. 

(104)  Export prices to third countries were also available on a general basis, including such 
prices  that  were  charged  by  not  cooperating  producers.  The  latter  prices  were  lower 
than the domestic prices charged by cooperating producers. This price difference again 
shows that exports to the Community may be made at dumped prices should measures 
be repealed. 

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

(105)  The investigation showed that the cooperating exporting producers in Korea have sold 
significant  quantities  to  third  countries.  Still,  for  SK  Chemicals  and  KP  Chemicals, 
given  that  they  have  had  the  possibility  to  export  unlimited  quantities  of  PET  to  the 
Community  at  zero  duty,  the  risk  of  trade  diversion  by  the  cooperating  exporting 
producers appears to be rather low.  

(106)  For  non-cooperating  exporting  producers,  information  from  a  market  intelligence 

report and information from the Korean statistical office had been used.  

(107)  When  summarizing  the  overall  exports  to  third  countries  by  Korean  exporting 
producers  in the  RIP  (727  Kt)  as  reported  by Korean statistical office and deducting 
the exports by the cooperating exporting producers (320 Kt), the total exports by non-
co-operating exporting producers have been calculated to 407 Kt.  

(108)  The  quantities  exported  to  each  destination  by  the  non-cooperating  exporting 
producers were established by taking the overall exports by destination and deducting 
exports by the cooperating exporting producers by destination. The five destinations to 

EN 

23 

   EN 

 
which  the  non-cooperating  exporting  producers  are  assumed  to  have  exported  the 
largest  quantities  are  the  PRC  followed  by  Ukraine,  Japan,  Tunisia  and  the  Islamic 
Republic of Iran. 

(109)  On the basis of export values provided by the Korean statistical office, the weighted 
average  price  to  the  five  destinations  with  the  largest  exports  has  been  calculated  as 
EUR  759/tonne.  Whereas  this  price  is  based  on  rough  unverified  statistical  data 
(partially  containing  statistical  values  by  the  cooperating  exporting  producers,  and 
possibly  containing  exports  prices  to  related  companies  as  well  as  prices  excluding 
ocean freight), the average price remains significantly lower than the average import 
prices (at CIF level) to the Community (about 25 %). 

(110)  On this basis, i.e. given the apparent significant volumes of exports to third countries 
by  non-cooperating  exporting  producers  and  the  fact  that  prices  to  the  five  largest 
destinations  of  the  non  cooperating  exporting  producers  are  significantly  lower  than 
the average import price into the Community, there appears to be a significant risk of 
trade diversion by non cooperating exporting producers should measures be allowed to 
lapse. Given the significant dumping margin found (55 %) for the biggest of the non 
cooperating exporting producers in the original investigation, it is highly likely that the 
non-cooperating  exporting  producers  would  resume  their  dumping  practises,  should 
measures be repealed.  

Unused capacities and stocks 

(111)  For the cooperating exporting producers, they were all found to have a normal level of 
stock  and  were  operating  at  almost  full  capacity.  Thus,  the  risk  of  recurrence  of 
dumping on this basis appears to be very limited. 

(112)  For the non-cooperating exporting producers, the capacity was established on the basis 
of the overall capacity of Korean exporting producers given by market intelligence. No 
information  is  available  on  the  level  of  stock.  When  subtracting  the  capacity  of  the 
cooperating  exporting  producer  from  the  overall  Korean  capacity,  an  estimated 
capacity  for  the  non-cooperating  exporting  producers  has  been  calculated.  This 
capacity  has  been  estimated  to  be  at  around  550  Kt  which  would  correspond  to  a 
market share of 23 % of the total Community consumption. 

(113)  Based  on  the  market  intelligence  report,  unused  capacity  for  Korea  as  a  whole  is 
estimated at around 200.000 tonnes. Thus, it cannot be excluded that there is a risk of 
recurrence of dumping by non-cooperating exporting producers with unused capacity 
should measures be repealed. 

Conclusion on Korea 

(114)  Although  for  the  four  cooperating  companies  there  seems  to  be  no  apparent  risk  of 
recurrence  of  dumping,  the  investigation  has  shown  that  for  the  non-cooperating 
companies  a  real  risk  of  recurrence  of  dumping  exists.  This  was  shown  by  a 
comparison of the prevailing price level on the Korean domestic market and the price 
level  on  the  Community  market  as  well  as  by  a  comparison  of  that  domestic  price 
level with the average export price level to third country markets. 

EN 

24 

   EN 

 
(115)  Moreover, a significant threat of trade diversion can indeed be found when comparing 
the  significant  volumes  of  PET  that  they  sell  to  third  countries,  at  prices  which  are 
significantly lower than the prices at which PET is imported to the Community. Given 
the  history  of  dumping  of  those  non-cooperating  companies  (at  55  %  in  the  original 
investigation),  there  is  no  reason  to  believe  that  those  companies  would  not  resume 
their dumping practices should measures be allowed to lapse.  

Taiwan 

Relationship between prices in the Community and prices within Taiwan 

(116)  Taiwanese  domestic  prices  of  cooperating  and  non-cooperating  exporting  producers 
were  generally  lower  than  prices  in  the  Community.  The  former  prices  were  indeed 
profitable.  This  means  that  the  Community  price  level  would  also  be  very  attractive 
from  a  Taiwanese  exporting  producer's  point  of  view.  Given  the  price  relationship 
found,  Taiwanese  export  prices  are  also  likely  to  be  significantly  lower  than  the 
averages prices charged by the Community industry. 

Relationship between export prices to third countries and prices within Taiwan 

(117)  In case of one cooperating producer, prices to third countries were significantly lower 
than  Taiwanese  domestic  prices.  In  the  case  of  the  other  cooperating  producer  that 
mainly sold to Japan, export prices to third countries exceeded domestic sales prices. 
On that basis, it cannot be ruled out that export prices to the Community will follow 
the  trend  of  Taiwanese  prices  to  other  countries  (except  Japan)  once  measures  are 
repealed. Therefore, dumping is likely to recur under such a scenario. This assessment 
is  based  on  the  data  supplied  by  cooperating  producers  as  no  other  data  could  be 
retrieved in this regard. 

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

(118)  Taiwanese export prices to third countries were significantly below the price level in 
the  Community.  Taiwanese  exports  to  other  countries  were  not  subject  to  anti-
dumping  duties  during  the  RIP.  Should  measures  be  repealed  it  cannot  be  excluded 
that export prices to the Community would follow the trend of prices to other markets. 
Under  such  circumstances,  future  exports  to  the  Community  would  be  made  at 
dumped  prices.  Again,  this  assessment  is  based  on  data  provided  by  cooperating 
producers.  However,  as  there  is  no  information  available  indicating  that  the  export 
prices to third countries or domestic prices found for the cooperating companies would 
not be representative for all Taiwanese exporting producers, it can also be concluded 
that future exports to the EC from the non-cooperating companies would be likely to 
be made at dumped prices. 

Unused capacities and stocks 

(119)  While one cooperating company made full use of its capacity during the RIP, the other 
one  did  not  use  a  significant  quantity  of  its  total  capacity.  The  companies  not 
cooperating with the investigation seem to have unused capacities in a range between 
400,000  and  500,000  tonnes.  This  amounts  to  around  20  %  of  the  Community 
consumption  during  the  RIP.  Indeed,  given  the  attractive  price  level  on  the 

EN 

25 

   EN 

 
Community  market,  such  unused  capacities  are  likely  to  be  redirected  to  the 
Community should measures be repealed. 

Conclusion on Taiwan 

(120)  With  a  view  to  the  unused  capacities,  it  appears  that  such  capacities  are  likely  to  be 
redirected  to  the  Community  should  measures  be  repealed.  Moreover,  such 
Community exports are likely to be made at dumped prices given the low price level 
for exports to third country markets, with the exception of Japan.  Community prices 
are  likely  to  be  put  under  pressure  once  larger  quantities  are  imported  into  the 
Community market. Such a downwards price trend is likely to exacerbate the dumping 
established for the RIP. 

Thailand 

Preliminary remarks 

(121)  As  outlined  in  recital  (71)  it  is  known  that  there  were  at  least  three  other  PET 
producers  in  Thailand  during  the  RIP  which  did  not  co-operate  in  the  investigation. 
For  those  non-cooperating  producers,  the  information  available  from  Eurostat  and 
other sources were analysed. 

(122)  The  information  on  stocks  and  sales  to  third  markets  refers  only  to  the  cooperating 
exporting producer. It was possible to obtain data on the overall production capacity in 
Thailand and to make an estimate of the production volume of all exporting producers 
in  Thailand  based  on  market  intelligence.  In  this  respect,  it  was  considered  that 
findings  for  non-cooperating  companies  could  not  be  more  favourable  than  those 
established for cooperating companies. 

Relationship between the domestic prices level and price level in the Community  

(123)  The  investigation  revealed  that  domestic  prices  were  10-20  %  lower  than  average 
prices  charged  on  the  Community  market.  There  is  no  reason  to  conclude  that  this 
would change should the measures be repealed.  

Relationship between the domestic prices level and export prices to third countries. 

(124)  The information provided by the cooperating producing exporter mentioned above in 
recital  (17)  which  did  not  export  to  the  Community,  showed  that  exports  to  third 
countries were made in large volumes accounting for over 80 % of total sales in the 
RIP.  It  was  also  found  that  the  average  export  prices  to  third  countries  were  below 
cost,  which  indicates  that  the  product  is  sold  at  dumped  prices  on  third  country 
is  no 
markets.  Moreover,  concerning 
information available to indicate that their pricing behaviour is different regarding the 
Thai domestic or third country markets and it can therefore be assumed that they also 
sell at lower prices to third countries than on their domestic market. 

the  non-cooperating  companies, 

there 

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

(125)  The  information  provided  by  the  cooperating  exporter  which  did  not  export  to  the 
Community, showed that exports to third countries were made at a weighted average 

EN 

26 

   EN 

 
export  price  significantly  below  the  Community  industry  sales  prices  in  the 
Community.  

(126)  Assuming that the prevailing price level in the Community would remain the same, it 
can  therefore  be  concluded  that  the  Community  would  be  a  considered  an  attractive 
market  for  producing  exporters  in  Thailand.  On  this  basis  it  is  considered  that  there 
would be an economic incentive for a shift from exports to third countries to the more 
profitable Community market should the measures be repealed. 

Unused capacities and stocks 

(127)  There are significant spare capacities in Thailand. The investigation revealed that the 
capacity utilisation of the cooperating exporting producer was found to be low during 
the RIP.  

(128)  According to the market intelligence report, the capacity level of the non-cooperating 
producing exporters is estimated at around 500.000 tonnes with a total production of 
around  430.000.  Based  on  these  figures  the  spare  capacity  would  amount  to 
approximately  70.000  tonnes.  This  spare  capacity  would  amount  to  around  2.9  %  of 
the  total  Community  consumption,  should  it  be  directed  towards  sales  on  the 
Community market.  

(129)  Overall,  market  intelligence  data  suggests  that  the  domestic  market  in  Thailand  can 
absorb  less  than  94.000  tonnes  or  25  %  of  the  domestic  production  of  PET.  Under 
these  circumstances,  Thai  producers  of  the  product  concerned  are  heavily  dependent 
on  export  sales  for  the  continuation  of  operation  at  current  capacity.  Under  these 
circumstances,  there  is  a  strong  likelihood  that  exports  to  the  EC  would  increase 
should  the  measures  be  repealed.  Therefore,  it  cannot  be  excluded  that  the  Thai 
exporting  producers  would  lower  their  export  prices  to  the  Community  to  a  level  of 
export prices for other third country markets, in an effort to regain lost market, should 
measures be repealed. Thus, it cannot be excluded that there is a threat of recurrence of 
dumping by non-cooperating exporting producers should measures be repealed. 

(130)  The  cooperating  exporting  producer  was  found  to  have  a  normal  level  of  stock.  It  is 
however  noted  that  stocks  cannot  be  considered  a  meaningful  indicator  because  the 
production of PET in Thailand is mostly based on orders from customers. Therefore, 
stocks  are  mainly  made  up  of  PET  that  is  waiting  to  be  shipped  to  already  known 
customers. 

Conclusion on Thailand 

(131)  As  the  sole  cooperating  exporting  producer  did  not  export  to  the  Community,  the 
investigation  could  not  conclude  as  to  whether  dumping  continues  despite  the 
measures in force.  

(132)  However the weighted average export prices of the cooperating exporting producer on 
third country markets and the prices of sales on the domestic market were considerably 
lower than Community industry sales prices in the Community. The sales prices were 
below  the  cost  of  production.  This  is  considered  as  an  indicator  that  sales  would 
probably be made at dumped prices should measures be repealed. Moreover, given the 

EN 

27 

   EN 

 
attractive  price  level  in  the  Community,  there  is  an  incentive  for  the  Thai  exporting 
producers to sell to the Community market should the measures be repealed.  

(133)  For the non-cooperating exporting producers, a significant threat of trade diversion can 
be  found  when  comparing  the  domestic  demand  and  the  significant  volumes  of  PET 
that  are  sold  to  third  countries.  It  is  recalled,  as  stated  in  recital  (131)  and  onwards, 
that Thai producers are heavily dependent on exports and that there is a large overall 
spare capacity that could be diverted towards the Community. Given their history of 
dumping  (at  32.5  %  in  the  original  investigation),  it  appears  that  there  is  a  risk  for 
recurrence of dumping should measures be repealed. 

4. 

Conclusion on the likelihood of a continuation and/or recurrence of dumping 

India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Taiwan and Thailand 

(134)  On  the  basis  of  the  above,  it  is  concluded  that  dumping  is  likely  to  continue  and/or 
recur  should  measures  be  repealed.  Accordingly,  it  is  proposed  that  measures 
applicable  to  imports  of  PET  originating  in  India,  Indonesia,  Malaysia,  Taiwan  and 
Thailand should be maintained. 

Republic of Korea 

(135)  On  the basis  of  information collected for non-cooperating  exporting producers,  there 
seems to be a significant risk of recurrence of dumping. This risk is based primarily on 
data  suggesting  a  significant  production  and  export  capacity  by  the  non  cooperating 
exporting  producers  and,  as  demonstrated  by  dumping  practises  in  the  original 
investigation,  would  in  all  likelihood  materialise  as  exports  at  dumped  prices  to  the 
Community should measures be repealed. 

(136)  Accordingly, it is proposed that measures applicable to imports of PET originating in 

Korea should be maintained. 

D. 

LASTING NATURE OF CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES  

(137)  In  accordance  with  Article  11(3)  of  the  basic  Regulation,  it  was  also  examined 
whether the changed circumstances with respect to the original investigation regarding 
dumping could reasonably be considered to be of a lasting nature. 

Republic of Korea 

(138)  It is recalled that the scope of the interim review in respect of the Republic of Korea is 
limited  to  the  dumping  margins  for  the  three  companies  SK  Chemicals  Co  Ltd.,  KP 
Chemicals Corp. and Daehan Synthetic Fibres Co. Ltd. and their related companies.  

Cooperating exporting producers (SK Chemicals Co Ltd. and KP Chemicals Corp) 

(139)  For  the  cooperating  exporting  producers  which  exported  PET  to  the  Community 
during  the  RIP,  the  interim  review  showed  that  their  dumping  margin  remained  at  a 
de minimis  level.  The  main  reason  for  this  was  that  whilst  the  normal  values  and 
domestic  sales  prices  for  these  companies  had  risen  as  compared  to  the  data  in  the 
original  investigation,  sales  prices  on  the  Community  market  had  increased 
correspondingly. 

EN 

28 

   EN 

 
(140)  No  indications  were  found  suggesting  that  these  changes  leading  to  a  de  minimis 
dumping  margin  would  not  be  of  lasting  nature,  as  all  of  the  cooperating  exporting 
producers had been found to operate at a high capacity utilisation rate (above 90 %). 
Moreover,  none  of  them  had  any  plans  to  increase  their  production  capacity  in  the 
Republic of Korea. Indeed one of them, SK Chemicals, had set up a production plant 
within the Community and is more likely to decrease its exports from the Republic of 
Korea. 

Other exporting producers (Daehan Synthetic Fibres Co. Ltd) 

(141)  For the exporting producer Daehan, which, as stated in Recital (49) above, eventually 
chose not to cooperate in the investigation, none of the facts related to this company 
could be verified.  

(142)  Thus, the conclusion for this company had to be based on facts available in accordance 
with  Article  18  of  the  basic  Regulation,  i.e.  on  the  basis  of  information  in  the 
complaint and information in the unverified questionnaire. 

Conclusion on Korea 

(143)  For the two cooperating exporting producer groups, SK Chemicals and KP Chemicals, 
the  circumstances  under  which  the  dumping  margins  have  been  calculated  in  this 
investigation can be considered to be of lasting nature. 

(144)  For  the  third  exporting  producer  Daehan  Synthetic  Fibres,  it  should  be  recalled  that 
this company did not cooperate and that the analysis therefore has to be based on facts 
available, suggesting that dumping continue. Under these circumstances this company 
should be subject to the residual duty as established in the original investigation and 
confirmed in the most recent review. 

Taiwan 

(145)  In the present proceeding, only two Taiwanese exporting producers co-operated. The 
analysis  on  the  lasting  nature  of  changed  circumstances  is  therefore  limited  to  these 
two companies. 

(146)  Far Eastern Textiles has been subject to a zero duty since Council Regulation (EC) No 
83/2005 was adopted14. The other cooperating exporting producer, Shinkong Synthetic 
Fibres, was allocated a dumping margin of 3.1 % by the same Regulation. 

(147)  On  the  basis  of  the  analysis  on  dumping  carried  out  for  the  RIP,  changed  dumping 
margins of 3.5 % for Far Eastern and 6.5 % for Shinkong have been established. 

(148)  For the two cooperating producers which exported to the Community during the RIP, 
there is no reason to believe that the nature of the changes between the current and the 
previous  investigations,  particularly  the  changes  in  export  prices  to  the  Community 
and normal values that both led to the revised dumping margins, are not of a lasting 
nature.  With  regard  to  the  company  for  which  a  pattern  of  dumping  was  found,  the 
investigation  showed  that  the  company  had  sold  significant  quantities  to  a  new 

14 

OJ L 19, 21.1.2005, p. 6, recital 58. 

EN 

29 

   EN 

 
                                                 
customer at a price that was considerably below its general export price level. As the 
company did not state that it will cease selling to this customer or that it will adapt its 
export prices, it can be concluded that the pattern will subsist. Moreover, this company 
made  almost  full  use  of  its  capacity  during  the  RIP.  Thus,  major  changes  in  the 
company's  sales  pattern  which  would  have  an  impact  on  their  price  levels  with 
according effects on normal values and export prices are unlikely to happen.  

(149)  Regarding the second cooperating company, the changes observed were not huge, i.e. 
change  in  dumping  margins  from  3.1  %  to  6.5  %  due  to  slightly  more  pronounced 
changes in the normal values than in the export prices. This circumstance is not likely 
to change in the future because oil prices which are a major cost factor to produce PET 
are stabilising at a high level.  

(150)  Accordingly, it is considered that the dumping margins for both companies, calculated 
on the basis of the data provided in this investigation are reliable and that the changes 
found are deemed to be of a lasting nature. 

E. 

DEFINITION OF THE COMMUNITY INDUSTRY 

1. 

Community production 

(151)  PET is manufactured in the Community by the following companies: 

– 

– 

– 

Producers which requested the expiry review, supported it and co-operated in 
the investigation (see recital (154) below). 

Two  producers  which  have  requested  the  expiry  review  but  have  not  co-
operated in the current investigation. 

One  subsidiary  of  a  Korean  producer  located  in  the  Community  who  has 
cooperated in the investigation and has supported the request. 

(152)  PET  produced  by  all  these  companies  constitutes  the  total  Community  production 

within the meaning of Article 4(1) of the basic Regulation. 

2. 

Community industry 

(153)  The Commission examined whether the cooperating Community producers requesting 
or supporting the request for the expiry reviews represented a major proportion of the 
total Community production of PET. Those Community producers accounted for 88 % 
of the total Community production of PET. Those Community producers who did not 
fully  cooperate  were  excluded  from  the  definition  of  the  Community  industry.  The 
Commission  therefore  considered  that  these  fully  cooperating  Community  producers 
represent the Community industry within the meaning of Articles 4(1) and 5(4) of the 
basic  Regulation.  In  the  original  investigations,  the  Community  industry  represented 
more than 85 % of the total PET production in the Community at that time. 

(154)  The  following  twelve  Community  producers  partly  mentioned  in  recital  (16)  above 

constitute the Community industry: 

Voridian BV (The Netherlands), M & G Polimeri Italia Spa (Italy), Equipolymers Srl 
(Italy), La Seda de Barcelona SA (Spain), Novapet SA (Spain), Selenis Industria de 

EN 

30 

   EN 

 
Polimeros  SA  (Portugal),  Aussapol  Spa  (Italy),  Advansa  Ltd  (UK),  Wellman  BV 
(The  Netherlands),  Boryszew  subsidiary  Elana  Wse  (Poland),  V.P.I.  SA  (Greece), 
SK Eurochem (Poland). 

F. 

SITUATION ON THE COMMUNITY MARKET 

1. 

Consumption in the Community market 

(155)  Community  consumption  was  established  on  the  basis  of  the  sales  volumes  of  the 
Community industry, of estimates of the sales of the other Community producers on 
the  Community  market  based  on  data  provided  at  the  complaint  stage,  and  Eurostat 
data for all Community imports from third countries. 

(156)  Between 2002 and the RIP, Community consumption of the product concerned in the 
Community  continuously  increased  to  reach  a  total  of  2.400.000  tonnes  in  the  RIP. 
The  overall  increase  over  the  period  was  18  %.  The  increase  was  partly  due  to  new 
applications (beer, wine, inter alia) and partly due to the increase of consumption in 
the countries acceding to the EU in 2004.  

Table 1 

2002 

2003 

2004 

RIP 

Community  consumption 
(tonnes) 

2.041.836 

2.213.157 

2.226.751 

2.407.387 

Index 

100 

108 

109 

118 

2. 

Imports from the countries concerned 

2.1.  Cumulation 

(157)  In  the  original  investigation,  imports  of  the  product  concerned  originating  in  India, 
Indonesia,  Malaysia,  the  Republic  of  Korea,  Taiwan  and  Thailand  were  assessed 
cumulatively in accordance with Article 3(4) of the basic Regulation. It was examined 
whether a cumulative assessment was also appropriate in the current investigation. 

(158)  With  regard  to  imports  of  the  two  cooperating  Korean  companies,  the  investigation 
has  shown  either  de  minimis  or  no  dumping.  Therefore,  in  accordance  with  Article 
3(4)  of  the  basic  Regulation,  those  imports  concerned  could  not  be  cumulatively 
assessed. However, it was found that the margin of dumping established in relation to 
the  imports  from  India,  Malaysia  and  Taiwan  was  above  the  de  minimis  level. 
Concerning imports from Indonesia and Thailand, the investigation has shown that the 
imports  were  not  representative  and  therefore  no  dumping  margin  could  be 
established. However, it was also concluded that should measures be allowed to lapse, 
there is a likelihood of recurrence of dumping. As regards the quantities exported by 
each  of  the  six  countries  concerned  it  was  considered  that  if  the  measures  were 
repealed, imports from each of the countries concerned would be likely to increase to 
levels  significantly  above  those  reached  in  the  RIP  and  would  certainly  exceed  the 
negligibility threshold. As regards the condition of competition, the investigation has 
confirmed that PET chips imported from the countries concerned were alike in all their 
these  chips  were 
essential  physical  and 
interchangeable with those produced in the Community and they were marketed in the 

technical  characteristics.  Moreover, 

EN 

31 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Community  during  the  same  period,  through  similar  sales  channels  under  similar 
commercial conditions. The imported PET chips were therefore considered to compete 
with each other and with the PET chips produced in the Community. 

(159)  In the light of the above, it was considered that all the criteria set out in Article 3(4) of 
the  basic  Regulation  were  met  regarding  imports  from  India,  Malaysia,  Thailand, 
Indonesia,  Taiwan  and  the  dumped  imports  from  Korea.  The  imports  from  the  six 
countries concerned were therefore examined cumulatively with the exception of those 
non-dumped imports produced by the two cooperating Korean exporting producers. 

2.2.  Volume, market share and prices of imports  

(160)  With  respect  to  the  six  countries  concerned,  the  import  volumes,  market  shares  and 
average prices developed as indicated below. The data are based on Eurostat statistics. 
In  these  figures,  non  dumped  Korean  imports  should  in  principle  be  taken  out.  For 
reasons  of  confidentiality,  however,  they  have  been  deliberately  included.  The 
development  of  the  trend  would  be  however  substantially  the  same  if  the  data 
concerning the non dumped Korean imports would be taken out. 

(161)  Between 2002 and the RIP, imports from the countries concerned decreased by 13 %, 
i.e. from 192.000 tonnes in 2002 to 167.000 tonnes in the RIP. Compared to the year 
2002, they remained unchanged in 2003 and decreased by 3 % in 2004, and by another 
10 % in the RIP. 

Table 2 

Volume 

Index 

2002 

2003 

2004 

RIP 

192 192 

191 455 

186 892 

166 982 

100 

100 

97 

87 

Market share 

9,4 % 

8,6 % 

8,4 % 

7,0 % 

Prices (Eur/tonne) 

850 

803 

854 

1030 

Index 

100 

94 

100 

121 

G. 

ECONOMIC SITUATION OF THE COMMUNITY INDUSTRY 

1. 

Preliminary remarks 

(162)  At the beginning of the review, sampling of the Community  producers was foreseen 
but considering that their number was not excessive, it was decided to include all of 
them and consequently, injury factors have been assessed on the basis of information 
collected at the level of the entire Community industry. 

(163)  Pursuant  to  Article  3(5)  of  the  basic  Regulation,  the  Commission  examined  all 
relevant economic factors and indices having a bearing on the state of the Community 
industry.  

EN 

32 

   EN 

 
 
1.1.  Production 

(164)  The Community industry’s production increased by 20 % between 2002 and the RIP, 
i.e.  from  a  level  of  1.465.000  tonnes  in  2002  to  1.760.000  tonnes  in  the  RIP.  The 
yearly increase was 4.8 % in 2003 and 4.6 % in 2004. A further increase occurred in 
the RIP, when production soared by 150.000 tonnes, i.e. by 10.8 %. This was due to 
the restructuring process undertaken by the industry with the aim to better control the 
production  costs  and  thereby  take  advantage  of  the  growing  consumption  in  the 
Community market which, as stated above, increased by 19 % between 2002 and the 
RIP (from 2 million tonnes in 2002 to 2.4 million tonnes in the RIP).  

Table 3 

2002 

2003 

2004 

RIP 

Production (tonnes) 

1 464 522 

1 534 480 

1 602 086 

1 760 828 

Index 

100 

105 

109 

120 

1.2.  Capacity and capacity utilisation 

(165)  Production capacity increased by 22 % between 2002 and the RIP, i.e. from a level of 
1.760.000  tonnes  in  2002  to  2.156.000  tonnes  in  the  RIP.  The  increase  occurred 
mainly in the RIP, when production capacity, compared to the year 2004, increased by 
300.000  tonnes,  i.e.  16.7  %.  This  significant  increase  of  production  capacity  was 
parallel to the increase of production over the same period (see recital 164 above). The 
increase  in  production  capacity  resulted  from  additional  investments  in  production 
lines  designed  to  take  advantage  of  the  growing  market.  The  capacity  utilisation 
increased  by  4  percentage  points  in  2003,  remained  on  this  level  in  2004  and  then 
decreased  in  the  RIP  by  5  percentage  points  to  the  level  of  82  %.  The  decrease 
between 2004 and the RIP results from the significant increase of production capacity 
in that period. Consequently, a higher production volume in the RIP, when compared 
with 2004, coincided with a lower capacity utilisation rate. 

Table 4 

2002 

2003 

2004 

RIP 

Production capacity (tonnes) 

1 760 332 

1 762 378 

1 848 315 

2 156 294 

Index  

Capacity utilisation 

Index 

100 

83 % 

100 

100 

87 % 

105 

105 

87 % 

104 

122 

82 % 

98 

1.3.  Sales and market share 

(166)  The volume sold by the Community industry on the Community market increased by 
21  %  between  2002  and  the  RIP.  A  growth  of  2  %  in  2003  was  followed  by  an 
increase  in  both  2004  and  the  RIP,  by  8  and  11  percentage  points  respectively. 
Notwithstanding the increase of sales due to the higher consumption, the Community 
industry's market share fell by 4 percentage points in 2003 to then gradually rise by 5 
percentage points in 2004 and 1 percentage point in the RIP.  

EN 

33 

   EN 

 
Table 5 

2002 

2003 

2004 

RIP 

Sales in the EC (tonnes) 

1 306 768 

1 333 976 

1 438 883 

1 586 902 

Index  

Market share 

1.4.  Growth 

100 

64 % 

102 

60 % 

110  

121  

65 % 

66 % 

(167)  Overall, it has to be noted that the Community industry’s market share increased by 2 
% in the period considered, which shows that its growth lagged behind the growth of 
consumption of the overall market. 

1.5.  Employment 

(168)  The level of employment of the Community industry increased by 18 % in the period 
considered.  The  main  increase  occurred  in  2003  (11  percentage  points)  and  2004 
(further 6 percentage points.). Although this rising tendency continued in the RIP, the 
increase amounted to only 2 percentage points. This increase of 18% during the whole 
period is linked to the production level which increased by 20 %.  

Table 6 

Employees 

Index  

1.6.  Productivity 

2002 

2003 

2004 

RIP 

1 010 

1 124 

1 170 

1 190 

100 

111 

116 

118 

(169)  The Community industry’s productivity, measured as the output in tonnes per person 
employed per year, had an overall increase during the period considered. Productivity 
initially fell by 6 % in 2003 compared to the year 2002 and remained at this level in 
2004  but  productivity  in  the  RIP  then  increased  significantly  by  more  than  8  % 
compared to 2004. 

Table 7 

2002 

2003 

2004 

RIP 

Productivity(t/employee) 
Index 

1450 

1365 

1369 

1480 

100 

94 

94 

102 

1.7.  Wages 

(170)  It  has  to  be  noted  that  PET  chips  production  is  a  capital  intensive  industry  and  that 
therefore labour costs have a limited impact on the overall cost of the product. During 
the  period,  wages  increased  by  12  %,  compared  to  a  20  %  increase  of  the  overall 
production  cost.  Another  significant  indicator  is  the  cost  of  wages  spent  per  tonne 
produced. During the period, this cost decreased by 6 %. 

EN 

34 

   EN 

 
Table 8 

2002 

2003 

2004 

RIP 

Wages (million Euro) 

Index 

Wages 
produced(€) 

per 

tonne 

Index 

62,3

100

44,4

63,0

101

42,9

66,3

106

43,6

69,5 

112 

41,9 

100 

96 

98 

94 

1.8.  Magnitude  of  the  actual  margin  of  dumping  and  recovery  from  the  effects  of 

past dumping 

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

1.9.  Sales prices and factors affecting Community prices 

(172)  The unit sales prices increased from 924 EUR/tonne in 2002 to 1058 EUR/tonne in the 
RIP. Overall, the tendency was rising (by 15 % in the whole period). This increase is 
to a large extent a consequence of the increase in the price of raw materials, which is 
due to the increase in the oil price. Although the Community industry had increased 
prices it was not in the position to pass the increase on to the downstream sector and 
fully reflect the increase of raw materials prices in its sales prices. This was principally 
due  to  the  fact  that  the  increase  in  the  price  of  raw  materials  was  higher  than  the 
increase of PET prices. In addition, the Community industry had to face the pressure 
from  imports.  With  the  aim  to  maintain  its  market  share,  the  Community  industry 
could only moderately increase its prices and thus experienced price suppression. 

Table 9 

2002 

2003 

2004 

RIP 

Weighted 
(EUR/tonne) 

Index 

average 

price 

924 

902 

1006 

1058 

100 

98 

109 

115 

1.10.  Cost of production of the main raw materials 

(173)  Bearing in mind that around 850 kg of purified terephthalic acid (PTA) and 350 kg of 
mono ethylene glycol (MEG) (the main raw materials) are needed to produce 1 tonne 
of  PET,  the  costs  of  raw  materials  (PTA  and  MEG)  increased  significantly 
respectively by 67 % and by 31 % between 2002 and the RIP to reach the level of 770 
EUR/tonne (PTA) and 721 EUR/tonne (MEG) (average of the RIP). Although a small 
decline in prices of PTA has been noted in the third quarter of 2005 when the prices 
dropped to the level of 700 EUR/tonne, and a substantially stable price was observed 
for  MEG,  it  has  to  be  pointed  out  that  the  raw  materials  are  purchased  in  advance 

EN 

35 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
based on long term contracts. As a result, for the period considered, despite the small 
decline in prices of PTA at the end of the RIP, the Community industry still bears the 
consequences  of  the  heavily  increased  costs.  In  addition,  due  to  the  situation  on  the 
world oil market the prices of raw materials for the production of PET are susceptible 
of unpredictable changes but they are most likely to remain at a high level. All these 
factors  contribute  to  an  increased  level  of  vulnerability  of  the  Community  PET 
producers.  

Table 10 

2002 

2003 

2004 

RIP 

average 

cost 

(EUR/tonne)

-PTA 

Index 

-MEG 

Index 

460 

100 

551 

100 

566 

123 

550 

100 

718 

156 

650 

118 

770 

167 

721 

131 

(174)  By  comparison,  the  average  unit  cost  per  tonne  of  PET  chips  produced  by  the 

Community industry was the following: 

Table 11 

2002 

2003 

2004 

RIP 

Weighted 
(EUR/tonne) 

Index 

average 

cost 

899 

918 

1013 

1092 

100 

102 

113 

121 

(175)  During the period considered, as indicated in tables 10 and 11, the main raw materials 
have continuously increased (PTA by 67 %, MEG by 31 %), while the overall cost of 
production  raised  only  by  21  %.  However,  as  shown  in  table  9  prices  have  only 
increased by 15 % due to the fact that the Community industry was not in a position to 
pass the increase on to the downstream sector and fully reflect the rise in the price of 
raw materials in its sales prices. 

1.11.  Stocks 

(176)  The evolution of stocks over the whole period considered, i.e. between 2002 and the 
RIP is down by 10 %. However as in the original investigations, stocks should not be 
considered  as  a  meaningful  indicator  as  regards  PET  produced  by  the  Community 
industry,  given  the  seasonal  nature  of  the  PET  market  throughout  the  year.  When 
compared to the production, stocks represent around 5/6 % of the output. 

Table 12 

2002 

2003 

2004 

RIP 

Stocks (tonnes) 

101 554 

110 695 

90 422 

91 123 

Index 

100 

109 

89 

90 

EN 

36 

   EN 

 
 
 
1.12.  Profitability, return on investments and cash flow 

(177)  Profitability on sales represents the profit generated by sales of the product concerned 
in the Community. Return on total assets and cash flow could only be measured at the 
level of the narrowest group of products which included the like product, pursuant to 
Article  3(8)  of  the  basic  Regulation.  Moreover,  return  on  investments  has  been 
calculated on the basis of return on total assets, as return on total assets is considered 
more relevant for the analysis of the trend.  

Table 13 

2002 

2003 

2004 

RIP 

Pre-tax profit margin on sales in 
the Community 

2,7 % 

-1,8 % 

-0,7 % 

-3,2 % 

Return on total assets 

2,0 % 

-1,4 % 

-0,6 % 

-2,4 % 

Cash flow(% of total sales) 

18,1 % 

5,5 % 

10,1 % 

-2,6 % 

(178)  Further to the price suppression starting in 2002 and coinciding with a strong increase 
of  dumped  imports  from  the  countries  concerned,  the  financial  situation  of  the 
Community  industry  deteriorated  and  turned  into  losses  in  2003.  After  a  small 
recovery in 2004 due to the measures imposed on PRC and Australia, losses increased 
to -3.2 % in the RIP. It is therefore noted that there is a clear downward trend. 

(179)  The trends for return on total assets and for cash flow developed similarly i.e. showed 
a relatively good situation in 2002, a deterioration in 2003, a small recovery in 2004 
and a further deterioration in the RIP. 

1.13.  Investments and ability to raise capital 

Table 14 

2002 

2003 

2004 

RIP 

Investments ('000 EUR) 

31.779 

42.302 

63.986 

50.397 

Index 

100 

133 

201 

159 

(180)  The  investments  were  partly  dedicated  to  an  increase  of  capacity  and  partly  to  the 
improvement of the production process. The bulk of the expenditure was made in 2004 
and during the RIP, coinciding with the increase of the capacity and with the aim to 
maintain market share in view of the increased consumption. Nevertheless, the current 
situation  of  the  Community  industry  and  the  evolution  of  the  Community  and  world 
markets  for  PET  marked  out  by  lack  of  profitability  were  not  an  incentive  to  make 
excessive  investments.  Although  in  some  circumstances  Community  producers  have 
been  able  to  raise  capital  (in  particular  from  related  companies),  the  lack  of 
profitability of PET did not encourage investment and in some cases the decision was 
postponed. 

EN 

37 

   EN 

 
 
2. 

Conclusion on the situation of the Community industry 

(181)  The constant increase of consumption partly due to new applications (beer, wine inter 
alia) and partly due to the increase of consumption in the countries acceding to the EU 
in 2004, obliged the Community industry to increase capacity and production in order 
not to lose market share. To do so, an important restructuring process accompanied by 
a frequent change of the ownership of the different producers, took place in 2004 and 
during the RIP. In parallel, the number of production lines was generally increased in 
order to follow the increase of the consumption and to concurrently achieve economies 
of  scale.  Thus,  some  economic  indicators,  i.e.  consumption,  capacity  production, 
production, EU sales, employment indeed followed a positive trend. 

(182)  However, all those restructuring efforts described above could not counterbalance the 
impact  of  the  constant  and  massive  increase  of  raw  material  prices  in  the  period 
considered. The higher raw material costs could not be passed on to the downstream 
sector  to  the  extent  it  would  have  been  necessary  to  maintain  a  certain  level  of 
profitability. This coincided with the low price level of the imports from the countries 
concerned which clearly exerted a significant downward pressure on the price of the 
Community  industry.  Thus,  despite  the  apparent  positive  developments  concerning 
production,  sales  and  sales  price,  the  overall  financial  situation  of  the  Community 
industry  deteriorated  and  is  reflected  in  the  negative  developments  of  profitability 
(from 2,7 % profit in 2002 to 3,2 % losses in the RIP), of export sales, production cost, 
return on investments and cash flow. 

(183)  Consequently, despite some apparent positive trends showed by the injury indicators, 
the  situation  of  the  Community  industry  is  still  far  from  the  levels  that  could  be 
expected had it fully recovered from the injury found in the original investigations 

(184)  It  is  therefore  concluded  that  the  situation  of  the  Community  industry  has  slightly 
improved, as compared to the period preceding the imposition of measures, but is still 
very  fragile  and  vulnerable.  Furthermore,  the  price  pressure  from  imports  did  not 
allow the Community industry to fully reflect the increase of raw materials prices in its 
sales prices. 

3. 

Imports from other countries  

3.1.  Other countries concerned by anti-dumping measures 

(185)  As  mentioned  in  recital  (2)  above,  it  is  recalled  that,  since  August  2004,  there  have 
also been definitive anti-dumping measures in force on imports of PET originating in 
Australia and the PRC. 

(186)  During  the  period  considered,  the  total  volume  of  imports  from  these  countries 
increased  by  12  %  (from  65  000  tonnes  to  73.000  tonnes).  Although  there  was  a 
significant increase in the market share (by 4 percentage points) in the year 2003, this 
rising tendency was reversed in 2004 when the market share of imports decreased to 
the  level  of  2.4  %.  In  the  RIP  a  slight  increase  of  0.6  %  stemming  from  Chinese 
imports has been noted. The effect of the definitive anti-dumping duties is reflected as 
from 2004. Whereas imports from Australia ceased completely, the volume of imports 
from  China  increased  steadily  by  130  %  in  2003,  decreased  in  2004  in  coincidence 
with  the  measures  and  increased  again  by  47  %  during  the  RIP.  Australian  prices 

EN 

38 

   EN 

 
decreased  by  7  %  in  2003  and  by  another  6  %  in  2004.  Chinese  prices  increased 
slowly  in  2003  and  2004  and  by  24  %  in  the  RIP,  i.e.  from  827  to  1022  EUR  per 
tonne.  As  a  conclusion  it  is  noted  that  significant  imports  from  these  two  countries 
were made at prices constantly lower than the Community prices, thus contributing to 
the injury suffered by the Community industry. 

Table 15 

Australia 

2002 

2003 

2004 

RIP 

Volume (tonnes) 

17 179 

18 727 

2 842 

Price (EUR per tonne) 

851 

789 

741 

Market share 

0,8 % 

0,8 % 

0,1 % 

- 

- 

- 

People’s Republic of China 

Volume (tonnes) 

47 875 

131 343 

49 678 

72 814 

Price (EUR per tonne) 

804 

806 

827 

1022 

Market share 

Total tonnes 

2,3 % 

5,9 % 

2,2 % 

3 % 

65 054 

150 070 

52 520 

72 814 

Total market share 

3,1 % 

6,8 % 

2,4 % 

3 % 

3.2.  Other third countries not mentioned above  

(187)  In  these  figures  non  dumped  Korean  imports  should  in  principle  be  included.  For 
reasons  of  confidentiality  they  have  been  deliberately  taken  out.  However  the 
development of the trend would be substantially the same if the Korean non dumped 
imports would be included.  

(188)  Between  2002  and  the  RIP,  total  imports  of  PET  originating  in  other  countries  have 
increased by 136 %, to reach 174.000 tonnes. Their market share in the EU increased 
from 3.6 to 7.1 % in the period considered. The table below illustrates these trends.  

EN 

39 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 16 

2002 

2003 

2004 

RIP 

Total volume(tonnes) of which 

73 549 

119 973 

182 687 

173 597 

Pakistan 

USA 

Mexico 

Turkey 

Others 

Market share 

28 558 

83 208 

55 125 

73 426 

20 570 

16 105 

49 763 

50 393 

1 476 

20 

32 112 

20 501 

7 208 

17 001 

24 032 

15 374 

15 737 

3 639 

21 655 

13 903 

3,6 % 

5,4 % 

8,2 % 

7,1 % 

(189)  Imports  from  Pakistan  rose  by  157  %  over  the  period  considered,  and  in  particular 
after the termination of the proceeding against them in 2004. Imports from the United 
States increased considerably, i.e. by 144 % to reach 50.000 tonnes in the RIP. Imports 
from Mexico passed from 1500 tonnes in 2002 to 20000 tonnes in the RIP, an increase 
of  1390  %.  As  far  as  Turkey  is  concerned,  its  imports  were  rising  significantly 
between 2002 and 2004 (by 244 %), to then decrease in the RIP by 36 %. Regarding 
the  prices  it  is  important  to  note,  however,  that  the  prices  of  the  imports  from  the 
United  States,  Mexico  and  Turkey  increased  and  were  higher  than  prices  of  other 
imports and of those of the Community industry. Moreover, most likely, imports from 
USA are Pet G, a special variety of PET having higher viscosity requirements and sold 
on  average  at  50  %  more  than  normal  PET.  Imports  prices  for  Pakistan  were  lower 
than  the  average  prices  of  the  Community  industry  from  2002  to  2004.  During  the 
RIP,  import  prices  from  Pakistan  increased  at  the  level  of  the  Community  industry. 
Therefore,  it  is  considered  that  these  imports  could  not  affect  the  situation  of  the 
Community market. 

3.3.  Export Activity of the Community Industry 

(190)  The export activity of the Community industry showed a downward trend during the 
period  considered,  i.e.  decreasing  from  7.9  %  to  4.9  %  of  the  Community  industry's 
total  sales.  Only  in  2003,  the  Community  industry's  export  performance  increased 
considerably,  probably  due  to  low  EU  sales  prices.  However,  during  the  RIP,  they 
represent  less  than  5  %  of  the  total  sales.  It  should  be  noted  that  export  prices  were 
constantly above EC sales price. 

EN 

40 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 17 

2002 

2003 

2004 

IP 

Export Sales(tonnes) 

111 381 

141 627 

97 686 

82 388 

Index 

% of total sales 

Price per tonne 

Index 

100 

127 

87 

74 

7,9 % 

9,6 % 

6,3 % 

4,9 % 

959 

100 

942 

1026 

1096 

98 

107 

114 

H. 

CONCLUSION ON THE LIKELIHOOD OF CONTINUATION OR RECURRENCE 

OF INJURY 

(191)  As  concluded  previously,  the  exporting  producers  in  India,  Indonesia,  Thailand,  the 
Republic  of  Korea,  Taiwan  and  Malaysia  have  the  potential  to  increase  their  export 
volumes to the Community market.  

(192)  The CIF export prices of PET originating in India, Thailand and Malaysia were higher 
than  the  prices  of  the  Community  industry.  The  difference,  however,  was  not 
significant  which  leads  to  the  conclusion  that  in  the  absence  of  anti-dumping  duties 
these  countries  could  exercise  an  even  stronger  price  pressure  on  the  Community 
industry. Moreover, the prices of Korean, Taiwanese and Indonesian imports into the 
Community  were  lower  than  the  Community  price.  The  difference  was  small  for 
Korea  and  Taiwan  (3-4  %)  and  significant  in  the  case  of  Indonesia  (amounting  to 
27 %).  Therefore  there  is  a  clear  indication  for  a  likelihood  of  continuation  or 
recurrence of injury.  

(193)  As  indicated  above,  the  situation  of  the  Community  industry  has  also  been 
considerably affected by the imports from the PRC. The prices of those imports were 
below  the  Community  price  (1022  EUR/tonne  as  compared  to  1058  in  the 
Community). In addition, in terms of volume, the imports from the PRC amounted to 
73.000 tonnes, representing a market share of 3 % in the RIP. 

(194)  Furthermore, in terms of volumes of imports from the countries concerned, it can be 
concluded that there is likelihood that those quantities will significantly increase due 
to  the  overall  production  capacity  and  spare  capacity  available  in  the  countries 
concerned as further detailed in recital (199).  

(195)  On the basis of the foregoing, it is concluded that the import prices would most likely 
be lower on the Community market in the absence of anti-dumping measures, as the 
producers  in  these  countries  would  possibly  try  to  regain  lost  market  shares  or  to 
increase their current market shares. Such price behaviour, coupled with the ability of 
the exporting producers in these countries to sell significant quantities of PET on the 
Community  market,  would  in  all  likelihood  have  the  effect  of  reinforcing  the  price 
pressure, with an expected further negative impact on the situation of the Community 
industry. 

EN 

41 

   EN 

 
 
(196)  In this context, it should be recalled that in all the six countries concerned a significant 
spare production capacity was established, ranging from 37.000 tonnes in Malaysia to 
400.000  tonnes  in  Taiwan,  and  totalling  around  1  million  tonnes,  i.e.  45  %  of  the 
Community  industry  production  capacity.  In  addition  the  import  prices  oscillated  in 
the period concerned slightly above or below Community prices. The prices of imports 
originating in Taiwan, for example, a country with by far the highest spare production 
capacity, fell during the period when anti-dumping measures were in force below the 
level of Community prices. Furthermore, the prevailing price level in the Community 
makes the EU an attractive market. Thus, it can be concluded that should the measures 
be  allowed  to  lapse,  there  exists  a  strong  incentive  for  producers  in  the  countries 
concerned to redirect their sales to the EU market at low prices.  

(197)  Moreover,  recent  publicly  available  information  indicates  that  unusual  quantities  of 
PET chips have been purchased by operators in Bulgaria and Romania from the Asian 
countries  under  review.  The  shipments  were  due  to  take  place  in  November  and 
December  2006.  This  information  is  an  indication  of  the  likelihood  of  recurrence  of 
injury  to  the  Community  industry,  as  it  clearly  demonstrates  that  significantly  more 
imports from the countries concerned would be present on the Community market in 
the absence of anti-dumping measures. 

(198)  As  shown  above,  although  the  situation  of  the  Community  industry  has  slightly 
improved when compared to the one before the imposition of anti-dumping measures, 
it  remains  vulnerable  and  fragile.  It  is  likely  that  if  the  Community  industry  was 
exposed  to  increased  volumes  of  imports  from  the  countries  concerned  at  dumped 
prices, this would result in a deterioration of its financial situation and most probably 
in  the  further  loss  of  profitability.  On  this  basis,  it  is  therefore  concluded  that  the 
repeal  of  the  measures  against  India,  Indonesia,  Thailand,  South  Korea,  Taiwan  and 
Malaysia would in all likelihood result in the recurrence of injury to the Community 
industry. 

I. 

COMMUNITY INTEREST 

1. 

Introduction 

(199)  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.  The  present  investigation 
analyses a situation in which anti-dumping measures have already been in place and 
allows  for  assessment  of  any  undue  negative  impact  on  the  parties  concerned  due  to 
the current anti-dumping measures. 

(200)  On this basis, it was examined whether, despite the conclusions on the likelihood of a 
continuation  or  recurrence  of  injurious  dumping,  compelling  reasons  existed  which 
would  lead  to  the  conclusion  that  it  is  not  in  the  Community  interest  to  maintain 
measures in this particular case. 

EN 

42 

   EN 

 
2. 

Interest of the Community industry 

(201)  As  outlined  above,  there  is  a  clear  likelihood  of  recurrence  of  injurious  dumping  if 
measures were to be repealed. All Community producers but two fully cooperated and 
indicated their support for the ongoing measures. One Community producer linked to 
one of the Korean exporters has also expressed support for the measures. It has to be 
considered, however, that its mother company is exporting at 0 % duty.  

(202)  The  continuation  of  anti-dumping  measures  on  imports  from  countries  concerned 
would enhance the possibility for the Community industry to reach a reasonable level 
of profitability. More importantly, it will avoid that the Community industry is pushed 
out  of  the  market.  Indeed,  there  is  a  clear  likelihood  of  injurious  dumping  in 
substantial  volumes  which  the  Community  industry  could  not  withstand.  The 
Community industry would therefore continue to benefit from the maintenance of the 
current  anti-dumping  measures,  in  particular  as  there  are  now  also  measures  against 
imports originating in Australia and the PRC.  

3. 

Interest of importers  

(203)  The Commission sent questionnaires to 18 importers/traders of the product concerned. 
However, cooperation from the importers/traders that are purchasing mainly from the 
countries  concerned  and  representing  around  5  %  of  the  EU  consumption  was  very 
low. Only one importer/trader supplied data and the bulk of its purchases were made 
from  the  Community  industry.  Only  marginal  quantities  were  from  the  countries 
concerned  or  from  other  exporting  countries.  This  importer/trader  would  prefer  a 
market with zero duties although they are currently enjoying healthy financial results. 
Bearing in mind that the measures in force did not considerably affect importers, it is 
concluded  that  maintaining  the  existing  anti-dumping  measures  against  imports 
originating  in  India,  Indonesia,  Thailand,  Malaysia,  South  Korea  and  Taiwan  would 
not  have  a  significant  negative  effect  on  the  situation  of  the  importers  in  the 
Community. 

4. 

Interest of converters/users 

(204)  The  Commission  sent  questionnaires  to  47  known  converters/users.  Only  ten 
converters/users with an overall low representativity replied to the questionnaire.  

(205)  According  to  the  information  on  purchases  supplied  in  their  responses  to  the 
questionnaire,  cooperating  converters/users  during  the  RIP  represent  about  20  %  of 
total Community consumption of PET. They purchased during the RIP 95 % of their 
PET  from  Community  producers  and  the  remainder  from  imports  originating  in 
countries other than those subject to these reviews. A number of arguments against the 
imposition of duties were presented. 

(206)  Five  converters  (transforming  PET  chips  in  pre-forms  and  bottle  grade  and 
representing 10 % of the consumption) replied to the questionnaire. The cost of PET 
chips  accounts  for  55  %  of  their  final  product  (mostly  pre-forms).  It  has  been 
established  that  they  import  negligible  quantities  from  the  countries  concerned  and 
other third countries. Nevertheless they oppose the imposition of duties claiming that 
the prolongation of the measures could have the effect of artificially raising the prices 
in Europe.  

EN 

43 

   EN 

 
(207)  Five users accounting for about 10 % of the consumption supplied rather incomplete 
data. The low level of cooperation from the big users is likely to be due to the fact that 
the last investigation concerning imports from PRC, Australia and Pakistan took place 
only  two  years  ago.  PET  costs  account  for  around  6/7  %  of  the  overall  cost  and  are 
therefore  rather  limited.  Although  they  have  declared  no  imports  from  the  countries 
concerned, similarly as the converters, they oppose the imposition of duties claiming 
that the measures could have the effect of artificially raising the prices in Europe. 

(208)  Considering the rather good financial situation of the downstream industry, in contrast 
to the one of the Community industry, no converter/user put forward the argument that 
maintaining the current duties could lead to a loss of jobs or to moving manufacturing 
facilities overseas. 

(209)  Furthermore, in terms of output, the Community industry adapted its size to match the 
increased  consumption  and  therefore  it  is  very  likely  that  the  unused  capacity  of  the 
Community industry could fully cover the amount of the imports. 

(210)  Bearing in mind that there are still alternative sources of supply with no anti-dumping 
measures,  i.e.  Mexico,  Turkey,  USA,  Brazil,  Pakistan,  Iran,  Saudi  Arabia  the 
Community  users  would  moreover  be  able  to  rely  on  (or  to  switch  to)  diversified 
suppliers of the product concerned.  

(211)  As  concerns  the  performance  of  the  user  industry,  the  investigation  has  shown  that 
during  the  period  considered,  the  cooperating  users  increased  their  turnover, 
maintained  employment  stable  and  rather  improved  their  overall  profitability. 
Therefore  it  was  found  that  they  were  not  negatively  affected  by  the  anti-dumping 
measures. 

(212)  On the basis of the above, it is concluded that maintaining the existing anti-dumping 
measures  against  imports  originating  in  India,  Indonesia,  Thailand,  Malaysia,  South 
Korea and Taiwan would not have a significant negative effect on the situation of the 
users in the Community. 

5. 

Interest of suppliers 

(213)  The suppliers of raw material (mono ethylene glycol (MEG) and purified terephthalic 
acid (PTA), DMT and isophthalic acid (IPA), all petrochemical products derivatives of 
naphtha, clearly indicated their support for the measures. They would benefit from the 
fact that the Community industry would very likely be able to recover from the effects 
of dumping and thus improve their performance. 

6. 

Conclusion on Community interest 

(214)  Taking  into  account  all  of  the  above  factors,  it  is  concluded  that  there  are  no 

compelling reasons against the maintenance of the current anti-dumping measures. 

EN 

44 

   EN 

 
J. 

RELATION BETWEEN ANTI-DUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING MEASURES 

(215)  For  one  export  country,  namely  India,  a  parallel  investigation  on  the  expiry  of 
countervailing  measures  has  been  carried  out  (see  recital  (10)).  This  investigation 
confirmed  the  necessity  to  continue  the  application  of  such  measures  at  unchanged 
levels.  The  present  investigation  also  concluded  that  anti-dumping  measures  on 
exports  from  India  should  be  kept  in  force  at  unchanged  levels.  In  that  respect, 
reference is made to recital (125) of the Regulation that led to the initial imposition of 
anti-dumping measures.15 As the measures currently proposed for exports of PET from 
India  remain  unchanged,  it  follows  that  Article  14(1)  of  the  basic  anti-dumping 
Regulation and Article 24(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2026/9716 are complied 
with.  

K. 

FINAL PROVISIONS 

(216)  All  parties  were  informed  of  the  essential  facts  and  considerations  on  the  basis  of 
which  it  was  intended  to  recommend  that  the  existing  measures  be  maintained 
respectively their levels be amended where warranted. They were also granted a period 
to  submit  comments  and  claims  subsequent  to  disclosure.  In  particular  one  Indian 
exporter alleged that in the absence of measures it is not likely that India will re-direct 
sales  to  the  Community.  This  exporter  claimed  that  emerging  markets  are  more 
attractive than the Community, that Indian demand is growing fast and that, therefore, 
no spare capacity is available. It is however to be considered that, notwithstanding an 
increase  of  the  demand  in  the  Indian  market,  the  investigation  at  company  level 
indicated spare capacities, in excess of the increase in demand on the Indian market, as 
also  confirmed  by  the  market  intelligence  report  mentioned  at  recital  (74).  It  is 
therefore  concluded  that  none  of  the  disclosure  comments  received  were  such  as  to 
alter the conclusions as contained in this regulation. 

(217)  It  follows  from  the  above  that  the  anti-dumping  duties  are  maintained  respectively, 

their levels are amended where warranted, 

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 

1. 

2. 

15 
16 

Article 1 

A  definitive  anti-dumping  duty  is  hereby  imposed  on  imports  of  polyethylene 
terephthalate having a viscosity number of 78 ml/g or higher, according to the ISO 
Standard  1628-5,  falling  within  CN  code  3907  60  20  and  originating  in  India, 
Indonesia, Malaysia, the Republic of Korea, Taiwan and Thailand. 

Except as provided for in Article 2, the rate of the anti-dumping duty applicable to 
the net, free-at-Community frontier price, before duty for products manufactured by 
the companies listed below shall be as follows: 

Council Regulation (EC) No 2604/2000, 30.11.2000, p. 36. 
Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  2026/97  (OJ  L  288,  21.10.1997,  p.  1)  on  protection  against  subsidised 
imports  from  countries  not  members  of  the  European  Community,  as  last  amended  by  Council 
Regulation (EC) No 461/2004 (OJ L 77, 13.3.2004, p. 12). 

EN 

45 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Country 

Company 

TARIC additional 
code 

Anti-
dumping 
duty 
(EUR/tonne)

India 

India 

India 

India 

India 

India 

Indonesia 

Indonesia 

Indonesia 

Indonesia 

Malaysia 

Malaysia 

Pearl  Engineering  Polymers 
Ltd 

130,8 

A182 

Reliance Industries Ltd 

SENPET Ltd  

Futura Polyesters Ltd 

181,7 

200,9 

161,2 

South Asian Petrochem Ltd 

88,9 

All other companies 

P.T.  Mitsubishi  Chemical 
Indonesia 

181,7 

187,7 

P.T. Indorama Synthetics Tbk 

92,1 

P.T. Polypet Karyapersada 

178,9 

All other companies 

187,7 

Hualon Corp. (M) Sdn. Bhd. 

36,0 

MpI  Polyester  Industries  Sdn. 
Bhd. 

160,1 

A181 

A183 

A184 

A585 

A999 

A191 

A192 

A193 

A999 

A186 

A185 

Malaysia 

All other companies 

160,1 

A999 

Republic of Korea 

SK Chemicals Group: 

SK Chemicals Co., Ltd 

Huvis Corp. 

Republic of Korea 

KP Chemicals Group: 

Honam Petrochemicals Corp. 

KP Chemicals Corp. 

Republic of Korea 

All other companies 

Taiwan 

Far Eastern Textile Ltd 

0 

0 

0 

0 

148,3 

36,3 

A196 

A196 

A195 

A195 

A999 

A808 

EN 

46 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Taiwan 

Taiwan 

Thailand 

Thailand 

Thailand 

Shinkong  Synthetic  Fibers 
Corp. 

67,0 

All other companies 

143,4 

Shingkong 

Thai 
Corp. Ltd 

Industry 

83,2 

Indo Pet (Thailand) Ltd 

All other companies 

83,2 

83,2 

A809 

A999 

A190 

A468 

A999 

3. 

4. 

5. 

1. 

2. 

In  cases  where  goods  have  been  damaged  before  entry  into  free  circulation  and, 
therefore, the price actually paid or payable is apportioned for the determination of 
the  customs  value  pursuant  to  Article  145  of  Commission  Regulation  (EEC)  No 
2454/93  of  2  July  1993  laying  down  provisions  for  the  implementation  of  Council 
Regulation  (EEC)  No  2913/92  establishing  the  Community  Customs  Code,17  the 
amount of anti-dumping duty, calculated on the basis of the amounts set above, shall 
be  reduced  by  a  percentage  which  corresponds  to  the  apportioning  of  the  price 
actually paid or payable. 

Notwithstanding paragraphs 1 and 2, the definitive anti-dumping duty shall not apply 
to imports released for free circulation in accordance with Article 2. 

Unless  otherwise  specified,  the  provisions  in  force  concerning  customs  duties  shall 
apply. 

Article 2 

Imports shall be exempt from the anti-dumping duties imposed by Article 1 provided 
that they are produced and directly exported (i.e. invoiced and shipped) to a company 
acting as an importer in the Community by the companies mentioned in paragraph 3, 
declared under the appropriate TARIC additional code and that the conditions set out 
in paragraph 2 are met. 

When  the  request  for  release  for  free  circulation  is  presented,  exemption  from  the 
duties shall be conditional upon presentation to the customs service of the Member 
State concerned of a valid ‘Undertaking Invoice’ issued by the exporting companies 
mentioned  in  paragraph  3,  containing  the  essential  elements  listed  in  the  Annex. 
Exemption  from  the  duty  shall  further  be  conditional  on  the  goods  declared  and 
presented to customs corresponding precisely to the description on the ‘Undertaking 
Invoice’. 

17 

OJ L 253, 11.10.1993, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 883/2005 
of 10 June 2005 (OJ L 148, 11.6.2005, p. 5). 

EN 

47 

   EN 

 
                                                 
3. 

Imports  accompanied  by  an  ‘Undertaking  Invoice’  shall  be  declared  under  the 
following TARIC additional codes: 

Country 

Company 

TARIC additional 
code 

India 

India 

India 

India 

Pearl  Engineering  Polymers 
Ltd 

A182 

Reliance Industries Ltd 

Futura Polyesters Ltd 

A181 

A184 

South Asian Petrochem Ltd 

A585 

Indonesia 

P.T. Polypet Karyapersada 

A193 

Article 3 

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

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

Done at Brussels, […] 

For the Council 
The President 
[…] 

EN 

48 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
ANNEX  

Elements to be indicated in the Undertaking Invoice referred to in Article 2(2): 

1. 

2. 

3. 

The Undertaking Invoice number. 

The TARIC additional code under which the goods on the invoice may be customs-
cleared at Community borders (as specified in the Regulation). 

The exact description of the goods, including: 

– 

– 

– 

the  product  reporting  code  number  (PRC)  (as  established  in  the  undertaking 
offered by the producing exporter in question), 

CN code, 

quantity (to be given in units). 

4. 

The description of the terms of the sale, including: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

price per unit, 

the applicable payment terms, 

the applicable delivery terms, 

total discounts and rebates. 

5. 

6. 

Name of the company acting as an importer to which the invoice is issued directly by 
the company. 

The name of the official of the company that has issued the undertaking invoice and 
the following signed declaration: 

‘I, the undersigned, certify that the sale for direct export to the European Community 
of the goods covered  by  this  invoice is being made within the scope  and under the 
terms of the undertaking offered by …… [company], and accepted by the European 
Commission through Decision 2000/745/EC. I declare that the information provided 
in this invoice is complete and correct.’ 

EN 

49 

   EN