Commission Regulation (EC) No 642/2008 of 4 July 2008 imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of certain prepared or preserved citrus fruits (namely mandarins, etc.) originating in the People's Republic of China
Date: 2008-07-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: China, anti-dumping duty, citrus fruit, import, originating product, prepared foodstuff, preserved product

5.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 178/19

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 642/2008

of 4 July 2008

imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of certain prepared or preserved citrus fruits
(namely mandarins, etc.) originating in the People's Republic of China

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

registration under Regulation (EC) No 1295/2007
of 5 November 2007 (3).

Having regard to the Treaty
Community,

establishing the European

(4)

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 7 thereof,

After consulting the Advisory Committee,

imposed
imports of

Commission
against

is recalled that safeguard measures were in force
It
the same product until 8th November 2007.
against
provisional
safeguard
The
measures
certain prepared or
preserved citrus fruits (namely mandarins, etc.) by Regu-
lation (EC) No 1964/2003 of 7 November 2003 (4). Defi-
nitive safeguard measures followed by Regulation (EC)
No 658/2004 of 7 April 2004 (the “Safeguards Regu-
lation”) (5). Both the provisional and definitive safeguard
measures consisted of a tariff rate quota i.e. a duty was
only due once the volume of duty free imports had been
exhausted.

Whereas:

1.2. Parties concerned by the proceeding

(5)

(6)

(7)

(1)

(2)

1. PROCEDURE

1.1. Initiation of the proceeding

On 20 October 2007 the Commission announced by a
notice published in the Official
the European
Union (2) the initiation of an anti-dumping proceeding
with regard to imports into the Community of certain
prepared or preserved citrus fruits (namely mandarins,
etc.) originating in the People’s Republic of China (‘PRC’).

Journal of

(‘the

(FNACV)

The proceeding was initiated as a result of a complaint
lodged on 6 September 2007 by the Spanish National
Federation of Associations of Processed Fruit and Vege-
complainant’) on behalf of
tables
producers representing 100 % of the total Community
production of certain prepared or preserved citrus fruits
(namely mandarins
contained
etc.). The
evidence of dumping of the product concerned and of
material
injury resulting thereof, which was considered
sufficient to justify the initiation of a proceeding.

complaint

(3)

On 9 November 2007, the Commission made imports
of the same product originating in the PRC subject to

their

producers

association,

complaining
The Commission officially advised the
Community
the
and
exporting producers and their association, suppliers and
importers and their associations known to be concerned,
and the authorities of the PRC of the opening of the
proceeding. Interested parties were given an opportunity
to make their views known in writing and to request a
in the notice of
hearing within the time limit
initiation.

set

producers,

complainant

The
producers,
importers, and their respective associations made their
interested parties, who so requested
views known. All
and showed that
reasons why
there were particular
they should be heard, were granted a hearing.

exporting

In the notice of initiation, the Commission indicated that
sampling for the determination of dumping and injury in
accordance with Article 17 of the basic Regulation may
be applied. In order to enable the Commission to decide
whether sampling would be necessary and, if so, to select
a sample, exporting producers and unrelated importers
were
known to the
Commission and to provide, as specified in the notice
of initiation, basic information on their activities related
to the product concerned during the investigation period
(1 October 2006 to 30 September 2007).

themselves

to make

asked

(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 C 246, 20.10.2007, p. 15.

(3) OJ L 288, 6.11.2007, p. 22.
(4) OJ L 290, 8.11.2003, p. 3.
(5) OJ L 104, 8.4.2004, p. 67.

L 178/20

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

5.7.2008

(8)

(9)

if

treatment

they so wished,

In order to allow exporting producers in the PRC to
submit a claim for market economy treatment (‘MET’)
(‘IT’),
the
or individual
Commission sent MET and IT claim forms
to the
Chinese companies known to be concerned. Five compa-
nies/groups
requested MET
pursuant to Article 2(7) of the basic Regulation or IT
should the investigation establish that
they did not
meet
for MET. However, only one
company claiming MET was selected in the sample (see
recital
(26) below). Nine companies/groups of related
companies requested only IT.

the conditions

companies

related

of

The Commission sent questionnaires to all Community
producers known to be concerned and to their associa-
tion, to all
importers selected in the sample and their
associations, to suppliers known to be concerned and
to the exporting producers selected in the sample.
In
to all potential
addition, questionnaires were
analogue
the
by
producers
country
Commission (see recitals (40)-(41) below).

identified

sent

(10) Questionnaire

received

replies were

from four
Community producers representing 100 % of the total
Community production, from the six sampled unrelated
importers in the Community and their respective asso-
ciations. Replies were also received from all sampled
Chinese
related
producers
companies. Finally, submissions were also received from
the association of Chinese producers and one importers
association.

exporting

their

and

— Cofrusa SA, Murcia, Spain

— Agriconsa SA, Valencia, Spain

— Videca SA, Valencia, Spain.

1.3. Investigation period (IP)

(12)

The investigation of dumping and injury covered the
period from 1 October 2006 to 30 September 2007
(‘IP’). The
the
assessment
from
1 October 2002 to the end of the investigation period
(‘period considered’).

examination of
injury
of

relevant

covered

period

trends

the

for

2. PRODUCT CONCERNED AND LIKE PRODUCT

2.1. General remarks

(13) Mandarins are harvested in autumn and winter, with the
harvesting and canning season starting early October and
finishing around the end of January, the following year.
The fresh product is destined for the fresh fruit market,
for juicing or for canning. Practice in the mandarin
canning industry is to use the season (the period from
1 October in one year to 30 September in the following
year) as the basis for comparisons, and the Commission
has adopted this practice in its analysis.

(11)

The Commission sought and verified all the information
deemed necessary for a provisional determination of
dumping, resulting injury and Community interest and
carried out verifications at the premises of the following
companies:

(14)

Exporting producers in the PRC:

— Yichang Rosen Foods Co., Ltd., Zhejiang

— Huangyan No.1 Canned Food Factory Zhejiang and
its related trader Merry & Co., Ltd., Huangyan

— Zhejiang Xinshiji Foods Co., Ltd. and its related
producer Hubei Xinshiji Foods Co., Ltd., Sanmen.

2.2. Product concerned

The product
concerned is prepared or preserved
mandarins (including tangerines and satsumas), clem-
entines, wilkings and other similar citrus hybrids, not
containing added spirit, whether or not containing
added sugar or other sweetening matter, and as defined
under CN heading 2008. These are currently classified as
follows: CN code 2008 30 55 covers
the product
concerned not containing added spirit but containing
added sugar and in immediate packings of a net
content exceeding 1 kg; CN code 2008 30 75 covers
the product concerned not containing added spirit but
containing added sugar and in immediate packings of a
net content not exceeding 1kg. In addition, a part of ex
CN code 2008 30 90 contains mandarins
(including
tangerines and satsumas), clementines, wilkings and
other similar citrus hybrids prepared or preserved with
no added spirit or added sugar (usually in water or its
own juice).

Community producers:

— Halcon Group SA, Murcia, Spain

(15)

the product
The preliminary investigation shows that
concerned is obtained by peeling and segmenting
certain varieties of small citrus fruit (mainly satsumas)
which are then packaged in a medium of sugar syrup,
juice or water. Peeling and segmenting can either be
carried out manually or by machine.

5.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 178/21

(16)

The product concerned is produced in various weights to
meet the demands both of the consumer market and of
the catering and food industries. The vast majority of the
consumer market
is taken by the 312 g net weight/
(175 g drained) size, although the share of sales taken
by the larger 850 g/(480 g) size is increasing. Larger
packaging sizes, particularly those of 2,65 kg/(1 500 g)
and 3,1 kg/(1 700 g), are used by the catering and food
industries, with the 2,65 kg format being the most
popular.

(e)

(17)

Satsumas, clementines and other small citrus fruit are
commonly known by the collective name ‘mandarin’.
Most of these different varieties of fruit are suitable to
be used as fresh product or for juicing or canning. They
are similar and their preparations or preservations are,
thus, considered as one single product.

2.3. Like product

(18)

It was argued by one European importer that the product
concerned imported from the PRC was of a higher
quality as the Chinese mandarin orange contains less
seeds/pips.

(19) As in the Safeguards Regulation, some parties argued that
there are differences between the product concerned and
the product produced by the Community industry in
terms of quality. Community producers argued that
consumers have a preference for their products due to
perceived higher hygiene standards during the canning
process.

(20)

The Commission investigated these claims and found the
following:

(a)

the imported product and the Community product
shared the same or similar physical properties such as
size, shape and texture. There were some
taste,
differences in terms of quality but
these did not
the product nor
affect
their perception by the user/consumer as a single
product category;

the basic characteristics of

(b) the imported product and the Community product
were sold via similar or identical sales channels. Price
information was readily available to buyers and the
the
and
product
Community producers competed mainly on price;

concerned

product

the

of

(c)

the imported product and the Community product
both serve the same or similar end-uses;

(24)

(d) the imported product and the Community product
were both perceived by consumers as interchangeable

and satisfy the same type of demand. In this respect,
the differences identified by certain importers were of
minor importance for the purposes of the analysis
under this section.

the

classified

the imported product and the Community product
normally
ex CN code
under
2008 30 90 (citrus fruit with no added spirit or
added sugar usually in water or
its own juice),
which were not covered by the safeguard measures,
serve also the same or similar end-uses and are
perceived by consumers as fully interchangeable and
characteristics with products
alike
normally classified under the other two CN codes,
i.e. 2008 30 55 and 2008 30 75.

in all basic

Given that ‘likeness’ does not require completely identical
products, any minor variations were not sufficient
to
change the overall
likeness between the
finding of
imported and Community products.

(21)

Therefore, the Commission concludes that the imported
product and the Community product are considered to
be alike within the meaning of Article 1(4) of the basic
Regulation.

3. SAMPLING

3.1. Sampling for exporting producers in the PRC

(22)

(23)

In view of the large number of exporting producers in
sampling was envisaged in the notice of
the PRC,
initiation for
in
accordance with Article 17(1) of the basic Regulation.

determination of

dumping,

the

if so,

In order to enable the Commission to decide whether
sampling would be necessary and,
to select a
sample, exporting producers were requested to make
themselves known within 15 days from the date of the
initiation of the investigation and to provide basic infor-
mation on their export and domestic sales, their precise
activities with regard to the production of the product
concerned and the names and activities of all their related
companies involved in the production and/or selling of
the product concerned. The authorities of the PRC and
the producers' association were also consulted.

3.1.1. Pre-selection of cooperating exporting producers

Sixteen companies/groups of related companies in the
PRC came forward and provided the requested infor-
mation within the given deadline set in the notice of
initiation. All of
to the
them reported
Community during the IP and expressed a wish to parti-
cipate in the sample.

exports

L 178/22

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

5.7.2008

(25)

(26)

Exporting producers which did not make themselves
known within the aforesaid period or did not provide
the requested information in due time, were considered
as non-cooperating with the investigation. However, a
import data and the
comparison between Eurostat
volume of exports to the Community of the product
concerned reported for
companies
the
mentioned in recital (24) suggests that the co-operation
of Chinese exporting producers was very high.

IP by the

3.1.2. Selection of the sample

In accordance with Article 17(1) of the basic Regulation,
the size of the exporting producers with regard to export
sales to the Community was taken into account in the
selection of the sample. Based on this criterion, a sample
of four exporting producers, two of them related, was
chosen. Based on the sampling information, the chosen
companies accounted, in the IP, for more than 60 % of
the total volume of exports to the Community of the
product concerned reported by the companies referred to
in recital (24) above. In addition, one of them had also
made substantial domestic sales of the product concerned
in the IP. It was therefore considered that such sample
would allow limiting the investigation to a reasonable
number of exporting producers which could be inves-
tigated within the time available while ensuring a high
level
producers
concerned, as well as their association and the authorities
of
the PRC, were consulted and raised no objection
within the time limit set for that purpose.

representation. All

exporting

of

3.2. Individual examination

(27) None of

the exporting producers which were not
included in the sample claimed an individual dumping
margin by providing the relevant information within the
given deadline, with a view to the application of
Article 17(3) of the basic Regulation. Therefore, an indi-
vidual examination of exporting producers was not made
in this investigation.

3.3. Sampling for importers

(28)

In view of the large number of importers identified from
the complaint
itself and from the previous safeguard
investigation, sampling was also envisaged in the notice
of initiation in accordance with Article 17(1) of the basic
Regulation. A large number of
importers offered to
cooperate. The six major importers in terms of volume
of imports were selected for the sample. These importers
represent slightly more than 60 % of total Community
imports.

4. DUMPING

4.1. Market Economy Treatment

(29)

Pursuant to Article 2(7)(b) of the basic Regulation,
in
anti-dumping investigations concerning imports originat-

ing in the PRC, normal value shall be determined in
accordance with paragraphs 1 to 6 of the said Article
for those producers which were found to meet
the
criteria laid down in Article 2(7)(c) of the basic Regu-
lation.

(30)

Briefly, and for ease of reference only, the MET criteria
are set out in summarised form below:

1. Business decisions regarding prices and costs are made
in response to market conditions and without State
interference;

2. Accounting records are independently audited, in line
with international accounting standards and applied
for all purposes;

3. There are no significant distortions carried over from

the former non-market economy system;

4. Legal certainty and stability is provided by bankruptcy

and property laws;

5. Currency exchanges are carried out at the market rate.

(31)

In the present
the exporting
investigation, one of
producers included in the sample (see recitals (22) to
(26) above) replied to the MET claim form.

(32)

This exporting producer cannot receive MET because it
failed to show that it fulfils the conditions set out in the
first, second and third criterion of Article 2(7)(c) of the
basic Regulation. In particular, as far as criterion 1 is
concerned,
it was established on spot that the labour
contracts of the company were signed by the workers
blank, without any reference
to remuneration and
working hours. It was thus impossible to determine the
conditions under which the workers were recruited and
paid and consequently whether the labour cost reflected
supply and demand. As far as criterion 2 is concerned, it
was established on spot that fundamental International
Accounting Standards were disregarded (i.e. accrual
principle,
the
amounts reported in the accounts and the actual source
lack of faithful representations of
accounting material,
transactions) both in the accounts and in their audit
which put into question the reliability of the company's
accounts. With regard to criterion 3, it was established
that the company benefitted from a number of subsidies
(e.g. refund of VAT never paid by the suppliers/farmers
and certain export subsidies from the Fund for Provincial
Foreign Trade Development Projects as well as an export
bonus), which indicates that significant distortions from
the former non-market economy system are still in place.

inconsistencies

offsetting,

between

5.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 178/23

(33)

the foregoing,

the sole Chinese exporting
In light of
producer which has requested MET has not shown that
that it fulfils all the criteria set out in Article 2(7)(c) of
the basic Regulation and, thus, could not be granted
MET.

4.2. Individual treatment

(34)

(35)

(36)

to Article 2(7)(a) of

the basic Regulation, a
Pursuant
country-wide duty,
is established for countries
falling under that Article, except in those cases where
companies are able to demonstrate that they meet all
criteria set out in Article 9(5) of the basic Regulation.

if any,

The sole exporting producer
requested MET, claimed also IT in the event
would not be granted MET. The other
producers included in the sample also claimed IT.

in the sample which
it
that
exporting

For all companies concerned, the preliminary examina-
tion of
the
requirements for IT as set forth in Article 9(5) of the
basic Regulation.

showed that all met

IT claims

their

(37)

It was therefore concluded that IT should provisionally
be granted to the following exporting producers in the
PRC:

— Yichang Rosen Foods Co., Ltd., Zhejiang

— Huangyan No.1 Canned Food Factory Zhejiang,

Huangyan

— Zhejiang Xinshiji Foods Co., Ltd. and its related
producer Hubei Xinshiji Foods Co., Ltd., Sanmen.

4.3. Normal Value

(38)

For the reasons stated above, no MET was granted to any
exporting producer in the PRC.

(39)

Therefore, normal value shall be determined for all
Chinese
accordance with
Article 2(7)(a) of the basic Regulation.

producers

exporting

in

parties were
in this

in the Community for
invited

i.e. the prices actually paid or
other reasonable basis,
like product.
the
payable
their
submit
to
Interested
comments
respect. The Commission itself
continued to seek any potential analogue countries
after the publication of
initiation. The
Commission sought co-operation from two companies
in Thailand. One of them initially agreed to co-operate
in the investigation but
failed to reply to the ques-
tionnaire later on. The other company did not react at
all.

the notice of

(41)

(42)

Two exporting producers from the country concerned
and an association of
and wholesalers
disagreed with basing the normal value on the prices
paid or payable in the Community but did not offer
any other solution which would comply with the basic
Regulation.

importers

In view of the above,
it was provisionally decided to
determine normal value for all exporting producers in
the sample on any other reasonable basis,
in this case
on the basis of the prices actually paid or payable in the
in accordance with
Community for the like product,
Article 2(7)(a) of the basic Regulation.

(43)

Following the choice of the prices paid or payable in the
Community, normal value was calculated on the basis of
the data verified at
the co-operating
Community producers listed in recital (11) above.

the premises of

(44)

The domestic sales of these Community producers of the
like product were found to be representative compared
to the product concerned exported to the Community by
the exporting producers included in the sample.

profit margin,

(45) As the sales prices of the Community industry were loss-
they had to be duly adjusted to include a
making,
under
reasonable
Article 2(7)(a) of the basic Regulation. The 6,8 % profit
used was the level of profit achieved in the last canning
season (2000/2001) before the huge increase in Chinese
imports that led to the imposition of safeguard measures,
i.e., the last season where market conditions were not
influenced by injurious imports at abnormally low prices.

foreseen

as

(40) According to information contained in the complaint,
the product
concerned is not being produced in
significant quantities outside the Community and the
It was therefore suggested in the
country concerned.
initiation to base the normal value on any
notice of

4.4. Export prices

(46)

The export prices were based on the prices actually paid
when sold to independent customers for export from the
PRC to the Community.

L 178/24

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

5.7.2008

4.5. Comparison

(47)

The comparison between normal value and export price
was made on an ex-factory basis.

(48)

(49)

For the purpose of ensuring a fair comparison between
the normal value and the export price, due adjustments
were made for differences affecting prices and price
the
comparison in accordance with Article 2(10) of
basic Regulation. Adjustments were made, whenever
necessary,
insurance and
any other transport related costs.

for differences in transport,

4.6. Dumping margin

explained above.

In view of the foregoing, and pursuant to Article 2(11)
and (12) of
the provisional
the basic Regulation,
dumping margin for all exporters in the PRC was estab-
lished on the basis of a comparison of a weighted
average normal value by product type with a weighted
average export price by product type determined and
adjusted as
In accordance with
consistent practice, a weighted average dumping margin
was calculated for related exporting producers. For the
co-operating
a
weighted average dumping margin based on the
dumping margins of the companies in the sample was
co-operation of
calculated.
exporting producers was very high (see recital
(25)
above), the highest individuali dumping margin of the
companies in the sample was attributed to all other
companies.

Furthermore,

producers

exporting

sampled

since

not

the

(50) On this basis

the provisional dumping margins,
cif Community
the

expressed as
frontier price duty unpaid are:

a percentage of

— Zhejiang Xinshiji Foods Co., Ltd. and its related
producer Hubei Xinshiji Foods Co., Ltd., Sanmen
134,7 %

— Co-operating exporting producers not included in the

sample 128,4 %

— All other companies 139,6 %.

5. INJURY

5.1. General Remarks

It should be recalled that the product in question was
subject to safeguard measures during most of the period
considered. This was
the
Community industry suffered serious injury at the end
of the period under scrutiny in the safeguard investi-
gation (i.e. from 1998/1999 to 2002/2003).

justified by the fact

that

5.2. Community
industry

production

and

Community

In the course of the present investigation it was found
the product concerned was manufactured in the
that
Community by four Community producers on whose
behalf
the complaint was lodged (Halcon Group SA,
Murcia, Spain; Cofrusa SA, Murcia, Spain; Agriconsa
SA, Valencia, Spain; Videca SA, Valencia, Spain). None
of these producers was related to any Chinese exporters
or importers of the product concerned from the PRC.

The investigation showed that the Community producers
the product
had produced around 34 100 tonnes of
concerned in the IP. This represents 100 % of the total
volume of the like product produced in the Community.
The aforementioned Community producers are therefore
deemed to constitute the Community industry within the
meaning of Articles 4(1) and 5(4) of the basic Regulation.

(51)

(52)

(53)

— Yichang Rosen Foods Co., Ltd., Zhejiang 139,6 %

— Huangyan No.1 Canned Food Factory Zhejiang,

Huangyan 87,4 %

(54)

It is noted that in the safeguards investigation there were
eight cooperating producers in the Community. The fact
that there only remain four producers in the Community
reflects the closure of some firms and mergers of others.

5.3. Community Consumption

(55) During the period considered the Community consumption developed as follows.

2002/03

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

IP

Community Consumption (in tonnes)

78 623

90 197

80 065

80 145

78 859

Index (2002/03 = 100)

100

115

102

102

100

5.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 178/25

(56)

Community consumption was established on the basis of the total volume of EU sales of the product
concerned by the Community industry, plus EU sales of former Community producers who no
longer produced during the IP, plus imports from all third countries. The figures concerning the
total EU sales of the product concerned by the Community industry derive from verified data
provided by the Community producers. Sales of former Community producers emanate from esti-
mations by the complainant and have been verified with the results of the safeguard investigation
including notice C322/06 published in the Official Journal of the European Union of 17 December
2005. Imported quantities were derived from Eurostat.

(57) As presented in the table above, the consumption of the product concerned in the Community has
been relatively stable over the period considered with the exception of the increase observed in
2003/04. This apparent increase in consumption may be explained essentially by the ‘stockpiling’ of
the product concerned as described in the notice mentioned in the recital above. Eurostat data
confirm this phenomenon in the new Member States, prior to their accession to the EU in May
2004.
imports in the new Member States reached almost 15 000 tonnes before their
accession (during the season 2003/2004) and considerably lowered to ca. 4 000 tonnes/year on
average during the seasons 2004/2005, 2005/2006 and 2006/2007. In the IP, consumption can be
deemed stable at a level consistent with the preceding period of the years 2005 and 2006.

Indeed,

5.4. Imports into the Community from the PRC

5.4.1. Volume and market share of imports of the product concerned

(58)

The evolution of imports from the PRC, in volume and market share, has been the following:

Import volumes

2002/03

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

IP

PRC in tonnes

51 193

65 878

49 584

61 456

56 108

Index (2002/03 = 100)

100

129

97

120

110

Source: Eurostat

Market shares of consumption

2002/03

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

IP

PRC

65,1 %

73 %

61,9 %

76,7 %

71,1 %

(59) A similar surge in imports from the PRC can be seen in 2003/04 as observed above in Community
consumption. These then fell back to lower levels in 2004/05 (post-accession of new Member States).
The market share of imports from China remains consistently high, as China is the main exporter of
this product to the EU and the rest of the world.

5.4.2. Prices of imports and price undercutting/underselling

2002/03

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

Import prices from the PRC Source
Eurostat (EUR/tonne)

Index (2002 = 100)

595

100

525

531

88

89

612

103

IP

596

100

L 178/26

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

5.7.2008

(60)

The above table shows the development of average import prices from the PRC. Over the period
considered prices fell only in 2003/04. In the IP, they recovered back to their original
in
2002/2003.

level

(61) A comparison of selling prices on the Community market during the IP was made between the prices
of Community industry and imports from the country concerned. In this market, the point which
serves as a reference for delivery of imports and Community production is Hamburg. For this reason
the relevant sales prices of Community industry were those to independent customers, adjusted where
necessary to a Hamburg-delivered level, after deduction of discounts and rebates. These prices were
compared with the sales prices charged by the Chinese exporting producers net of discounts and
adjusted where necessary to cif Hamburg plus duty and customs clearance paid. The adjustments
included, where appropriate, the safeguard duty paid of EUR 301/MT for exports which were not
covered by the quota.

(62)

imports of the product concerned were sold in the
The comparison showed that during the IP,
the Community industry’s prices, when expressed as a
Community at prices which undercut
percentage of
the latter ranging from 19,6 % to 35,2 % based on the data submitted by the
sampled cooperating exporting producers. In addition, the analysis of the price development of
the Community industry shows that substantial price suppression (and, during the IP, depression)
has taken place (see infra).

5.5. Situation of the Community industry

(63)

In accordance with Article 3(5) of the basic Regulation, the examination of the impact of the dumped
imports on the Community industry included an evaluation of all economic factors and indices
having a bearing on the state of the industry from 1 October 2002 to the IP.

(64)

The Community industry data below is the aggregated information from the four Community
producers.

Production, production capacity and capacity utilisation

(65)

The table below indicates the evolution of production, production capacity and capacity utilisation of
the Community producers:

2002/03

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

IP

Production (tonnes)

31 238

23 000

28 865

16 149

34 125

Index (2002/03 = 100)

100

73

92

52

109

Production capacity (tonnes)

74 380

74 380

74 380

66 380

68 380

Index (2002/03 = 100)

Capacity utilisation %

Index (2002/03 = 100)

100

42 %

100

100

31 %

74

100

39 %

93

89

24 %

57

92

50 %

119

(66) As shown in the table above, production during the period varied as a result of smaller harvests in
2003/04 and 2005/06. Production capacity fell towards the end of the period considered. The
capacity utilisation remained, irrespective of harvest fluctuations, at very low levels throughout the
period.

5.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 178/27

Stocks

(67)

The figures below represent the volume of stocks of the Community industry at the end of each
period.

2002/03

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

IP

Stocks (tonnes)

7 159

3 695

6 140

1 688

11 895

Index (2002/03 = 100)

100

52

86

24

166

(68)

It should be noted, that the product concerned has a long shelf life (of more than three years),
preserving their characteristics in terms of taste and colour.

(69)

Stocks have fluctuated throughout the period but have increased considerably during the IP. This
appears to be due to the pressure of dumped imports and to the expectation that safeguard measures
would disappear, thus paving the way for importers to switch from Community industry to Chinese
imports as a source of the product concerned.

Sales volume, market share and average sales prices

(70)

The figures below represent the sales volume, market share and average unit sales prices of the
Community industry.

Sales volume Community Industry in
tonnes

2002/03

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

IP

17 635

19 705

23 240

17 769

21 387

Index (2002/03 = 100)

100

112

132

101

121

Market share

22,4 %

21,8 %

29,0 %

22,2 %

27,1 %

Index (2002/03 = 100)

100

97

129

99

121

Average sales prices (EUR/tonne)

824,3

819,8

840,6

1 058,7

1 034,6

Index (2002/03 = 100)

100

99

102

128

125

(71) Notwithstanding the existence of safeguard measures and the disappearance of a number of
Community producers (whose market share decreased from 11,2 % in 2002/03 to 8,1 % in
2004/05 and disappeared afterward), the Community industry’s sales volumes slightly increased in
absolute terms, but remained low over the period considered. Indeed, Community industry's market
share gained only 4,7 percentage points over the period considered. Average sales prices have
increased in the period considered but not to the extent necessary to achieve a normal profit,
underlining the impact on price levels by the substantial imports from China at very low prices.

Growth

(72) Overall, it has to be noted that the Community industry's market share increased by around 5,2 % in
the period considered reaching a modest 27,6 % in the IP and showing that the pressure of the
Chinese imports did not allow the Community industry to substantially improve its performance.

L 178/28

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

5.7.2008

Profitability, return on investments

(73)

The pre-tax profit margin shown below relates to sales of the Community industry and reflects the
fact that the industry remained loss making, helped somewhat by the imposition of safeguard
measures but also jeopardised by the avoidance of measures due to stockpiling which was taking
place in parallel (see recital 57). The positive effect of safeguard measures is therefore particularly
reflected towards the end of the period considered.

Pre-tax Profit Margin

Index (2002 = 100)

Return on Investments (RoI)

2002/03

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

IP

– 3 %

100

– 3 %

– 17,6 %

– 17,3 %

– 12,6 %

– 4,3 %

585

7,2 %

575

4,3 %

420

141

– 31,2 %

– 28,9 %

(74)

The RoI above shows a trend towards decline after 2003/04. Deteriorating return on investment is
also an indication of the deterioration of the situation of the Community producers.

Cash flow

Cash flow (% of total sales)

2002

8,7 %

2003

2004

2005

– 0,5 %

– 1,6 %

– 4,6 %

2006

3,2 %

(75) As Community producers can other kind of fruits, cash flow could only be examined at total
company activity rather than in relation to the product concerned only. This indicator is therefore
less meaningful and is shown in terms of the financial years (calendar years). Nevertheless it can be
seen that a progressive deterioration took place until 2005 and a limited recovery occurred during
the IP.

Investment in the product concerned and the ability to raise capital

(76)

The trend for the investments of the Community industry is shown in the following table.

EUR

2002/03

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

IP

Investments

698 358

837 152

994 242

1 110 304

785 109

Index (2002/03 = 100)

100

120

142

159

112

(77) Despite the negative development seen for profitability above, the Community industry has increased
its investments in the product concerned in order to further improve its competitiveness in respect of
the product concerned. The investments were mainly made in machinery. These steps have signifi-
cantly contributed to improving the sampled Community industry's efficiency.

(78)

There is evidence of a reduced ability to raise capital over the period considered, inter alia given the
negative profit margins involved in production and the importance of the product in the overall
activity of the companies at hand.

5.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 178/29

Employment and productivity

2002/03

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

IP

Number of employees

1 975

1 965

1 837

1 546

2 091

Index (2002/03 = 100)

Productivity (hours worked/tonne
produced)

Index (2002/03 = 100)

100

17

100

99

16,8

99

93

16

94

78

16,5

97

106

15,5

91

Total hours worked during the season

531 000

386 000

462 000

266 000

529 000

Index (2002/03 = 100)

100

74

88

60

116

(79)

It should be recalled that the canning of the product concerned is by nature a seasonal activity lasting
4 or 5 months and that the bulk of the production is carried on by seasonal workers. Therefore the
ratio indicating the number of employees is less meaningful, while the total hours worked during the
season should be seen as the main employment
indicator. As shown in the above table, the
Community industry has progressively improved its productivity. In the IP, productivity achieved
its best level in the whole period. As a result the number of hours worked to produce 1 tonne of
finished product decreased from 17 in 2002/03 to 15,5 in the IP (– 9 %). The number of employees
peaked during the IP as a result of the return to high production volumes following the low volumes
manufactured in 2005/06. This was matched also by more hours worked during the IP season.
Indeed, productivity achieved by the Community industry in the IP confirms the efforts made to
further improve its efficiency in front of the massive inflow of dumped imports from China.

Wages

(80)

It has to be noted that data on wages, expressed in absolute figures, are not meaningful, due to high
fluctuations of the production level. The cost of wages per tonne produced is more indicative and
shows that, notwithstanding a natural increase of the wage per hour due to inflation, the gains of
productivity allowed the Community industry to decrease the wage per tonne produced by 3
percentage points.

2002/03

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

IP

5 022 165

3 927 820

4 558 624

3 350 390

5 317 744

100

161

100

78

171

106

91

158

98

67

207

129

106

155

97

Wages (EUR)

Index

Wages per tonne produced (EUR)

Index

Magnitude of dumping

(81)

The country-wide provisional dumping margin specified in recital (50) above is clearly above de
minimis level. Furthermore, given the volumes and the prices of the dumped imports, the impact of
the actual margin of dumping cannot be considered to be negligible.

Effects of past dumping or subsidization

(82)

There is no evidence of past dumping or subsidization for this product. However, it should be noted
that the Community industry is recovering from the effects of the greatly increased quantities of
imports that caused it serious injury and which led the Commission to impose both provisional and
definitive safeguard measures in 2003 and in 2004 (see recital (4)). As mentioned above in recitals
(57) and (70), these safeguard measures helped the industry to slightly improve their position
injurious dumping,
notwithstanding some stock-piling in 2003/2004, and,
would have been expected to generate a much more substantial overall
the
situation of the Community industry.

in the absence of

improvement of

L 178/30

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

5.7.2008

(83)

(84)

(85)

5.6. Conclusion on injury

The above analysis of the situation of the Community industry has to be seen in the light of the fact
that
there existed a much larger number of Community producers and a significantly larger
production capacity at the beginning of the period. According to Reg 658/2004 and notice C
322/06 capacity then reached ca. 129 000 MT. The aforementioned restructuring of the sector led
to a drop in production capacity of over 45 %. In this context, and due also to the existence of
it would have been expected that the remaining four producers would have
safeguard measures,
experienced an overall
inter alia, taken up a significant
proportion of the sales lost by the companies exiting the market, substantially increased production
and capacity utilisation, and enjoyed much more enhanced price/cost differentials that allowed for
profits to be accrued.

improvement, whereby they would have,

To the contrary, production has increased only by 9 %, capacity utilisation remained low (and
increased only because of a drop in capacity itself) and sales volumes remained weak notwithstanding
a concentration in the sector, with stocks increasing by no less that 66 %. Losses have continued
(– 4,3 %) and return on investment has become even more negative (– 28,9 %), notwithstanding
continuing investments to further increase its competitiveness and a 9 % productivity rise.

It is recalled that, during the period considered, the volume of dumped imports of the product
concerned from the PRC had increased by almost 10 % whilst the sales price was practically the same
as in 2002, notwithstanding the increase in the cost of raw materials. Moreover, in the IP, the sales
prices of the Community industry were substantially undercut by those of the dumped imports of the
product concerned.

(86)

Taking into account all of these factors, the provisional conclusion reached is that the Community
industry has suffered material injury within the meaning of Article 3 of the basic Regulation.

6.1. Preliminary remark

6. CAUSATION

(87)

In accordance with Article 3(6) and (7) of the basic Regulation, it was also examined whether there is
a causal link between the dumped imports from the PRC and the injury suffered by the Community
industry. Known factors other than the dumped imports, which could at the same time have injured
the Community industry, were also examined to ensure that any possible injury caused by these other
factors was not attributed to the dumped imports.

6.2. Impact of the imports from the PRC

(88)

It is recalled that import volumes from the PRC continued to constitute no less that 70 % of the
Community market. In practice, given their clear market dominance, the impact of Chinese imports is
unmistakably a major cause of the deterioration of the situation of the Community industry.

(89)

This is even more so given the fact that Chinese prices have continued to significantly undercut those
of the Community industry — and to be made at levels significantly below Community industry
costs, indicating a predatory intent. The Community industry reacted to the large import volumes at
very low price levels, by trying to maintain a reasonable market share and capping their prices. They
were, thus, unable to achieve normal profitability.

(90)

It is therefore clear that there is a strong causal
volumes at ever lower prices and the injury suffered by the Community industry.

link between the significant increase in imports

5.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 178/31

6.3. Impact of imports from other third countries

(91)

The volume of non-Chinese imports represented less than 2 % in the IP of total EU imports. It is for
this reason that their impact (if any) is considered marginal. It has been alleged that such imports
were in fact re-sales of Chinese products. This is reinforced by the absence of sufficient production in
other countries, as demonstrated by the lack of an appropriate analogue country (see recitals (40)-
(41) above).

6.4. Impact of changes in export performance of the Community industry

(92) As can be seen from the table below, exports made by the Community industry decreased over the

‘period considered’.

2002/03

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

IP

Export Sales Volume (tonnes)

15 376

6 959

3 638

2 630

2 344

Index (2002 = 100)

100

45

24

17

15

(93)

(94)

The Community industry once supplied the product concerned to the USA as a traditional market.
Today, however, the main source of exports to the USA (and indeed to most importing countries) is
China, which appears to follow a similar strategy of dumping and significant undercutting of
Community industry exports to the USA.

Even if the Community industry had maintained similar levels of exports volumes and prices, the
sheer degree of the penetration of the Chinese imports, as well as the size of price undercutting, point
to a significant material
impact of the aforesaid imports upon the situation of the Community
industry. Rather than breaking the causal link, the drop in export performance by the Community
industry might be considered as a prediction of what would well happen to Community sales of
industry if the pressure of dumped imports continues.

6.5. Impact of currency fluctuations

(95) Another factor which the Community industry) claimed to have caused injury is the falling currency
exchange rate of the Chinese RMB against the Euro. Between October 2002 and September 2007
there was a fall of more than 40 % in the exchange rate of the US Dollar to the Euro. As the Chinese
RMB is pegged against the US Dollar, this gave Chinese exports a competitive advantage over
European exports of the product concerned. To this purpose it is recalled that the investigation
has to establish whether the dumped imports (in terms of prices and volume) have caused material
injury to the Community industry or whether such material injury was due to other factors. In this
respect, Article 3(6) of the basic Regulation states that it is necessary to show that the price level of
the dumped imports cause injury. It therefore merely refers to a difference between price levels, and
there is thus no requirement to analyse the factors affecting the levels of those prices.

6.6. Supply and price of raw materials

(96)

Several parties have claimed that injury is not caused by dumped imports but by insufficient supply
and high prices of raw materials as a result of a bad harvest. The injury investigation period includes
a number of different harvests, with lower and higher raw material production — and prices.
However, these fluctuations are not correlated to the general situation of the Community industry
as can be seen, for example, from the table below. In fact, the situation of the Community industry
has deteriorated throughout the period considered regardless of raw material supply and prices. This
points to the existence of other explanatory factors for injury.

2002/03

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

IP

Unit cost of raw materials (EUR/tonne)

120,8

143,7

163,2

204,5

Pre-tax Profit Margin (see recital

(76))

– 3 %

– 17,6 %

– 17,3 %

– 12,6 %

155,9

– 4,3 %

L 178/32

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

5.7.2008

(97) On these grounds, there is no indication that this factor
is of such a nature that it could have broken the causal
link between the dumped imports from China and the
deterioration of the situation of the Community industry.

(102)

6.7. Investments

7. COMMUNITY INTEREST

7.1. General considerations

It has been examined whether compelling reasons exist
that could lead to the conclusion that it would not be in
the Community interest to impose anti-dumping duties
against imports from the PRC. The determination of the
Community interest was based on an appreciation of all
the
the
Community industry, importers and suppliers.

those of

involved,

interests

various

i.e.

(98)

(99)

(100)

the

claimed

situation of

Some parties
the
that
Community industry is a result of overinvestment. This
allegation appears however to be unfounded. Investments
made by the Community industry mainly concern
improvement of machinery in order to increase effi-
ciency. These investments contributed to productivity
gains which would tend to compensate potential short
term unit costs increases. These investments can not
therefore be considered as a factor having contributed
to injury. Therefore, this argument is rejected.

6.8. Quality differences

the

claimed

situation of

the
that
Some parties
Community industry is a result of the lower quality of
Community products. As explained above in recitals (18)
to (21), the Commission closely examined comparability
of products and found that both Community product
differences
are
and Chinese
encountered between the two products were minor and
did not support the allegation. In any event, if any, such
minor differences would appear to favour the Chinese
products,
leading to higher undercutting and under-
selling. Therefore, this argument is rejected.

product

alike.

The

6.9. Conclusion on causation

In conclusion, it is confirmed that the material injury of
the Community industry, which is characterized by weak
sales,
low utilisation of capacity and negative financial
results was caused by the dumped imports concerned.
Indeed,
export
the Community industry, of currency
performance of
raw materials, of quality
supply of
fluctuations, of
differences or of
investments on the Community
industry's negative developments was only limited, if any.

imports,

effect

other

the

of

of

7.2. Interest of the Community industry

(103) The Community industry has been suffering from
injurious dumped imports of
the product concerned
from the PRC. It is also recalled that the economic indi-
cators of the Community industry above showed dete-
riorating financial results during the period considered.
(4))
The imposition of safeguard measures (see recital
the effects of
allowed for some partial mitigation of
Chinese imports. Taking into account the nature of the
injury (i.e. recurrent
loss of domestic sales), a
further and substantial deterioration in the situation of
Community industry would be unavoidable in the
absence of measures.

losses,

(104) The

the

that

fruits

showed

investigation

to decrease

(namely mandarins,

Community
production consists of four producers in the prepared
or preserved citrus
etc.)
industry, which employs around 2 000 workers for the
the product concerned. The
production and sales of
product concerned corresponded to approximately 30 %
of their output. Should measures not be imposed, prices
would continue
and the Community
producers would incur further big losses, which would
In
be unsustainable
addition, this would result
in negative effects for the
remaining activity of the companies concerned. In view
of the investment made in production systems, it can be
expected that some Community producers would be
unable to recover their investments should measures
not be imposed. Based on the above, the Community
industry would obviously benefit from the adoption of
anti-dumping measures.

in the medium to long-term.

(105) Should

anti-dumping measures

the
Community industry would in all likelihood be able to
increase its selling prices to a level
that ensures a
reasonable profit margin.

imposed,

be

(101) Given the above analysis which has properly distin-
the known
guished and separated the effects of all
factors on the situation of
the Community Industry
from the injurious effects of the dumped imports, it is
hereby confirmed that these other factors as such do not
reverse the fact
the injury assessed must be
attributed to the dumped imports.

that

(106)

It is therefore provisionally concluded that anti-dumping
measures would be in the interest of the Community
industry.

5.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 178/33

7.3. Interest of unrelated importers

(107) Certain importers opposed measures. However, others,
and in particular
the six unrelated importers which
were sampled and provided answers to the questionnaire,
agreed with the principle of imposing measures given the
need to maintain a dual source of supply in a product
subject
to potential harvest-linked production fluc-
tuations. They also underlined the need for stability of
the market.

(108) The Commission also analysed the data submitted by the
cooperating importers in reply to the questionnaires. In
all cases, the activity of importing the product concerned
from China represents only a minor proportion of their
total activity. Any measure on imports of the product
concerned from China is therefore not likely to have
such an impact on the situation of the importer sector
as to be over-proportional to the benefits accrued by the
Community industry.

7.4. Interest of users

(109)

It is recalled that the product concerned, which is used
primarily as a food for private consumption as a dessert
is mainly sold to the retail sector.
or accompaniment,
When presented in larger containers,
is
mainly sold directly to the catering industry which
absorbs 25 % of
consumption. However, no
catering company cooperated in the investigation.

the product

the

among which the product

(110) Both the retail sector and the catering industry purchase,
in the framework of their current activity, a wide range
of products,
concerned
represents only a minor proportion of their needs and,
as a consequence, of their costs. Any measure on imports
of the product concerned from China is therefore not
likely to have such an impact on the situation of the
user sector as to be disproportional
to the benefits
accruing to the Community industry.

(111)

In addition it is recalled that, in the short and medium
term, non-imposition of measures could well lead to the
scaling down or outright
termination of Community
industry activity. This would imply that only one
source of supply would exist — and one which in
addition is subject by nature to harvest-linked fluc-
tuations. This would not be in the interest of users.

(112) No submission pointing to the contrary was received

during the investigation.

7.5. Interest of consumers

(113) No cooperation was forthcoming from consumer orga-
nisations. Even with large impacts on prices, the product

concerned is such a small proportion of household food
expenditure that
the impact on consumers would be
negligible.

(114)

In addition it is recalled that, in the short and medium
term, non-imposition of measures could well lead to the
termination of Community
scaling down or outright
industry activity. This would imply that only one
source of supply would exist — and one which,
in
addition,
is subject by nature to harvest-linked fluc-
tuations. This would not be in the interest of consumers.

7.6. Interest of suppliers

(115) The increase in dumped imports from the PRC is preju-
dicial to suppliers and the measures are in their interest.
The volume of raw material they supply to Community
turnover.
producers is an important source of
Significant disruption of agricultural activity in the
Spanish region concerned would occur if production
were to cease, particularly because canning is the major
outlet for certain varieties of citrus given their taste and
texture.

their

7.7. Conclusion on Community interest

(116)

In view of the above, it is provisionally concluded that
there are no compelling reasons not to impose anti-
dumping duties on imports of prepared or preserved
citrus fruits (namely mandarins, etc.) originating in the
PRC.

8. PROVISIONAL ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES

8.1. Injury elimination level

(117) The level of

the provisional anti-dumping measures
should be sufficient
to eliminate the injury to the
Community industry caused by the dumped imports,
without exceeding the dumping margin found. When
calculating the amount of duty necessary to remove the
effects of the injurious dumping, it was considered that
any measures should allow the Community industry to
cover its costs of production and to obtain an overall
profit before tax that could be reasonably achieved under
normal conditions of competition, i.e. in the absence of
dumped imports. A pre-tax profit margin of 6,8 % was
used provisionally for this calculation. This was the profit
that the sector achieved prior to the increase in imports
which led to a serious injury of
is
considered that this level of profit is representative of
the Community industry’s profitability that would be
achieved for the product concerned in the absence of
injurious dumping.

the industry.

It

L 178/34

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

5.7.2008

(118) The necessary price increase was then determined on the
basis of a comparison of average import price, as estab-
lished for the price undercutting calculations (see recitals
(62) to (64)), with the non-injurious price of the like
sold by the Community industry on the
product
Community market. The non-injurious price has been
obtained by adjusting the sales price of the Community
industry in order to reflect the aforementioned profit
margin. The difference resulting from this comparison,
when expressed as a percentage of the total cif import
value, amounted per company to the following levels
which are less than the dumping margin found:

— Yichang Rosen Foods Co., Ltd., Zhejiang 91 %

— Huangyan No.1 Canned Food Factory Zhejiang,

Huangyan 44,6 %

— Zhejiang Xinshiji Foods Co., Ltd. and related producer
Hubei Xinshiji Foods Co., Ltd., Sanmen 81,6 %

— Co-operating exporting producers not included in the

sample 81,1 %

— All other companies 91 %.

8.2. Provisional measures

(119)

In the light of the foregoing and pursuant to Article 7(2)
of the basic Regulation, it is considered that a provisional
anti-dumping duty should be imposed at the level of the
lowest of the dumping margin and the injury elimination
level found, in accordance with the lesser duty rule. Since
the injury elimination level
is lower than the dumping
margin in all cases, the former should be the basis for the
overall level of the measures.

(120) The purpose of anti-dumping measures is to remove the
effects of the injurious dumping. The form of measures is
an integral element to this end. Depending on the speci-
ficities of the product in question and its market, the
form of the measures should be defined so as to be
effective in removing the aforesaid effects.

(121) With regard to the present case and as alleged by both
Community producers and a significant number of
the specificities of the product and of the
importers,
the
market
following.

taken into account are

that must be

(122) The form of the measures should avoid the phenomena
which have been detected in the course of the safeguards
investigation/measures, as well as by the current investi-
gation. These phenomena, which showed a certain deter-
mination to undermine any measures wherever possible,
are set out below.

(123) A first phenomenon was a process of stockpiling in the
new Member States just before accession, as mentioned
above. Prior to enlargement of the EU in 2004, Chinese
exporters shipped important quantities of the product
these goods
concerned to the future Member States;
thus entered the Community market without being
subject
to safeguard measures when these Member
States joined the EU.

(124) A second phenomenon was the introduction of new
the
product
types which nominally
same
safeguard measures, but which shared
physical and technical characteristics. As explained in
recitals 14 above, these are now part of the product
concerned by the current anti-dumping case.

outside
the

fell

(125) A third phenomenon was that of price compensation. EU
operators tend to source not only the product concerned,
but different kind of processed food products from
Chinese traders.

(126) This implies the risk that the effect of a classical measure
such as an ad valorem duty might be compensated via
higher prices charged for other imported food products.
In light of the above, a measure is needed whose form
minimises such phenomena which would significantly
impair the effectiveness of the measures. Under these
circumstances, the duty should be imposed in the form
of a specific amount per tonne in order to ensure the
the measures and to discourage any
efficiency of
the anti-dumping measure through a
absorption of
decrease in the export prices. This amount results from
the application of the injury elimination margin to the
export prices used in the calculation of the dumping
during the IP for each company during the IP. As far
the specific duty for all co-operating exporting
as
producers not included in the sample is concerned,
it
is calculated as an average of the respective data from
each of the sampled companies. The specific duty for all
other companies is the highest individual duty of the
companies in the sample. On these grounds specific
duty amounts to the following:

Yichang Rosen Foods Co., Ltd., Zhejiang

Huangyan No.1 Canned Food Factory Zhejiang,
Huangyan

Zhejiang Xinshiji Foods Co., Ltd. and related
producer Hubei Xinshiji Foods Co., Ltd., Sanmen

Co-operating exporting producers not included
in the sample

All other companies

Fixed duty
(EUR/ton)

482,2

330

440,7

455,1

482,2

5.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 178/35

the

rates

findings of

the present

(as opposed to the

(127) The individual company anti-dumping specific duties
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
duty
countrywide duty
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.

(128) 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 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
entities. The Commission,
if appropriate, will, after
the Advisory Committee, amend the
consultation of
Regulation
of
updating
companies benefiting from individual duty rates.

accordingly

the

list

by

(129) The variance of the individual duty rates is significant
and there are a number of exporting producers. All
these elements may facilitate attempts to re-channel the
export flows through the traditional exporters benefiting
from the lowest duty rates. Consequently, should the
exports by one of the companies benefiting from lower
individual duty rates increase by more than 30 % in
volume,
the individual measures concerned would be
considered as being likely to be insufficient to counteract
and
the
provided that the requisite elements are met, an investi-
gation may be initiated in order to correct appropriately
the measures in their form or level.

found. Consequently,

dumping

injurious

(130)

In view of the foregoing, and also of the comments made
both by Community industry and a number of importers
concerning the modalities of the form of the measures,
this matter may be revisited at definitive stage,
if
warranted.

(131)

of

fruits

application

to Article 7(1) of

It is recalled that by Regulation (EC) No 1295/2007 of
5 November 2007, the Commission made imports of
certain prepared or preserved citrus
(namely
mandarins, etc.) originating in the People’s Republic of
the possible
to registration in view of
China subject
anti-dumping measures,
retroactive
pursuant
the basic Regulation.
Community industry has requested the retroactive appli-
cation of measures. This matter is under examination. At
this stage, it is noted that available statistics of imports of
the product concerned from China did increase by more
than 60 % in the period November 2007 to February
2008 as compared to the same period in the preceding
years (from 16 300 tonnes to 27 300 tonnes). This
increase was accompanied with a 4 % decrease of the
average price of the corresponding imports.

9. FINAL PROVISION

(132)

In accordance with Article 7(7) of the basic Regulation,
provisional measures should be imposed for a period of
six months.

(133)

In the interest of sound administration, a period should
be fixed within which the interested parties which made
them-selves known within the time limit specified in the
initiation may make their views known in
notice of
it should
writing and request a hearing. Furthermore,
be stated that the findings concerning the imposition
of duties made for the purposes of this Regulation are
provisional and may have to be reconsidered for the
purposes of any definitive duty,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

clementines, wilkings

A provisional anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on imports
of prepared or preserved mandarins (including tangerines and
satsumas),
citrus
hybrids, not containing added spirit, whether or not containing
added sugar or other sweetening matter, and as defined under
CN heading 2008, originating in the People’s Republic of China,
falling within CN codes 2008 30 55, 2008 30 75 and
ex 2008 30 90 (TARIC codes 2008 30 90 61, 2008 30 90 63,
2008 30 90 65, 2008 30 90 67, 2008 30 90 69).

and other

similar

L 178/36

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

Article 2

The rate of the provisional anti-dumping duty applicable to the
products described in Article 1 produced by the following
manufacturers shall be as follows:

Unless otherwise

3.
concerning customs duties shall apply.

specified,

the provisions

Article 4

5.7.2008

in force

Company

Yichang Rosen Foods Co., Ltd., Yichang,
Zhejiang

EUR/tonne
net product
weight

TARIC
additional
code

482,2

A 886

Without prejudice to Article 20 of Council Regulation (EC) No
384/96, interested parties may request disclosure of the essential
facts and considerations on the basis of which this Regulation
was adopted, make their views known in writing and apply to
be heard orally by the Commission within one month of the
date of entry into force of this Regulation.

Huangyan No.1 Canned Food Factory,
Huangyan, Zhejiang

330

A 887

Zhejiang Xinshiji Foods Co., Ltd. and
related producer Hubei Xinshiji Foods Co.,
Ltd., Sanmen, Zhejiang

Co-operating exporting producers not
included in the sample as set out in the
Annex

440,7

A 888

455,1

A 889

All other companies

482,2

A 999

Article 3

In cases where goods have been damaged before entry
1.
into free circulation and, therefore, the price actually paid or
payable is apportioned for the determination of the customs
to Article 145 of Commission Regulation
value pursuant
(EEC) No 2454/93 (1),
the amount of anti-dumping duty,
calculated on the basis of Article 2 above, shall be reduced
by a percentage which corresponds to the apportioning of the
price actually paid or payable.

Pursuant
to Article 21(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No
384/96, the parties concerned may comment on the application
of this Regulation within one month of the date of its entry
into force.

Article 5

Customs authorities are hereby directed to discontinue the regis-
tration of imports established in accordance with Article 1 of
Regulation (EC) No 1295/2007.

Data collected regarding products which were entered for
consumption not more than 90 days prior to the date of
entry into force of
the
entry into force of possible definitive measures, or the termi-
nation of this proceeding.

this regulation shall be kept until

Article 6

The release for free circulation in the Community of the
2.
product referred to in Article 1 shall be subject to the provision
of a security, equivalent to the amount of the provisional duty.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that
of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union and
apply for a period of six months.

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

Done at Brussels, 4 July 2008.

For the Commission

Peter MANDELSON
Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 253, 11.1.1993, p. 3. Regulation as last amended by Regu-

lation (EC) No 214/2007 (OJ L 62, 1.3.2007, p. 6).

5.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 178/37

ANNEX

Co-operating exporting producers not included in the sample

Hunan Pointer Foods Co., Ltd., Yongzhou, Hunan

Yichang Jiayuan Foodstuffs Co., Ltd., Yichang, Hubei

Huangyan No.2 Canned Food Factory, Huangyan, Zhejiang

Zhejiang Xinchang Best Foods Co., Ltd., Xinchang, Zhejiang

Guangxi Guiguo Food Co., Ltd., Guilin, Guangxi

Zhejiang Juda Industry Co., Ltd., Quzhou, Zhejiang

Zhejiang Iceman Group Co., Ltd., Jinhua, Zhejiang

Ningbo Guosheng Foods Co., Ltd., Ninghai

Yi Chang Yin He Food Co., Ltd., Yidu, Hubei

Yongzhou Quanhui Canned Food Co., Ltd., Yongzhou, Hunan

Ningbo Orient Jiuzhou Food Trade & Industry Co., Ltd., Yinzhou, Ningbo

Guangxi Guilin Huangguan Food Co., Ltd., Guilin, Guangxi

Ningbo Wuzhouxing Group Co., Ltd., Mingzhou, Ningbo