Council Regulation (EC) No 260/2007 of 9 March 2007 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of certain tungsten electrodes originating in the People’s Republic of China
Date: 2007-03-09
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: China, anti-dumping duty, anti-dumping legislation, electrical equipment, import, originating product, tungsten

13.3.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 72/1

(Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is obligatory)

I

REGULATIONS

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 260/2007

of 9 March 2007

imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on
imports of certain tungsten electrodes originating in the People’s Republic of China

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

B. SUBSEQUENT PROCEDURE

Having regard to the Treaty
Community,

establishing the European

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of
22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports
from countries not members of the European Community (1)
(the basic Regulation), and in particular Article 9 thereof,

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

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

A. PROVISIONAL MEASURES

The Commission, by Regulation (EC) No 1350/2006 (2)
(the provisional Regulation) imposed a provisional anti-
dumping duty on imports of certain tungsten electrodes,
currently classifiable within CN codes ex 8101 99 10 and
ex 8515 90 00 (CN codes since 1 January 2007), origi-
nating in the People’s Republic of China (PRC).

It is recalled that the investigation of dumping and injury
covered the period from 1 January 2005 to 31 December
2005 (investigation period or IP). With respect to the
trends
the
Commission analysed data covering the period from
1 January 2001 to the end of the investigation period
(period considered).

assessment,

relevant

injury

the

for

(1) 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).

(2) OJ L 250, 14.9.2006, p. 10.

(3)

(4)

Following the imposition of a provisional anti-dumping
duty on imports of certain tungsten electrodes origi-
nating in the PRC, some interested parties submitted
comments in writing. The parties, who so requested,
were also granted an opportunity to be heard orally.

The Commission continued to seek and verify all infor-
mation it deemed necessary for its definitive findings. The
oral and written comments submitted by the parties were
examined and, where considered appropriate, the provi-
sional findings were modified accordingly. To this end,
the Commission carried out further verification visits at
the premises of the following companies:

(a) Unrelated importer in the Community:

— Comptoir Lyonnais de Soudage SA, Lyon, France;

(b) Related companies in the Community:

— Alexander Binzel Schweißtechnik GmbH & Co.,

KG, Buseck, Germany,

— Binzel France Sarl, Strasbourg, France.

(5)

the essential

All parties were informed of
facts and
considerations on the basis of which it was intended to
recommend the imposition of a definitive anti-dumping
duty on imports of certain tungsten electrodes origi-
nating in the PRC and the definitive collection of the
amounts secured by way of the provisional duty. They
were also granted a period within which they could make
representations subsequent to this disclosure.

(7)

(8)

(9)

L 72/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

13.3.2007

(6)

The oral and written comments submitted by the parties
were considered, and, where appropriate,
the findings
have been modified accordingly.

C. PRODUCT CONCERNED AND LIKE PRODUCT

The product concerned is tungsten welding electrodes
(TE), including tungsten bars and rods for welding elec-
trodes, containing 94 % or more by weight of tungsten,
other than those obtained simply by sintering, whether
of not cut to length. It is currently classifiable within CN
codes ex 8101 99 10 and ex 8515 90 00 (CN codes
since 1 January 2007). The product concerned is used
in welding and similar processes, including tungsten inert
gas shielded arc welding, plasma arc welding and cutting
and thermal spraying.

for

any

to the

available

evidence,

trodes are of better quality than those of its competitors
and in any event better tailored for the main product
the TIG welding torch.
manufactured by the group,
it should be stressed that
Regarding the latter claim,
quality
according
differences are not such as to prevent the use of elec-
trodes produced by other producers in this specific appli-
cation, even if they would not provide the optimal fitting
to the torches. As
the alleged general quality
differences, as pointed out by the importer, between
the TE produced and sold by the Community industry
in the Community and the TE imported into the
Community from the PRC, there was no objective infor-
mation available to corroborate or quantify such a
perceived general quality difference. Therefore the TE
produced and sold by the Community industry in the
Community and the TE imported into the Community
from the PRC have been considered alike within the
meaning of Article 1(4) of the basic Regulation, and no
adjustment was made in this respect in the injury calcu-
lations.

One importer argued against the conclusion drawn in
recital 13 of the provisional Regulation that all TE are
considered to constitute a single product for the purpose
of this proceeding. This importer emphasised the varying
properties of different types of TE and in particular one
patented type developed by the importer himself.

(12)

In the absence of any other comments concerning the
product concerned and the like product, recitals 12 to 15
of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.

However, since the beginning of the investigation, the
Commission has been aware that
there are several
types of TE. As well as being sold in different lengths
from pure
and thicknesses, TE can be made either
tungsten or alloyed with a small percentage of a metal
such as thorium,
lanthanum, cerium, zirconium, or a
combination of those. This alloying affects the properties
of the electrodes namely in terms of ignitability, stability
and durability, allowing them to be better tailored for
specific applications. Despite the variations in technical
features of the different types of TE, it is considered that
their common basic physical characteristics and degree of
substitutability are sufficient to consider them as a single
product for the purpose of this proceeding as they share
the same basic physical and chemical characteristics.

D. DUMPING

1. Market economy treatment (MET)

(13)

The exporting producer for which MET was rejected,
since it did not fulfil the second MET criterion as set
out
in Article 2(7)(c) of the basic Regulation, argued
that the discrepancies found in its accounting system
concerned only a few cases and that in the meantime
its system had been improved in order to meet the inter-
national accounting standards. The company, however,
did not substantiate this claim or provide any evidence.
Moreover, from the evidence gathered during the on-the-
spot verification it is clear that the practices found were
in clear violation of IAS as well as Chinese accounting
rules, even if they would have been corrected after the IP.

(10)

It should be noted, however, that the different types of
TE as mentioned above have been taken into consi-
deration for the purpose of calculating the dumping
and injury margins.

(14)

In the absence of any other arguments regarding the
granting of MET, the findings as set out in recitals 16
to 21 of
the provisional Regulation are hereby
confirmed.

(11)

The importer referred to in recital 8, also pointed to the
differences in the production processes between the
European and Chinese producers, and claimed that
these lead to a higher quality of
the Chinese TE.
Furthermore, an exporting producer claimed that its elec-

2. Individual treatment (IT)

(15)

Following the provisional disclosure,
the Community
industry contested the granting of IT to the exporting
producer referred to above in recital 13, since discre-
pancies were found in the company’s accounts also

13.3.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 72/3

In this
with regard to the recording of export sales.
respect it should be noted that the company fulfilled
all criteria set out in Article 9(5) of the basic Regulation
and therefore there was no reason to reject its IT claim.
Moreover, all evidence related to the company’s very few
export transactions to the Community in the IP could be
obtained during the on-the-spot verification of the main
anti-dumping questionnaire,
single necessary
correction to its export data could be made immediately.
the Community industry was
Therefore the claim of
rejected.

and a

(19)

(16)

In the absence of any other comments in this respect, the
findings concerning IT as set out in recitals 22 to 25 of
the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.

(17)

3. Normal value

(a) Determination of normal value for the exporting producer

in the PRC granted MET

the

Following the provisional disclosure,
exporting
producer concerned presented a monthly normal value
by linking the verified, average normal value of the IP to
the price development of
the main raw material,
ammonium paratungstate (APT), in order to demonstrate
that when comparing with the monthly export prices
there was no more dumping towards the end of the IP.
Moreover, this monthly normal value suggested that the
provisional finding of dumping was essentially caused by
to which the
the dramatic price increase of APT,
company did not react
immediately by increasing its
export sales prices, but only at the end of the IP. The
company asked the Commission to take this devel-
into account and to consider calculating the
opment
dumping margin based on the last six months or last
quarter of the IP solely. This claim, however, had to be
rejected, as differing from the IP would be discriminatory
towards all other companies investigated, which were
affected in the same way by that general price increase
of APT. The request is also in conflict with the concept
of an investigation period. Indeed, it amounts to selec-
tively choosing data from part of the investigation period
and puts thus into question the representativity of the
findings.

prices of the main raw material, APT, have remained
consistently lower than the export prices of APT.

the Chinese government’s policies at

The above claim was examined by analysing the effects
of
the macroe-
lead to different price
conomic level, which might
and export
levels of APT between the domestic
the Chinese
markets. The investigation showed that
VAT export
to a certain
refund policy discourages
extent the export of tungsten and related products such
as APT as exporters are refunded for only part of the
VAT paid on the domestically sourced raw material. This
also implies that producers of TE incur an additional cost
when exporting. Therefore, an adjustment was made to
the normal value, pursuant to Article 2(10)(b) of the
basic Regulation, to reflect the total cost incurred as a
result of
is not
the abovementioned VAT scheme.
considered that any further adjustment is required.

It

(20) Apart

to the
from the abovementioned adjustment
normal value, the general methodology as set out in
the provisional Regulation is
recitals 26 to 33 of
hereby confirmed.

(b) Determination of normal value for the exporting producers

in the PRC not granted MET

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

(21)

In the absence of any relevant comments regarding the
use of the USA as an analogue country, recitals 34 to 38
of the provisional Regulation are confirmed.

(ii) N o r m a l v a l u e

(22)

In the absence of any comments with regard to the
determination of
the normal value for the exporting
producers not granted MET, recitals 39 to 46 of the
provisional Regulation are definitively confirmed.

(18)

In that context, further to the provisional disclosure, the
Community industry claimed that an adjustment should
be made to the raw material costs used for
the
the company
the normal value of
construction of
granted MET. In the view of the Community industry
such an adjustment would be justified pursuant
to
Articles 2(3) and 2(5) of the basic Regulation, as the
Chinese tungsten market is subject to State interference
the macroeconomic level and hence the domestic
at

4. Export prices

(23)

Regarding the export prices of one company granted IT
as well as the cooperating company not granted MET/IT,
whose dumping margin served as the basis for
the
country-wide dumping margin, as explained in recitals
54 to 56 of the provisional Regulation, export prices
were
falling
revised by excluding two transactions
outside the IP.

L 72/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

13.3.2007

(24)

the
sales

exporting
Following the provisional disclosure,
producer granted MET, whose export
to the
Community were made via a related importer and subse-
quently resold to related and unrelated companies in the
Community, claimed that the SG&A costs of its related
companies, used for the construction of the export price
pursuant to Article 2(9) of the basic Regulation, were
overestimated and did not reflect
the costs generated
by the sales of TE. The exporting producer requested
the Commission to use the original SG&A presented in
the questionnaire replies of the related distributors, which
could not been accepted initially in the absence of
evidence regarding the cost allocation method. The
company presented supporting evidence for the allo-
cation method used originally, which was based on an
internal standard, used by the companies historically. The
evidence provided was subsequently verified on the spot
and it was found that the original allocation method
corresponded to the costs associated with the sales of
TE. Hence, the claim was accepted and the SG&A costs
of the related distributors were adjusted accordingly.

6. Dumping margin

(a) For the cooperating exporting producer granted MET

(28)

In the light of the above, the definitive dumping margin,
expressed as a percentage of the cif Community frontier
price, duty unpaid, is as follows:

Company

Shandong Weldstone Tungsten
Industry Co., Ltd

Definitive dumping
margin

17 %

(b) For the cooperating exporting producers granted IT

price
it was

of
the
found that

(25) With regard to the profit margin of the two unrelated
importers, one of which was provisionally used for the
abovementioned
constructed
export
those profit
exporting producer,
margins should not be used since their business activities
are not sufficiently comparable to that of the related
importer concerned.
the TE
imported by this related importer are further integrated
the
into the main product produced by the group,
welding torch. It should also be noted that the TE are
of minor value compared to the end-product. On this
basis it was concluded that the related importer’s own
profit margin would constitute a more accurate basis for
a profit margin to construct the export price.

the majority of

Indeed,

(26) No other comments were received with regard to export
prices, and hence the general methodology as set out in
recitals 47 and 48 of the provisional Regulation, with the
exception of the use of the related importer’s own profit
margin for the constructed export price of the producer
is hereby confirmed.
granted MET, as described above,

5. Comparison

(27)

In order

The normal values, as described above in recitals 17 to
20 and 22 and the export prices, revised as explained
above in recitals 23 to 26 were compared on an ex-
to ensure a fair comparison
works basis.
between the normal value
export price,
account was taken, in accordance with Article 2(10) of
the basic Regulation, of differences in factors which were
claimed and demonstrated to affect prices and price
comparability. The factors for which adjustments were
accepted were indirect taxes as described in recital 19,
transport,
costs,
packing, credit, and bank charges.

insurance, handling

and ancillary

and the

(29)

Following the adjustment to the export price of the other
the definitive dumping margins,
company granted IT,
expressed as
cif Community
frontier price, duty unpaid, are as follows:

a percentage of

the

Company

Definitive dumping
margin

Shaanxi Yuheng Tungsten & Molybdenum
Industrial Co., Ltd

107,3 %

Beijing Advanced Metal Materials Co., Ltd

128,4 %

(c) For all other exporting producers

(30)

to the export price of

Following the adjustment
the
cooperating exporting producer not granted MET/IT,
the definitive country-wide level of dumping is estab-
lished at 160,2 % of the cif Community frontier price,
duty unpaid.

E. INJURY

1. Community production

(31)

In the absence of comments concerning Community
production, recitals 57 and 58 of the provisional Regu-
lation are hereby confirmed.

2. Definition of the Community industry

(32)

In the absence of comments concerning the definition of
the Community industry, recital 59 of the provisional
Regulation is hereby confirmed.

13.3.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 72/5

3. Community consumption

(33)

In the absence of comments concerning the Community
consumption, recital 60 of the provisional Regulation is
hereby confirmed.

4. Imports into the Community from the country

concerned

(34)

In the absence of any comments concerning the imports
from the country concerned, recitals 61 to 66 of the
provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.

5. Situation of the Community industry

(35)

In the absence of comments concerning the situation of
the Community industry, recitals 67 to 93 of the provi-
sional Regulation are hereby confirmed.

F. CAUSATION

(36)

In the absence of any new and substantiated information
or argument in this respect, recitals 94 to 114 of the
provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.

(37)

G. COMMUNITY INTEREST

Three exporters, one exporters’ association and one
importer reiterated their concern that that the provisional
duties would exclude the Chinese exporters from the
Community market. Given that
there are only two
Community producers and virtually no imports from
other countries, this would allegedly eliminate compe-
tition from the Community market, to the detriment of
users. Furthermore,
the two
Community producers have a history of controlling the
prices in the Community market through anti-compe-
titive practices. However, these parties did not provide
any additional evidence to substantiate their claims nor
has any indication been found in the course of the inves-
tigation which would point to such practices.

it has been alleged that

(38) As stated in the provisional Regulation, the purpose of
any anti-dumping measure is not to stop access to the
Community market for exporters in third countries, but
rather to restore a level playing field that had been
distorted by unfair trade practices.

(39) No evidence for the alleged anti-competitive behaviour
was
the
Community industry enjoyed abnormally high profits,
even before the Chinese imports gained a substantial

investigation, nor has

found during the

least

allow at

should
from the PRC to continue

foothold in the Community market. Besides the two
the level of measures
existing Community producers,
exporting
imposed
selling the
producers
Indeed,
product concerned in the Community market.
the purpose of
is
merely to raise the import prices to a level which
allow the Community industry to achieve a normal
profit.

the duties, when based on injury,

some

(40) One importer further claimed that

the duties would
threaten the existence of his company. Moreover, this
importer markets
type of high-quality
unique
electrode and if he were to go out of business, he
claims, end-users of TE would suffer in terms of inno-
vation and quality of service.

a

(41) However, as stated in the provisional Regulation,

the
general effect on importers of any increase in the
prices of imports of the product concerned should be
to restore fair competition with Community producers
and should not prevent the importers from selling the
product concerned. Moreover, the high profit margins
found at the level of the cooperating importers make it
unlikely that they will be driven out of business even if
the volume of imports decreases with the imposition of
measures. The distributor/dealer’s role in the welding
electrode market is an essential one because it offers
the end-user the benefits of a one-stop shop for all the
latter’s needs regarding welding. Therefore,
it is highly
likely that
remain an important
those agents will
feature of the market even after measures are imposed.

(42)

It was also argued by one party that the TE imported by
their group are complementary to the welding torches
manufactured by the same company. If the users were
induced as a consequence of the anti-dumping measures
to switch to cheaper electrodes from other suppliers, the
the company’s torches
performance and durability of
would suffer, with an adverse impact on their whole
the
business. However it
customers of these users were unaware of such adverse
technical consequences, the relatively low level of the
duties proposed for
likely to
is not
them to switch to other
provide an incentive for
sources of supply. Furthermore, no evidence of
the
alleged negative consequences was submitted.

is considered that, even if

this exporter

(43)

In the absence of substantially new information or
argument in this particular respect, recitals 115 to 132
of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.

L 72/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

13.3.2007

(44)

(45)

(46)

H. DEFINITIVE ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES

(48)

1. Injury elimination level

industry

Further to the disclosure of provisional
the
adjustment
Community
mentioned in recital 136 of the provisional Regulation,
for the functions of importers, was excessive, for two
reasons:

claimed that

findings,

the

It was also found that due to the infrequent time pattern
of exports of some PRC exporters, and the evolution the
USD/EUR exchange rate during the IP,
the use of
monthly exchange
significantly more
accurate result than the use of a single annual rate. The
calculations for all exporters were revised accordingly.

rates gave

a

— not all

in

that

namely

importers would perform all the functions
mentioned
packaging,
recital,
stocking, quality control, branding, and in some
cases a physical processing of
In
some cases, the electrodes would be exported from
the PRC in a condition that does not require most of
these operations to be performed by the importer,

the electrodes.

importer,

— even if such functions were to be performed by a
the
costs,
given
Community industry’s estimates, would be signifi-
cantly smaller than the amount of the adjustment
provisionally established by the Commission.

according

its

to

that

both

the Community-produced

The Commission has further investigated this issue by,
among others, obtaining detailed information from an
additional unrelated importer. The investigation has
shown
and
imported electrodes are sold through a wide variety of
channels, and are often re-sold several times between the
producer and the end-user. The players involved in this
market perform, to different extents, functions such as
quality control,
re-packaging,
marketing and after-sales support. Having examined all
the available information,
it was considered a more
systematic and uniform way to take into account the
functions of
a comparison of
import prices and Community industry prices adjusted
to a common level of trade.

and logistics,

importers

to make

storage

For this purpose, the sales of the like product by the
Community industry in the Community market were
used as a basis to estimate the differences in prices
resulting from different
traders,
retailers, end-users and original equipment manufac-
turers. This adjustment for level of trade was therefore
applied instead of the adjustment mentioned in recital
136 of the provisional Regulation.

levels of

trade,

i.e.

(49) One exporter and one exporters’ association argued that
the lead time between the purchase of the raw material
to the sale of a finished tungsten electrode to a dealer is
significantly higher for the PRC exporters than for the
Community industry, due to longer transport time and
custom procedures. This would mean that the prices of
the PRC exporters naturally take a longer time to react to
the
the raw material price increases
Community industry and,
this
should be taken into account in the injury calculation.

than those of
the importer claimed,

at

(50) While it is recognised that the time lag between the
product being manufactured and delivery
the
customer is greater for Chinese exporters, this is not
considered to be a relevant factor for the injury determi-
nation. The data used in the investigation are defined by
invoice date, which normally corresponds to the date on
which the goods have been shipped from the factory.
There is also a time lag between the time the price is
negotiated on the basis on the current levels of raw
material prices and the shipping date, but there is no
reason to assume
for
Chinese producers than for those in the Community.
Therefore, this argument has to be rejected.

this would be greater

that

(51) Accordingly,

the definitive weighted average

injury

margins for companies granted either IT or MET are:

Company

Definitive injury
margin

Shandong Weldstone Tungsten
Industry Co., Ltd

Shaanxi Yuheng Tungsten & Molybdenum
Industrial Co., Ltd

Beijing Advanced Metal Materials Co., Ltd

All other companies

22,7 %

41,0 %

38,8 %

63,5 %

(47) One exporter pointed out a mistake in the sales data used
for the calculation of his injury margin. Other clerical
errors in the data used for the injury margins were
also corrected. As a result of
the
injury margin of one exporter and the country-wide
injury margin have been reduced.

these corrections,

2. Form and level of the duties

(52)

In the light of the foregoing and in accordance with
Article 9(4) of the basic Regulation, a definitive anti-
dumping duty should be imposed at the level sufficient
to eliminate the injury caused by the imports without
exceeding the dumping margin found.

13.3.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 72/7

(53) On the basis of the above, the definitive duties are as

3. Undertakings

follows:

Company

Definitive duty

Shandong Weldstone Tungsten
Industry Co., Ltd

Shaanxi Yuheng Tungsten & Molybdenum
Industrial Co., Ltd.

Beijing Advanced Metal Materials Co., Ltd.

All other companies

17,0 %

41,0 %

38,8 %

63,5 %

(54)

the

duty

company

individual

findings of

the present

anti-dumping

(as opposed to the

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

(e.g.

(55) Any claim requesting the application of these individual
following a
company anti-dumping duty rates
change in the name of
the entity or following the
setting up of new production or sales entities) should
be addressed to the Commission (1) forthwith with all
in particular any modification in
relevant information,
the company’s activities linked to production, domestic
and export sales associated with, for example, that name
that change in the production and sales
change or
then be
entities.
amended accordingly by updating the list of companies
benefiting from individual duty rates.

the Regulation will

If appropriate,

(57)

(58)

Following the disclosure of the essential facts and consi-
derations on the basis of which it was intended to
recommend the imposition of definitive anti-dumping
two exporting producers in the PRC offered
duties,
price undertakings in accordance with Article 8(1) of
the basic Regulation.

The product concerned is characterised by a considerable
number of product types with significant price variations
between them. The two exporting producers offered only
one minimum import price (MIP) for all product types at
a level which would not have guaranteed the elimination
of injurious dumping for all products. It also needs to be
noted that the high number of product types makes it
virtually impossible to establish meaningful MIPs for each
product type which could be properly monitored by the
Commission even if the exporting producers had offered
different MIPs for each of them.

(59) Moreover during the IP the product concerned showed a
considerable volatility in prices and therefore it is not
suitable for a fixed price undertaking.
to
overcome this problem both companies offered to
index the MIP on the basis of the volatility of the APT
prices. However, as no close correlation between the
volatility of APT prices and the volatility of TE prices
the
could be established during the IP for one of
the MIP on
exporting producers,
basis of the APT prices was not feasible for this particular
exporting producer.

the indexation of

In order

(60)

Furthermore one of the exporting producers has several
related companies in the EC and these related companies
also sell other products to the same customers. This
complex sales structure raises the risk of circumvention.

(61) On the basis of the above, it was concluded that these

undertaking offers had to be rejected.

(62)

(56)

In order to ensure a proper enforcement of the anti-
dumping duty, the residual duty level should not only
apply to the non-cooperating exporters, but also to those
companies which did not have any exports during the IP.
However, the latter companies are invited, when they
fulfil the requirements of Article 11(4) of the basic Regu-
lation, second paragraph,
for a
review pursuant to that Article in order to have their
situation examined individually.

to present a request

(1) European Commission

Directorate-General for Trade
Direction H, office J-79 5/16
B-1049 Brussels

4. Definitive collection of provisional duties and

special monitoring

In view of the magnitude of the dumping margins found
and in the light of the level of the injury caused to the
Community industry, it is considered necessary that the
amounts secured by way of the provisional anti-dumping
duty, imposed by the provisional Regulation, i.e. Regu-
lation (EC) No 1350/2006,
should be definitively
collected to the extent of the amount of the definitive
duties imposed. Where the definitive duties are lower
amounts provisionally
than the provisional duties,
secured in excess of the definitive rate of anti-dumping
duties shall be released. Where the definitive duties are
higher than the provisional duties, only the amounts
secured at the level of the provisional duties shall be
definitely collected.

L 72/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

13.3.2007

(63)

In order to minimise the risks of circumvention due to
the high difference in the duty rates, it is considered that
special measures are needed in this case to ensure the
proper application of
the anti-dumping duties. These
special measures, which only apply to companies for
which an individual duty rate is introduced, include the
following: the presentation to the customs authorities of
the Member States of a valid commercial invoice, which
shall conform to the requirements set out in the Annex
to this Regulation. Imports not accompanied by such an
invoice shall be made subject
to the residual anti-
dumping duty applicable to all other exporters.

Company

Shandong Weldstone Tungsten
Industry Co., Ltd

Anti-
Dumping
Duty

TARIC
Additional
Code

17,0 %

A754

Shaanxi Yuheng Tungsten & Molybdenum
Industrial Co., Ltd

41,0 %

A755

Beijing Advanced Metal Materials Co., Ltd

38,8 %

All other companies

63,5 %

A756

A999

(64) Moreover it is recalled that should the exports by the
companies benefiting from lower individual duty rates
increase significantly in volume after the imposition of
the anti-dumping measures, such an increase in volume
could be considered as constituting in itself a change in
the pattern of trade due to the imposition of measures
within the meaning of Article 13(1) of the basic Regu-
lation.
the
conditions are met, an anti-circumvention investigation
inter alia,
may be initiated. This
examine the need for the removal of
individual duty
rates and the consequent imposition of a country-wide
duty,

In such circumstances,

investigation may,

and provided

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

tungsten welding electrodes,

A definitive anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on
1.
imports of
including tungsten
bars and rods for welding electrodes, containing 94 % or
than those obtained
more by weight of
tungsten, other
falling
simply by sintering, whether or not cut
within CN codes ex 8101 99 10 and ex 8515 90 00 (TARIC
codes 8101 99 10 10 and 8515 90 00 10) and originating in
the People’s Republic of China.

to length,

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

Unless otherwise

4.
concerning customs duties shall apply.

specified,

the provisions

in force

Article 2

Amounts secured by way of provisional anti-dumping duties
to Regulation (EC) No 1350/2006 on imports of
pursuant
certain tungsten electrodes,
including tungsten bars and rods
for welding electrodes, containing 94 % or more by weight of
than those obtained simply by sintering,
tungsten, other
falling within CN codes
whether or not cut
ex 8101 99 10
codes
(TARIC
and
8101 99 10 10 and 8515 90 00 10) and originating in the
People’s Republic of China shall be definitively collected. The
amounts secured in excess of the amount of the definitive anti-
dumping duties shall be released. Where the definitive duties are
higher than the provisional duties, only the amounts secured at
the level of the provisional duties shall be definitely collected.

ex 8515 90 00

to length,

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

Article 3

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following 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, 9 March 2007.

For the Council
The President

F.-W. STEINMEIER

13.3.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 72/9

ANNEX

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

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

2. The following declaration ‘I, the undersigned, certify that the [volume] of tungsten electrodes sold for export to the
European Community covered by this invoice was manufactured by (company name and address) (TARIC additional
code) in (country concerned). I declare that the information provided in this invoice is complete and correct.’