Council Regulation (EC) No 1193/2008 of 1 December 2008 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duties imposed on imports of citric acid originating in the People’s Republic of China
Date: 2008-12-01
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: China, anti-dumping duty, import, organic acid, originating product

3.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 323/1

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

I

REGULATIONS

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 1193/2008

of 1 December 2008

imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duties imposed
on imports of citric acid originating in the People’s Republic of China

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

(3)

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 published a
On 4 September 2007,
notice (2)
initiating an anti-dumping proceeding on
imports into the Community of citric acid originating
in the People’s Republic of China (the PRC). On 3 June
2008,
by Regulation (EC) No
488/2008 (3) (the provisional Regulation) imposed a pro­
visional anti-dumping duty on imports of citric acid orig­
inating in the PRC.

the Commission,

It is noted that the proceeding was initiated following a
complaint
Industry
lodged by the European Chemical
Council
(the complainant) on behalf of a
producer representing a major proportion of the total
Community production of citric acid, in this case more
than 25 %.

(CEFIC)

As set out in recital 14 of the provisional Regulation, the
investigation of dumping and injury covered the period
from 1 July 2006 to 30 June 2007 (‘investigation period’
or ‘IP’). With respect to the trends relevant for the injury
assessment, the Commission analysed data covering the
period from 1 January 2004 to the end of the IP (period
considered).

(4)

(5)

B. SUBSEQUENT PROCEDURE

Following the imposition of provisional anti-dumping
duties on imports of citric acid originating in the PRC,
several interested parties submitted comments in writing.
The parties who so requested were also granted the
opportunity to be heard.

The Commission continued to seek and verify all infor­
mation it deemed necessary for its definitive findings. In
particular, the Commission intensified the investigation
with regard to Community interest aspects.
In this
connection, one additional verification visit was carried
out after the imposition of the provisional measures at
the premises of the following user of citric acid in the
European Union:

— Reckitt-Benckiser Corporate Services Ltd, Slough, UK

and Nowy Dwor, Poland.

In addition, as explained in detail
cation visits were carried out at
following exporting producers:

in recital 11, verifi­
the
the premises of

(1) OJ L 56, 6.3.1996, p. 1.
(2) OJ C 205, 4.9.2007, p. 14.
(3) OJ L 143, 3.6.2008, p. 13.

— Laiwu Taihe Biochemistry Co. Ltd (Laiwu Taihe),

Laiwu City, Shandong Province,

L 323/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

3.12.2008

— Weifang Ensign Industry Co. Ltd (Weifang Ensign),

Changle City, Shandong Province.

(6)

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 citric acid originating 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
representations
subsequent to this disclosure.

could make

they

(7)

The oral and written comments
submitted by the
interested parties were considered and, where appro­
priate, the findings were modified accordingly.

C. INITIATION OF THE CASE, PRODUCT CONCERNED
AND LIKE PRODUCT

(8)

(9)

facie

injury

evidence

of material

the
One exporting producer reiterated the claim that
the complaint did not contain any
public version of
prima
to the
Community industry, preventing the interested parties
from exercising their rights of defence. According to
this exporting producer, the case should not have been
initiated due to lack of sufficient evidence included in the
it should be noted that the
complaint. In this respect,
public version of the complaint contained all the essential
evidence
data
provided under confidential cover in order for interested
parties to exercise their right of defence throughout the
proceeding. Therefore, this argument should be rejected.

and non-confidential

summaries of

argued that

interested parties

Some
the product
concerned, as set out in recital 16 of the provisional
Regulation, and the like product are not alike as stated
in recital 18 of the provisional Regulation since they
would not share the same physical and chemical charac­
teristics and are not used for
the same purposes.
According to those interested parties, the statement in
recital 18 of the provisional Regulation fails to address
the arguments brought forward during the investigation
and is in contradiction with the adjustment made by the
Commission in the undercutting calculations for de-
caking certain quantities of the product concerned after
arrival in the EU. It is firstly noted that the investigation
the product concerned and the like
has shown that
product are both used in the same basic applications,
i.e. mainly for the household cleaning (auto dish-wash
products, detergents, water softeners) and as additives
in food and beverages, but also in the personal care/cos­
metics area. The claim that the product concerned would

that

there

in fact not be used by certain users in the detergents,
food and beverages industry because of its smell and/or
colour was not further substantiated by evidence. The
investigation has shown that only in one niche appli­
i.e. the pharmaceutical area, only the European
cation,
citric acid was indeed used because of the cost of the
special compliance test which is required. Since the phar­
maceutical area represents only a small portion of the
users’ total business, running the compliance test was not
considered as economically justifiable business decision.
Secondly,
is no contradiction between the
adjustment made in the undercutting calculation for de-
caking parts of the product concerned after importation,
as mentioned in recital 64 of the provisional Regulation,
and the statement that both products are alike as it is
sufficient
the product concerned and the like
product share the same basic chemical, physical and
technical characteristics and have the same basic uses,
which is the case. It is further noted that the caking as
such does not happen because of specific characteristics
of the Chinese product, but happens because every citric
acid, regardless of its origin, due to its chemical compo­
sition shows a tendency to cake when being exposed to
humidity and changes of temperature. As naturally only
the product concerned is exposed over a longer period of
time to humidity and changes of temperature during the
shipping time to the EU, the problem mainly occurs for
the product concerned, but not exclusively. Therefore, the
adjustment simply takes account of the fact that the de-
caking incurs additional costs mainly for the product
concerned as the quantities that are affected by the
caking either are de-caked (by breaking and sieving or
liquefying the caked product) before further selling or are
sold with a rebate. Thus, this claim should be rejected.

(10)

In view of the above, it is definitively concluded that the
product concerned and citric acid produced and sold in
the analogue country, Canada, as well as
the one
produced and sold by the Community industry on the
Community market are alike, within the meaning of
Article 1(4) of the basic Regulation and recitals 15 to
17 of the provisional Regulation are hereby definitively
confirmed.

D. DUMPING

1. General

treatment

treatment

(MET)/individual

(11) At the provisional stage of the investigation the market
economy
(IT)
claims of all known exporting producers were inves­
tigated. Only a number of the exporting producers had
been included in the sample and one company was
granted individual examination.
In their comments to
the provisional Regulation, a number of parties have
claimed that this approach has some shortcomings. The
matter was therefore reconsidered and,
in view also of
the fact that it became possible, given the circumstances
of the case such as for example the available resources, to
increase the number of companies that could reasonably
it was finally decided that sampling
be investigated,

3.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 323/3

should not be applied. Given that every cooperating
company has been granted at least IT at the provisional
stage, an individual duty rate should be established for
each of them. As a consequence, three companies not
selected in the sample or individually examined at the
provisional stage were requested to submit questionnaire
replies. However, only two of these companies submitted
a questionnaire reply. The third company did not submit
a questionnaire reply and was not investigated further.

(12)

(13)

2. Market economy treatment (MET)

the purposes of
the non-payment of

The company referred to in recital 27 of the provisional
Regulation insisted that the subsidy mentioned in that
the product
recital was not
for
rents was
concerned and that
justified by private inter-group arrangements for
the
setting off of profits against rent due. However, in the
absence of any new elements or information concerning
the issue, and in view of the distorting effects on the
accounting of the practices mentioned concerning rent,
the conclusions in respect of
this company remain
unchanged and are hereby definitively confirmed.

Further to provisional disclosure one group of companies
referred to in recital 25 of the provisional Regulation
claimed that it had received loans on the basis of a
detailed financial analysis of one of the banks and after
having been granted a high credit rating. However, the
fact that a bank formally carried out an analysis and
granted a high credit rating does not eliminate the fact
that the company in question gave guarantees to other
companies despite having mortgaged the majority of its
non-current assets, nor the fact that the loans granted to
the company in question were granted by a bank found
to be under State influence. Therefore, the conclusions in
this company remain unchanged and are
respect of
hereby definitively confirmed.

obtaining assets for prices significantly below market
value,
this company
remain unchanged and are hereby definitively confirmed.

the conclusions

in respect of

(15)

In the absence of any other comments concerning MET,
recitals 25 to 30 of the provisional Regulation are hereby
definitively confirmed.

3. Individual treatment (IT)

(16)

Five companies or groups of companies that were not
granted MET fulfilled all the criteria set out in Article 9(5)
the basic Regulation and were granted IT. One
of
company which had been granted provisionally IT,
failed to further cooperate and, thus, no IT was finally
granted (see recitals 11 and 34).

4. Normal value

(17) As explained in recital 11, following comments to the
provisional Regulation,
it was decided that sampling
should not be applied and the three companies not
selected in the sample or individually examined at the
provisional stage were requested to submit questionnaire
replies. Normal value was established for one of these
companies (Laiwu Taihe), which was granted MET and
which submitted a questionnaire reply.

4.1. Companies or groups of

companies which could be

granted MET

(18)

Since the sole company which could be granted MET and
which was examined individually at the provisional stage
of the investigation did not submit any comments on
normal value, the findings in recitals 35 to 39 of the
provisional Regulation are hereby definitively confirmed.

(14) One of the companies referred to in recital 26 of the
provisional Regulation insisted that it was penalised for
the fact that its majority shareholder had acquired land
use rights for a good price and then correctly had them
revalued according
to market price developments.
However, the enormous difference between the acqui­
sition price and later evaluations (1 000-2 000 %) could
not be explained. Therefore, in the absence of any new
elements or information concerning the acquisition and
subsequent revaluation of the land use rights and in view
company received by
the
of

advantages

that

the

(19) As for the only other company which was granted MET
(Laiwu Taihe) and which was further investigated for the
reasons explained in recital 11,
it was first verified
whether the company’s total domestic sales of the like
product were representative within the meaning of
Article 2(2) of the basic Regulation. Domestic sales of
the product concerned were slightly below 5 % of the
exports of
to the Community.
However, such lower ratio is nonetheless of sufficient
magnitude to provide for a proper comparison and the
domestic prices of the like product are considered rep­
resentative given also the overall domestic sales of the
company in question. Therefore,
they were used to
determine normal value.

like product

the

L 323/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

3.12.2008

(20)

For each product type sold for export to the Community
it was established whether a directly
by Laiwu Taihe,
comparable product
type was sold on the domestic
market. Product
types were considered to be directly
comparable when they were of the same product type
(defined by the chemical composition), comparable gran­
ulation and packing. It was established that for only one
product type sold for export to the Community a directly
comparable product
type was sold on the domestic
market.

(21)

It was subsequently examined whether the domestic sales
of this product type could be regarded as being sold in
the ordinary course of trade pursuant to Article 2(4) of
the basic Regulation. It was established that there were
profitable domestic sales of this product type to inde­
pendent customers during the IP, and therefore in the
ordinary course of trade.

(22)

Since the volume of profitable sales of this product type
represented 80 % or less of the total sales volume of that
type, normal value was based on the actual domestic
price, calculated as a weighted average of profitable
sales of that type only.

(23) As domestic prices of Laiwu Taihe could not be used in
order to establish normal value for the other product
types, normal value was constructed in accordance with
Article 2(3) of the basic Regulation.

(24) When constructing normal value pursuant to Article 2(3)
of the basic Regulation, the amounts for selling, general
and administrative costs (SG & A) and for profits have
been based, pursuant to Article 2(6) first introductory
the basic Regulation, on the actual
subparagraph of
data pertaining to the production and sales,
in the
ordinary course of trade, of the like product, by Laiwu
Taihe.

4.2. Companies or groups of companies which could not be

granted MET

(25)

In their comments to the provisional Regulation, some
parties claimed that Canada would not be an appropriate
analogue country given the fact that the United States of
America (US) have recently initiated an anti-dumping
proceeding against citric acid originating,
in
Canada. Thailand was therefore again brought forward
as
the
analysis showed that while anti-dumping measures on
in force
citric acid originating in Canada were not

country. However,

an alternative

inter alia,

analogue

during the IP, anti-dumping measures were in force
during the IP on citric acid originating in Thailand. The
latter measures were imposed by India and consisted in
substantial anti-dumping duties of USD 374,36/tonne,
i.e. two months
which only expired in August 2007,
after the end of the IP. Therefore, also considering the
arguments already mentioned in recitals 42 and 43 of
the provisional Regulation and the fact that the US inves­
tigation on citric acid originating in Canada was still
finalising the Community
ongoing at the moment of
investigation,
there is no reason
it
why Thailand should be preferred to Canada as an
analogue country.

is concluded that

(26) According to Article 2(7)(a) of

the basic Regulation,
normal value for the exporting producers mentioned in
recital 11 above that were not granted MET had to be
established on the basis of the prices or constructed value
in the analogue country.

5. Export price

(27)

In the case of the two companies which were further
investigated for
the reasons explained in recital 11
above, the export price was established following the
same methodology explained in recitals 45 to 47 of
the provisional Regulation.

(28)

Since no companies submitted any comments on export
prices, the findings contained in recitals 45 to 47 of the
provisional Regulation are hereby definitively confirmed.

6. Comparison

(29)

In its comments to the provisional Regulation and to the
definitive disclosure, one group of companies contested
the deduction of a notional commission for sales via a
trader in the PRC, given that the trader was an integral
part of the group. It was, however, established that the
trading company did indeed perform the function of an
independent trader, and that the economic result of the
relationship of the two companies is that of a principal
and an agent. It was established that the trader was not
only trading products produced by related companies,
but also products produced by independent producers.
Moreover,
company in question did also sell
directly to non-related customers. Therefore, the claim
was rejected, and pursuant
the
basic Regulation, an allowance based on SG & A and
profit of unrelated importers was deducted.

to Article 2(10)(i) of

the

3.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 323/5

(30)

(31)

for

cost

taken into account,

In its comments to the provisional Regulation, one
currency
exporting producer
claimed that
conversion should not be
as
the basic Regulation,
pursuant
a
exporters
sustained movement in exchange rates during the inves­
tigation period. This claim could be accepted, and the
dumping margin of
exporting producer was
adjusted accordingly.

to Article 2(10)(j) of
shall be granted 60 days

to reflect

the

is acknowledged that

In the provisional Regulation, a deduction to the export
price was made in respect of non-refundable VAT
charged on export sales, pursuant to Article 2(10)(b) of
the basic Regulation. One exporting producer claimed in
its comments to the provisional Regulation that no such
adjustment to the export price should have been made,
as Article 2(10)(b) of the basic Regulation would only
relate to normal value.
the
It
adjustment provided for under Article 2(10)(b) of the
basic Regulation only refers to the calculation of the
In fact the above mentioned deduction
normal value.
is due and should be done
to the
pursuant
the basic Regulation.
While examining this claim, it was found that a clerical
error had been made in calculating the adjustment for
the company in question, and that the same error had
been made in respect of other companies. These inac­
curacies were rectified and have led to slight downward
corrections in the dumping margins previously calculated
for these companies.

export price
to Article 2(10)(k) of

(32)

In examining the claim referred to in recital 31, it was
found that the necessary adjustment had not been made
in the case of one company which was granted individual
treatment. This has been rectified and results in a slight
increase in the dumping margin for that company.

(33)

In the absence of any other comments in respect of
comparison, and apart from the changes indicated in
recitals 30, 31 and 32 above, recitals 48 to 50 of the
provisional Regulation are hereby definitively confirmed.

reply and was not further investigated, as explained in
recital 11 above, this company is considered as non-
cooperating and findings are based on facts available in
accordance with Article 18(1) of the basic Regulation. In
this case, considering the high level of cooperation
mentioned in recital 19 of the provisional Regulation,
the company has been attributed the highest dumping
margin found in respect of all other companies.

The dumping margins of all the companies which had
already been individually investigated at the provisional
the inaccuracies
stage were recalculated,
referred to in recitals 30, 31 and 32. This recalculation
has led to slight corrections of the dumping margins.

to correct

In the absence of any new element, the conclusions in
recital 53 of the provisional Regulation, which relates to
definitively
the
confirmed.

cooperation,

are hereby

level of

(35)

(36)

(37) On this basis, the definitive dumping margins expressed
as a percentage of the CIF Community frontier price,
duty unpaid, are:

Company

Definitive dumping
margin
(%)

Anhui BBCA Biochemical Co. Ltd

DSM Citric Acid (Wuxi) Ltd

RZBC Co. Ltd

RZBC (Juxian) Co. Ltd

TTCA Co. Ltd

Yixing Union Biochemical Co. Ltd

Laiwu Taihe Biochemistry Co. Ltd

Weifang Ensign Industry Co. Ltd

All other companies

58,1

19,1

59,8

59,8

57,1

55,7

6,6

53,5

59,8

E. INJURY

1. Community production and Community industry

7. Dumping margin

(38)

(34)

In the case of the two companies which were further
the reasons explained in recital 11
investigated for
above,
by
following the same methodology explained in recital
51 of
the
one company which did not submit a questionnaire

the provisional Regulation.

dumping margin was

In the case of

established

the

concerned imported from its

Some interested parties claimed that SA Citrique Belge
NV ceased production after the IP and was only trading
the product
related
(DSM Citric Acid (Wuxi) Ltd)
company in China
arguing,
that SA Citrique Belge NV should not
constitute part of the Community industry. This claim
was however not substantiated by any evidence and
from the data submitted by SA Citrique Belge NV,
it
follows that the company continued production.

thus,

L 323/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

3.12.2008

(44)

(45)

(39) One interested party also complained that in recital 56 of
the provisional Regulation only a range of imports of SA
Citrique Belge NV from its related Chinese producer
during the IP was given. This party claimed that the
imports of the Community industry from
trend of all
related and unrelated companies should be given for
the whole period considered since imports constitute
an important factor for the assessment of community
production and consequently for the conclusion of the
existence of injury. The investigation has indeed shown
that during the whole period considered the imports of
the Community industry were insignificant, i.e. between
1 % and 6 % of production — this range is given for
confidentiality reasons. Therefore the argument should be
rejected and recitals 55 to 58 of the provisional Regu­
lation are hereby definitively confirmed.

2. Community consumption

(40) As no new and substantiated information was received
with regard to Community consumption recitals 59 and
60 of the provisional Regulation are hereby definitively
confirmed.

3. Imports from the country concerned

(a) Volume and market share of the imports concerned, import

prices

(41) With regard to import volumes, market share and prices,
no new and substantiated information was found or
received, therefore, and in the absence of any claims or
arguments from any interested parties relating to volume
and prices of the imports concerned, recitals 61 to 63 of
the provisional Regulation are hereby
definitively
confirmed.

(b) Price undercutting

(42) During the provisional stage of the investigation, in order
to compare the product concerned and the citric acid
produced by the Community industry at the same level
of trade, an adjustment for the markup (including SG &
A) of unrelated importers was made in the price under­
cutting calculation and, additionally, an adjustment was
made for special treatment costs incurred by importers in
the Community to de-cake certain volumes of
the
product concerned before further selling. However, due
to a minor revision of the data concerning the level of
trade adjustment,
the weighted average price under­
cutting margin which was calculated and found to be
17,42 % has been revised downwards to 16,54 %.

(43) After final disclosure, one Community producer claimed
that the level of trade adjustments should also be made
in relation to sales of the Community industry, i.e. that

its sales made via traders should be taken into account.
In this respect it should be noted that a level of trade
adjustment was made
the Community
industry’s sales prices before comparing them with the
import prices of the product concerned.

indeed for

The same Community producer also requested that the
adjustment for special treatment costs to de-cake certain
volumes of the product concerned should also apply to
the like product. However, this request was not further
substantiated with data concerning the specific costs
it
incurred by this Community producer and,
could not be accepted. In view of the above, recital 64
of
the provisional Regulation is hereby definitively
confirmed.

thus,

4. Situation of the Community industry

(a) General

situation of

improvement

the efforts of

the Community producers

Some interested parties claimed that the Commission had
not analysed thoroughly all injury indicators and thus, no
proper and complete link between the situation of the
Community industry and the Chinese imports was estab­
lished. In particular, it was claimed that there had been
no assessment of the positive developments of certain
injury indicators. It should be noted that even though
some injury indicators show a positive development
which was acknowledged in recital 79 of the provisional
Regulation, the overall picture points to a deterioration
the Community industry. The
of
the
moderate
production
of
production,
sales volume and unit
capacity, capacity utilisation,
price levels as well as the increased cost efficiency
the provisional Regulation
described in recital 76 of
reflect
to
remain competitive over the period considered and to
benefit
from the increased consumption. However, as
can be seen in recital 68 of the provisional Regulation,
despite these efforts the Community industry lost 5
percentage points (i.e. the market share decreased from
54 % to 49 %) of its market share which was mostly
taken by Chinese low-priced, dumped imports. As an
aggravating factor,
the
Community industry could have expected to gain some
of the market share hold by those three Community
producers of citric acid which closed down as of 2004.
But on the contrary,
the Community industry could
neither take over customers from the three closed EC
producers, nor benefit from the increased consumption.
This significant loss of market share, coupled with the
clearly deteriorating financial indicators, i.e. profitability,
return on investment and cash flow, show that
the
overall situation of the Community industry deteriorated
over the period considered and appeared to be at its
stocks’ decrease
worst during the
cannot be assessed as a positive development of
the
Community industry’s situation in this case since it
cannot be considered as a meaningful
indicator, given
the nature of the product which does not allow long-
term storage.

also mentioned that

In addition,

IP.

is

it

3.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 323/7

(b) Investments and ability to raise capital

(46) One interested party argued that

in this field but

investments are not
constant
follow certain investments
cycles. While even under normal market conditions it
can certainly not be expected that important investments
would be made every year, the fact that over the whole
two remaining Community
period neither of
producers carried out any important
is
considered as a sign that the low profitability (which
turned into loss as of 2006) did not allow any
important investment to be made. It is hence considered
that
injury
investment
indicator in this case.

is a particularly meaningful

investment

the

(47)

Finally, the Community producers’ ability to raise capital
should be considered. In this regard, the investigation has
shown that both Community producers, due to the dete­
riorating citric acid business environment, had difficulties
to raise capital.

(48) One interested party claimed that the complainant was at
least able to raise capital
for other products since it
announced in February 2007 the construction of a new
glucose plant. In this respect it is noted that the scope of
the investigation is limited to the ability to raise capital in
relation to the product in question, i.e. citric acid, which
appeared to have been negatively affected by the financial
situation of the Community industry.

(51)

(52)

was deemed more appropriate to use the operating result
as a basis for the injury analysis rather than the net
profit.

situation of

The same party claimed that the fine for anti-competitive
behaviour that was imposed in 2005 on both mother
the Community producers could have
companies of
influenced the profit
the Community
industry. Any effects stemming from the fine (both the
adding and releasing of provisions) have been recorded
under extraordinary result. As mentioned in recital 50,
the operating result has been used as an injury indicator
in this proceeding. Therefore, the fine that was imposed
on the Community producers, could not have affected
In
the profit
situation used in the injury analysis.
it should be noted that Community industry
addition,
was loss making as of 2006 until
IP.
Therefore,
the trends as presented in the provisional
Regulation are hereby definitively confirmed.

the end of

Several interested parties pointed to some inconsistency
between the trend concerning profitability and the return
on investment. Indeed, in contrast to profitability which
was established by expressing the operating profit on
sales of the like product to unrelated customers as a
percentage of
these sales, return on
investment was calculated as the net profit in percentage
of net book value of
to be
consistent in the calculation of all injury indicators, the
calculation of return on investment was revised, based on
the operating profit in percentage of the net book value
of investments. The revised figures are as follows:

the turnover of

investments.

In order

(49)

Based on the above, the conclusion set out in recital 72
of
the provisional Regulation on the Community
industry’s investment is hereby definitively confirmed.

Return on total
investments
(index)

2004

100

2005

148

2006

– 147

IP

– 207

(c) Profitability and return on investment

in particular none of

(50) One interested party claimed that the findings set out in
recital 73 of the provisional Regulation could not be
accounts of both Community
reconciled with the
producers,
the accounts would
show the mentioned extraordinary restructuring cost. In
this respect,
the period
considered, the extraordinary result of one Community
producer has to a large extent been affected by restruc­
turing efforts, which was presented in the accounts either
as a cost or a revenue, depending on whether it concerns
the addition or the release of a provision and by royalties
paid to the mother company in Switzerland. Therefore, it

is noted that

throughout

it

(53)

The corrected figures however follow the same trend and
therefore do not alter the conclusion drawn in recital 74
of the provisional Regulation, which is hereby definitively
confirmed.

5. Conclusion on injury

(54)

argument

In the absence of any new and substantiated information
sales volume,
concerning production,
or
market
cash flow,
sales price,
employment, productivity, wages and magnitude of the

shares, unit

stocks,

L 323/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

3.12.2008

return on investment

dumping margin, the findings in recitals 66 to 71, 73
and 75 to 78 of the provisional Regulation are hereby
definitively confirmed. In addition, the corrected figures
given for
leave unaffected the
trends as set out in recitals 73 to 74 of the provisional
clearly dete­
Regulation. Therefore,
riorating
such as profitability,
return on investment and cash flow coupled with the
significant
the conclusion laid
down in recital 81 of the provisional Regulation that
that the Community industry suffered material injury is
hereby definitively confirmed.

loss of market share,

considering the

indicators,

financial

F. CAUSATION

1. Effect of the dumped imports

(55) As mentioned in recital 42, it is definitively concluded
that during the IP, the average prices of imports from the
PRC undercut the average Community industry prices.
Following a minor
the
average undercutting margin was found to be 16,54 %.
This
the
conclusions on the effect of the dumped imports set
out in recitals 83 to 85 of the provisional Regulation,
which are hereby definitively confirmed.

revision in the calculations,

slight downwards

revision cannot

affect

2. Effect of other factors

(a) Self-inflicted injury

(56)

it

i.e.

to serve only

Some importers claimed that the Community industry
followed a ‘price-over-
self-inflicted the injury as
volume’
the high-end
strategy,
segment of the market, abstaining from producing and
selling the low-end product. According to the same
importers the consequence was that
the Community
industry could not benefit from the increased demand
of
low-end citric acid, and thereby lost market share
and deteriorated its financial performance. The investi­
gation, however,
both the product
concerned and the like product are basically used in
the same applications and compete mainly in the same
segments (see recital 9), with the exception of one niche
the European
market representing a small portion of
citric acid market share, which was supplied so far
solely by the Community industry. The investigation
the Community industry
has indeed established that
was present
the market.
in the low-end segment of
Therefore, this argument should be rejected.

showed

that

(57) Moreover, some interested parties considered the lack of
any investment during the period considered and in
particular during the years when the Community
i.e. 2004-2005, as a
industry achieved better results,

factor which contributed to the market share loss and
consequently to the deterioration of its situation. The
investigation showed the Community industry did not
operate at full capacity and that its capacity utilisation
was stable throughout the period considered. Therefore,
some production increase would have been possible in
further investments.
case of stronger demand without
Moreover,
the
Community industry was insufficient,
i.e. below target
the period considered and even
profit,
turned into negative, it is considered to be an econom­
ically justifiable business decision not to invest significant
amounts in the production of
the like product. This
argument
is therefore not convincing and should be
rejected.

profitability

throughout

given

that

the

of

(b) Rise in the costs of raw materials, rising energy prices

(58) Almost all interested parties reiterated their claims that
any injury found would be due to the reform of the
sugar market and the consequent abolition of
the
production refunds in 2006 and/or the rising energy
prices.

(59) One interested party claimed that in the annual report of
one Community producer relating to 2007, it was stated
that the raw material availability was limited due to the
European sugar regime which resulted in higher cost. In
this respect, it is noted that the mentioned Community
producer does not use sugar as main raw material, but
molasses and as explained in recital 89 of the provisional
Regulation was thus never subject to production refunds.
The
for molasses was however not
substantial, but corresponding to the increase of world
market prices for sugar. As concerns the situation of the
other Community producer which was described in detail
in recitals 90 to 94 of the provisional Regulation, no
new or
substantiated information or argument was
received. The overall conclusion laid down in recital 93
that the reform of the sugar market had no considerable
impact on the cost situation of the Community industry
is hereby definitively confirmed.

increase

cost

(60)

The same interested party claimed that
there would
indeed be a link between sugar prices and biofuel
production as this was acknowledged in a study of the
Commission on ‘The causes of the food price crisis’ (1). In
this respect it is noted that the Commission, as already
stated in recital 98 of the provisional Regulation, had

(1) European Commission ‘The

crisis:
sugar’, 20 May 2008, http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/analysis/perspec/
foodprice/sugar_en.pdf

food price

causes of

the

3.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 323/9

access to the cost data of both Community producers
and was therefore in a position to analyse the concrete
cost of raw materials for both Community producers
concerning the production of citric acid. Any link
and biofuel production has
between sugar prices
therefore been investigated and taken into account in
assessing the impact of EU sugar market reform and
the increasing biofuel production. Based on this,
it
and
could
definitively
hereby
concluded
factors had no considerable
confirmed that
these
impact on the
injury found and suffered by the
Community industry.

be

is

European producer participated and which was claimed
to be the reason of the boost of Chinese citric acid
imports. This allegation was not
further substantiated
and, therefore, did not alter the conclusion drawn in
recital 100 of the provisional Regulation that the big
boost of the dumped imports happened several years
after the cartel ceased to exist.

(65) On the basis of the above, it is definitively concluded that
the consequences of
the anti-competitive practices in
which the Community industry took part did not
injury suffered by the
contribute
Community industry.

to the material

(61)

the Community industry as

In addition,
it has to be stated that any cost increase
concerning molasses, sugar or glucose or energy which
was acknowledged in the provisional Regulation (see
recitals 93 and 96 thereof) are not the source of the
injury of
in a normal
market situation, the Community industry could have
least
passed on these increased costs at
to a certain
extent
the investigation
to its customers. However,
showed the increasing presence of dumped imports
which undercut the prices of the Community industry
significantly. Thus, as stated in recital 84 of the provi­
sional Regulation there was a price depression and the
Community industry could only pass on a fraction of its
own cost increases to its customers, which led to the
deterioration of its financial situation and a further loss
of market share.

(66)

(67)

(62)

Finally, it has to be mentioned that the investigation has
shown that the Chinese costs of production of citric acid
had also increased. These increased costs were however
sales prices, but on the
not
contrary, unit sales prices even decreased by 6 percentage
points during the period considered as shown in recital
63 of the provisional Regulation.

translated into higher

(63) On the basis of the above, the claims should be rejected
and recitals 88 to 99 of the provisional Regulation are
hereby definitively confirmed.

(d) Currency fluctuations

Some interested parties reiterated their claims that the
drop in prices of Chinese citric acid during the IP was
largely due to the unfavourable exchange rate from the
US dollar to euro, the fact that prices for citric acid are
generally expressed in US dollar on world markets and
the difficulty to adjust prices, which are generally nego­
tiated annually, to the new currency situation.

It is recalled that in recital 104 of the provisional Regu­
lation,
the impact of any currency fluctuation is not
considered to be significant because even if the deva­
luation of
the euro between
2004 and the IP, which amounted to 4,97 %, after a
fine-tuning of provisional calculations, would have been
fully disregarded, there would still be undercutting of
over 10 %.

the US dollar against

(68)

Consequently, it is definitively confirmed that the appre­
ciation of the euro in respect of the US dollar was not
such as to break the causal link between the established
injury to the Community industry and the imports
concerned. The claim should, therefore, be rejected.

3. Conclusion on causation

(69)

In the absence of any further new and substantiated
information or argument, recitals 82 to 110 of the pro­
visional Regulation are hereby definitively confirmed.

(c) Price cartel of Community industry

(64)

Some interested parties reiterated their claims that the
loss of market share for the European producers was
self-inflicted because of the citric acid cartel
(1991 to
in which both the complainant and the other
1995)

(70)

the above,

finding of
In the light of
existence of causal
injury
suffered by the Community industry and the dumped
Chinese imports is hereby definitively confirmed.

link between the material

the provisional

L 323/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

3.12.2008

G. COMMUNITY INTEREST

3. Competition and security of supply

(71)

(72)

(73)

1. Developments after the investigation period

both

from certain Community

Comments relating to the need to take into consideration
certain important post-IP developments have been
received
industry
producers as well as from the cooperating exporting
producers and importers. It is noted that in accordance
information
with Article 6(1) of the basic Regulation,
concerning dumping and injury relating to a period
subsequent to the investigation period shall, normally,
not be taken into account. However,
the
statement made in recitals 119 and 129 of the provi­
considered
sional Regulation,
necessary to collect data and information related to the
period after June 2007 until July 2008.

exceptionally

in view of

it was

Some interested parties claimed that the imposition of
measures would be unnecessary as the profitability of the
Community industry attained high levels post-IP due to
significantly increased prices and that the market had
there was evidence of
regulated itself. During the IP,
dumping and injury and this injury was caused to a
significant degree by the price depression stemming
from the dumped imports.
Import statistics show an
average increase of Chinese sales prices of only 12 %
after the IP. Compared to the undercutting level of
16,54 % found during the IP,
this increase is clearly
not sufficient as it would not allow the Community
industry to increase its sales price to a sustainable level
without risking losing more customers in the absence of
anti-dumping measures. Concerning the price level of the
Community industry, it was found that the Community
industry managed to increase its prices moderately as of
the first quarter of 2008 which appeared to have
the Community
improved the financial
in a
industry. These price increases are, nevertheless,
close timely correlation with the initiation of
this
proceeding and it thus appears that the situation of the
Community industry may have improved because of the
potential anti-dumping measures on imports from the
PRC. It was hence concluded that there was no self-regu­
lation of the market, or the self-regulation was insuf­
ficient to render the imposition of measures unnecessary.
The argument should be thus rejected.

situation of

2. Interest of the Community industry

argument with regard to the

In the absence of any new and substantiated information
or
the
Community industry,
the conclusion made in recitals
112 to 115 of the provisional Regulation regarding the
interest of the Community industry are hereby defini­
tively confirmed.

interest of

(74) Most

interested parties reiterated their claim that

the
imposition of measures would significantly
reduce
competition in the European market and create a duopo­
listic market situation. It is considered, however, that in
the Chinese
view of
the strong market position that
exporting producers obtained over the last years,
the
imposition of measures would not drive them out of
the Community market, but merely restore a level
playing field allowing the Community industry and the
Chinese exporting producers to compete on equal terms.
Moreover, a reasonable price increase on the Community
market could indeed attract more imports from other
third countries with own production, such as Israel and
South America which were likely less
interested in
exporting to a market with depressed prices.

(75) On the other hand, should anti-dumping measures not
be imposed, it cannot be excluded that the Community
industry would have to cease its manufacturing activities
for
leading to the opposite
scenario, i.e. a dominant position of the Chinese imports.

this particular business,

supply would be at

(76) Most interested parties also claimed that should Chinese
imports stop due to the imposition of measures the
security of
stake because the
Community industry cannot satisfy the demand on the
EU market even if both producers would produce at
100 % of their capacity. This would be aggravated by
the fact that the demand of citric acid is predicted to
even increase with the effects of Regulation (EC) No
the
648/2004 of
Council of 31 March 2004 on detergents (1).
In this
Regulation,
the Commission undertakes to conduct a
review regarding the use of phosphates in detergents
for
and, based on the results,
appropriate
the
Following
Commission submitted a report, but did not propose
any action. However, even if phosphates would be
completely banned from the detergents’
industry, their
main substitutes are zeolites and to a smaller extent
only citric acid.

to submit a proposal
this obligation,

the European Parliament and of

action.

(77)

Furthermore, several facts contradict the assumption that
Chinese imports would indeed stop.

— Import statistics showed that
the Chinese imports
increased by 17 % during
twelve months
the
following the IP, whereas after the imposition of pro­
visional measures they remained at a substantial level,
appearing sufficient
to guarantee the security of
supply in the EU.

(1) OJ L 104, 8.4.2004, p. 1.

3.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 323/11

— The investigation showed some overcapacity of some
exporting producers in China which is an indication
that Chinese imports in the EU market will not stop,
the USA would impose measures
in particular if
the US anti-
against PRC,
dumping investigation.

in the framework of

(83)

In the absence of any further comments from importers,
the conclusions made in recitals 116 to 120 of the pro­
visional Regulation are hereby definitively confirmed.

(78)

In addition, the Community industry announced to take
appropriate measures in order to increase its production
capacity. The complainant announced to increase its
production capacity significantly. According to the
press release issued in July 2008, those additional capa­
cities should be fully available as of mid 2009 with the
first
increase already available in January 2009. This
should indeed contribute to satisfy the demand in the
the other Community
further noted that
EU.
producer announced in August 2008,
it would
that
close its production site in China by the first quarter of
2009 and that it will focus on its production site in the
Community.

is

It

(85)

(79) Moreover, a more attractive price level in the EU market
from third
also increase
would probably
countries and with those alternative sources,
supply
appears to be better secured as if users would only
depend on Chinese citric acid. During the 12 months
following the IP, imports from Israel for example have
increased by 30 %.

imports

(80)

therefore appears that

It
the imposition of measures
would not drive the Chinese exporting producers out
of the market, but would rather restore a level playing
field which secures alternative sources of supply.

5. Interest of users

(84) After the provisional stage, the Commission intensified
the possible impact of
the investigation as
measures on users. To this end, additional
information
was requested from the users and national associations
and an additional verification visit was carried out at one
Community user’s premises.

regards

is

the users

questionnaire

information received confirms

the provisional
The
finding, based on users’
incomplete
responses as mentioned in recitals 121 and 122 of the
provisional Regulation, that the effect of citric acid in the
relatively
total cost of production of
moderate. While the share of citric acid in the users’
cost of production naturally depends on the product, it
was found to range generally between less than 1 % and
20 %. The additional information mentioned above has
also confirmed the provisional findings that a duty at the
level of
the underselling margin would have a very
limited effect on the cost of production of the coop­
erating users. After the definitive disclosure, two of the
main industrial users of citric acid argued that citric acid
represents a high proportion in certain of their products
and, thus, the effect of the duties would be significant for
them. Firstly, it should be noted that both users produce
a wide range of products in which citric acid is used in
different proportions. Secondly, based on the data
submitted, it could not be proved that those users sold
predominantly those products in which the cost of citric
acid were more important. Finally, the argument was not
further substantiated by any additional data. Therefore,
this argument could not be accepted.

4. Interest of unrelated importers

(81)

thus lacking information of

Some interested parties claimed that due to sampling, the
Commission only received the results for the largest
importers in Europe,
the
effects of duties on the overwhelming majority of small
and medium sized importers. However, no party raised
any objection against the selected sample and, therefore,
the sample is considered to be representative for all
importers.

(86)

(82) Given that citric acid, on average, constitutes only 1 % of
the importers’ total revenue, it is expected that the effects
of
an anti-dumping duty will be diluted in the
companies’ overall results.

6. Conclusion on Community interest

The above additional analysis concerning the interest of
the importers and the users in the Community has not
altered the provisional conclusions in this respect. Even if
in certain cases the burden would need to be fully borne
by the importer/user, any negative financial
impact on
the latter would in any event be not significant. On this
basis, it is considered that the conclusions regarding the
Community interest as set out in the provisional Regu­
In the absence of any other
lation are not altered.
comments,
definitively
hereby
therefore
are
confirmed.

they

L 323/12

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

3.12.2008

H. DEFINITIVE MEASURES

(91) On the basis of the above, the definitive duties should be

1. Injury elimination level

as follows:

(87)

It

is

acknowledged

Several interested parties contested the profit margin level
is
provisionally used and claimed the 9 % profit
excessive, arguing that the Community industry during
the period considered never actually achieved this profit
indeed only one
level.
in the
Community producer achieved this profit level
absence of dumping,
in 2001, whereas the other
i.e.
did not. The methodology used to determine the injury
elimination level was
re-examined and it was
deemed more appropriate to use as profit margin the
weighted average profit margin that was achieved by
both European producers in 2001, i.e. 6 %.

thus

that

(88) On the basis of

it

the above,

the
Community industry could reasonably expect to achieve
a pre-tax profit margin of 6 % in the absence of dumped
imports and this profit margin was used in the definitive
findings.

is concluded that

(89)

The Chinese import prices were compared, for the IP,
with the non-injurious price of the like product sold by
the Community industry on the Community market. The
non-injurious price has been obtained by adjusting the
sales price of the Community industry in order to reflect
the profit margin, as now revised. The difference
resulting from this comparison, when expressed as a
percentage of the total CIF value, amounted to a range
from 8,3 % to 42,7 % for each company, i.e. less than the
dumping margin found, except for one company.

2. Definitive measures

(90)

the conclusions reached with regard to
In view of
dumping,
injury, causation and Community interest,
and in accordance with Article 9(4) of the basic Regu­
lation, a definitive anti-dumping duty should be imposed
at the level of the lowest of the dumping and injury
margins found, in accordance with the lesser duty rule.
In all but one case, the duty rate should accordingly be
set at the level of the injury found.

Exporting producer

Proposed anti-dumping
duty
(%)

Anhui BBCA Biochemical Co. Ltd

DSM Citric Acid (Wuxi) Ltd

RZBC Co. Ltd

RZBC (Juxian) Co. Ltd

TTCA Co. Ltd

Yixing Union Biochemical Co. Ltd

Laiwu Taihe Biochemistry Co. Ltd

Weifang Ensign Industry Co. Ltd

All other companies

35,7

8,3

36,8

36,8

42,7

32,6

6,6

33,8

42,7

3. Form of the measures

(92) During the course of

the investigation, six exporting
producers in the PRC offered acceptable price under­
takings in accordance with Article 8(1) of
the basic
Regulation.

(93)

The Commission, by Decision 2008/899/EC (1), accepted
these undertaking offers. The Council recognises that the
undertaking offers eliminate the injurious effect of
dumping and limits to a sufficient degree the risk of
circumvention.

(94)

the compliance of

To further enable the Commission and the customs auth­
orities to effectively monitor
the
companies with the undertakings, when the request for
release for free circulation is presented to the relevant
customs authority, exemption from the anti-dumping
duty is to be conditional on (i) the presentation of an
undertaking invoice, which is a commercial
invoice
containing at least the elements listed and the declaration
stipulated in the Annex; (ii) the fact that imported goods
are manufactured, shipped and invoiced directly by the
said companies to the first independent customer in the
Community; and (iii) the fact that the goods declared and
presented to customs
correspond precisely to the
description on the undertaking invoice. Where the
above conditions are not met
the appropriate anti-
dumping duty shall be incurred at the time of acceptance
of the declaration for release into free circulation.

(1) See page 62 of this Official Journal.

3.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 323/13

(95) Whenever

the Commission withdraws, pursuant

to
Article 8(9) of the basic Regulation,
its acceptance of
an undertaking following a breach by referring to
particular transactions and declares the relevant under­
taking invoices as invalid, a customs debt shall be
incurred at the time of acceptance of the declaration
for release into free circulation of these transactions.

(96)

(97)

(98)

(99)

(100)

Importers should be aware that a customs debt may be
incurred, as a normal trade risk, at the time of acceptance
of
the declaration for release into free circulation as
described in recitals 94 and 95 even if an undertaking
from whom they were
offered by the manufacturer
buying, directly or indirectly, had been accepted by the
Commission.

to Article 14(7) of

Pursuant
the basic Regulation,
customs authorities should inform the Commission im­
mediately whenever indications of a violation of
the
undertaking are found.

exporting

producers

For the reasons stated above, the undertakings offered by
the
considered
acceptable by the Commission and the companies
concerned have been informed of
facts,
considerations and obligations upon which acceptance
is based.

the essential

therefore

are

In the event of a breach or withdrawal of the under­
takings, or in case of withdrawal of acceptance of the
undertakings by the Commission, the anti-dumping duty
which has been imposed by the Council in accordance
with Article 9(4) of the basic Regulation shall automa­
tically apply in accordance with Article 8(9) thereof.

I. DEFINITIVE COLLECTION OF THE PROVISIONAL
DUTY

the

level of

In view of the magnitude of the dumping margin found
and given the
injury caused to the
Community industry, it is considered necessary that the
amounts secured by way of provisional anti-dumping
duty imposed by the provisional Regulation should be
definitively collected to the extent of the amount of defi­
nitive duties imposed. As the definitive duty rates are
lower than the provisional duty rates, amounts provi­
sionally secured in excess of the definitive rate of anti-
dumping duty should be released,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

1.
A definitive anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on
imports of citric acid and of trisodium citrate dihydrate falling

within CN codes 2918 14 00 and ex 2918 15 00 (TARIC code
2918 15 00 10) and originating in the People’s Republic of
China.

The rate of the definitive anti-dumping duty applicable to
2.
the net, free-at-Community-frontier price, before duty, of the
products described in paragraph 1 and produced by the
companies below shall be as follows:

Company

Anti-dumping duty
(%)

TARIC additional
code

Anhui BBCA Biochemical Co. Ltd
— No 73, Daqing Road, Bengbu
City 233010, Anhui Province,
PRC

DSM Citric Acid (Wuxi) Ltd —
Jincheng Bridge,
West Side of
Wuxi 214024,
Jiangsu province,
PRC

RZBC Co. Ltd — No 9 Xinghai
West Road, Rizhao, Shandong
Province, PRC

RZBC (Juxian) Co. Ltd, West
Wing, Chenyang North Road, Ju
County,
Shandong
Rizhao,
Province, PRC

TTCA Co. Ltd — West, Wenhe
Bridge
City,
Anqiu
North,
Shandong Province, PRC

Yixing Union Biochemical Co. Ltd
— Economic Development Zone
Yixing City
Jiangsu
Province, PRC

214203,

Laiwu Taihe Biochemistry Co. Ltd,
No 106 Luzhong Large East
Street,
Shandong
Province, PRC

Laiwu,

Weifang Ensign Industry Co. Ltd,
Limin Road,
The West
Changle
Shandong
Province, PRC

End,
City,

35,7

A874

8,3

A875

36,8

A876

36,8

A877

42,7

A878

32,6

A879

6,6

A880

33,8

A882

All other companies

42,7

A999

3.
Notwithstanding the first paragraph, the definitive anti-
dumping duty shall not apply to imports released for free circu­
lation in accordance with Article 2.

Unless otherwise

4.
concerning customs duties shall apply.

specified,

the provisions

in force

L 323/14

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

3.12.2008

Article 2

1.
Imports declared for release into free circulation which are
invoiced by companies from which undertakings are accepted
by the Commission and whose names are listed in Decision
shall be
2008/899/EC, as
exempt from the anti-dumping duty imposed by Article 1, on
condition that:

from time to time amended,

(a)

they are manufactured, shipped and invoiced directly by the
said companies to the first independent customer in the
Community; and

(b) such imports are accompanied by an undertaking invoice
which is a commercial
the
elements and the declaration stipulated in the Annex of
this Regulation; and

invoice containing at

least

(a) whenever it is established, in respect of imports described in
paragraph 1, that one or more of the conditions listed in
that paragraph are not fulfilled; or

(b) when the Commission withdraws its acceptance of

the
undertaking pursuant
to Article 8(9) of Regulation
(EC) No 384/96 in a Regulation or Decision which refers
to particular transactions and declares the relevant under­
taking invoices as invalid.

Article 3

The amounts secured by way of provisional anti-dumping duty
pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 488/2008 shall be definitively
collected at the rate of the definitive duty imposed pursuant to
Article 1 of this Regulation. The amounts secured in excess of
the amount of the definitive duty shall be released.

(c)

the goods declared and presented to customs correspond
precisely to the description on the undertaking invoice.

Article 4

A customs debt shall be incurred at the time of acceptance

2.
of the declaration for release into free circulation:

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, 1 December 2008.

For the Council
The President

H. NOVELLI

3.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 323/15

ANNEX

The following elements shall be indicated in the commercial
Community of goods which are subject to the undertaking:

invoice accompanying the companies’ sales to the

1. The heading ‘COMMERCIAL INVOICE ACCOMPANYING GOODS SUBJECT TO AN UNDERTAKING’.

2. The name of the company issuing the commercial invoice.

3. The commercial invoice number.

4. The date of issue of the commercial invoice.

5. The TARIC additional code under which the goods on the invoice are to be customs-cleared at the Community

frontier.

6. The exact description of the goods, including:

— the product code number (PCN) used for the purpose of the undertaking,

— plain language description of the goods corresponding to the PCN concerned,

— the company product code number (CPC),

— TARIC code,

— quantity (to be given in tonnes).

7. The description of the terms of the sale, including:

— price per tonnes,

— the applicable payment terms,

— the applicable delivery terms,

— total discounts and rebates,

8. Name of the company acting as an importer in the Community to which the commercial invoice accompanying goods

subject to an undertaking is issued directly by the company.

9. The name of the official of the company that has issued the commercial invoice and the following signed declaration:

‘I, the undersigned, certify that the sale for direct export to the European Community of the goods covered by this
invoice is being made within the scope and under the terms of the Undertaking offered by [COMPANY], and accepted
by the European Commission through Decision 2008/899/EC. I declare that the information provided in this invoice
is complete and correct.’