Proposta de REGULAMENTO (UE) N.º XX/2010 DO CONSELHO que institui um direito anti-dumping definitivo e estabelece a cobrança definitiva do direito provisório instituído sobre as importações de fios de alta tenacidade, de poliésteres, originários da República Popular da China e que encerra o processo relativo às importações de fios de alta tenacidade, de poliésteres, originários da República da Coreia e de Taiwan
Date: 2010-11-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: China, South Korea, Taiwan, anti-dumping duty, anti-dumping legislation, dumping, import, originating product, plastics, wire

EN

EN 

  EN 

 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 5.11.2010 
COM(2010) 637 final 

2010/0319 (NLE) 

Proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION (EU) No XX/2010  

of XX December 2010 

imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty 
imposed on imports of high tenacity yarn of polyesters originating in the People’s 
Republic of China and terminating the proceeding concerning imports of high tenacity 
yarn of polyesters originating in the Republic of Korea and Taiwan 

EN 

1 

EN 

 
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 

1. 

Context of the proposal 

•  Grounds for and objectives of the proposal 

This  proposal  concerns  the  application  of  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  1225/2009  of  30 
November  2009  on  protection  against  dumped  imports  from  countries  not  members  of  the 
European Community (‘the basic Regulation’), in the proceeding concerning imports of high 
tenacity yarn of polyesters originating in the People's Republic of China ('PRC') the Republic 
of Korea ('Korea') and Taiwan. 

•  General context 

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

•  Existing provisions in the area of the proposal 

A provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of high tenacity yarn of polyesters falling within 
CN code 5402 20 00 originating in the People's Republic of China was imposed by Council 
Regulation (EC) No 478/2010 (OJ L 135, 2.6.2010, p. 3).  

•  Consistency with other policies and objectives of the Union 

Not applicable. 

2. 

Consultation of interested parties and impact assessment 

•  Consultation of interested parties 

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

•  Collection and use of expertise 

There was no need for external expertise. 

•  Impact assessment 

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

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

3. 

Legal elements of the proposal 

•  Summary of the proposed action 

On  8  September  2009,  the  Commission  initiated  an  anti-dumping  proceeding  concerning 
imports  of  high  tenacity  yarn  of  polyesters  originating  in  the  PRC,  Korea  and  Taiwan.  The 
proceeding was initiated as a result of a complaint by CIRFS – European Man-made Fibres 
Association  ('the  complainant')  on  behalf  of  producers  of  high  tenacity  yarn  of  polyesters 
representing a major proportion, in this case more than 60% of the total Union producers of 
high tenacity yarn of polyesters.  

By Regulation (EU) No 478/2010 the Commission imposed provisional anti-dumping duties 
on  imports  from  the  PRC.  No  anti-dumping  duties  were  imposed  on  imports  originating  in 
Korea  and  Taiwan,  since  the  countrywide  weighted  average  dumping  margins  for  these 
imports were found to be de minimis.  

EN 

2 

EN 

The  attached  proposal  for  a  Council  Regulation  is  based  on  the  definitive  findings  on 
dumping,  injury,  causation  and  Union  interest  which  confirmed  the  provisional  findings 
regarding imports from the PRC and also confirmed that dumping margins regarding imports 
from Korea and Taiwan were de minimis. In addition, two additional exporting producers in 
the  PRC  who  had  requested  individual  examination  were  investigated  and  received  an 
individual margin of dumping. Based on comments of interested parties to the disclosure of 
the provisional findings, the dumping margins were also revised. 

It is therefore proposed that the Council adopt the attached proposal for a Regulation in order 
to  impose  definitive  measures  on  imports  from  the  PRC  and  terminate  the  proceeding 
concerning imports of high tenacity yarn of polyesters originating in the Korea and Taiwan.  

•  Legal basis 

Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of 30 November 2009 on protection against dumped 
imports from countries not members of the European Community. 

•  Subsidiarity principle 

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

•  Proportionality principle 

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

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

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

•  Choice of instruments 

Proposed instrument: Regulation. 

Other means would not be adequate for the following reason: 

The basic Regulation does not provide for alternative options. 

4. 

Budgetary implication 

The proposal has no implication for the Union budget. 

EN 

3 

EN 

2010/0319 (NLE) 

Proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION (EU) No XX/2010  

of XX December 2010 

imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty 
imposed on imports of high tenacity yarn of polyesters originating in the People’s 
Republic of China and terminating the proceeding concerning imports of high tenacity 
yarn of polyesters originating in the Republic of Korea and Taiwan 

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, 

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,  

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of 30 November 2009 on protection 
against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community1 (the 'basic 
Regulation'), and in particular Article 9 thereof, 

Having  regard  to  the  proposal  submitted  by  the  European  Commission  ('the  Commission') 
after consulting the Advisory Committee, 

Whereas: 

1. 

1.1. 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

1.2. 

(4) 

PROCEDURE 

Provisional measures 
The  Commission,  by  Regulation  (EU)  No  478/20102  ('the  provisional  Regulation') 
imposed  a  provisional  anti-dumping  duty  on  imports  of  high  tenacity  yarn  of 
polyesters  ('HTY')  originating  in  the  People's  Republic  of  China  ('PRC').  No 
provisional measures were imposed on imports of HTY originating in the Republic of 
Korea ('Korea') and Taiwan. 

The  proceeding  was  initiated  as  a  result  of  a  complaint  lodged  on  27  July  2009  by 
CIRFS  -  European  Man-made  Fibres  Association  ('the  complainant')  on  behalf  of 
producers of high tenacity yarn of polyesters representing a major proportion, in this 
case more than 60 % of the total Union production of high tenacity yarn of polyesters. 

As set out in recital (15) of the provisional Regulation, the investigation of dumping 
and injury covered the period from 1 July 2008 to 30 June 2009 ('investigation period' 
or 'IP'). The examination of the trends for the assessment of injury covered the period 
from January 2005 to the end of the investigation period ('period considered'). 

Subsequent procedure 

Subsequent to the disclosure of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of 
which  it  was  decided  to  impose  provisional  anti-dumping  measures  ('provisional 

1 

2 

OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 51. 
OJ L135, 2.6.2010, p. 3 

EN 

4 

  EN 

                                                 
disclosure'),  several  interested  parties  made  written  submissions  making  their  views 
known  on  the  provisional  findings.  The  parties  who  so  requested  were  granted  an 
opportunity to be heard. The Commission continued to seek and verify all information 
it  deemed  necessary  for  its  definitive  findings.  The  oral  and  written  comments 
submitted  by  the  interested  parties  were  considered  and,  where  appropriate,  the 
provisional findings were modified accordingly. 

(5) 

As regards the Union interest aspects, additional verification visits were carried out at 
the following companies: 

Users in the Union 

–  - Continental AG,  

–  - Oppermann Automotive Webbing GmbH,  

–  - Katradis Marine Ropes Industry S.A.,  

–  - Mehler Texnologies GmbH,  

–  - E. Oppermann GmbH,  

–  - Oppermann Industrial Webbing s.r.o.,  

–  - Contitech Transportbandsysteme GmbH 

(6) 

(7) 

2. 

(8) 

(9) 

One interested party requested a hearing and the intervention of the Hearing Officer. 
This request was made after the provisional disclosure. The hearing in the presence of 
the Hearing Officer was granted. 

All  parties  were  informed  of  the  essential  facts  and  considerations  on  the  basis  of 
which it was intended to recommend the imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty 
on imports of HTY originating in the PRC and the definitive collection of the amounts 
secured by way of the provisional duty ('final disclosure').  They  were  also  granted  a 
period within which they could make representations subsequent to this disclosure. 

PRODUCT CONCERNED AND LIKE PRODUCT 

The product concerned is high tenacity yarn of polyesters (other than sewing thread), 
not put up for retail sale, including monofilament of less than 67 decitex originating in 
the PRC, Korea and Taiwan ('the product concerned') currently falling within CN code 
5402 20 00.  

Following the provisional disclosure, one party claimed that the Commission had not 
addressed  the  differences  between  the  yarn  used  in  the  production  of  tyres,  the  so 
called 'High Modulus Low Shrinkage' ('HMLS') yarn, and other types of yarns, as this 
type requires lengthy and costly technical tests before getting approvals for the HMLS 
specifications imposed by the purchasers. Moreover, this party claimed that it was not 
clear which factors were going into the provisional determination of the existence of a 
single  product.  Another  party  argued  that  HMLS  and  other  types  of  yarns  have 
different cost structures.  

(10) 

In reply to these claims it should first be noted that the product concerned is used in a 
number  of  diverse  applications  such  as  tyre  reinforcement,  broad  fabrics,  seatbelts, 
airbags, ropes, nets and a number of industrial applications. There are therefore a great 
number  of  different  applications  and  consequently  many  different  types  and 
specifications exist. 

EN 

5 

  EN 

(11) 

In the determination that HMLS and other types of yarns constitute one single product, 
the  main  criteria  were  the  basic  physical,  technical  and  chemical  characteristics. 
Indeed,  as  explained  in  recital  (19)  of  the  provisional  Regulation,  the  investigation 
showed  that,  although  HMLS  yarn  has  some  distinctive  characteristics  compared  to 
other types of HTY (e.g. modulus, shrinkage, tensile strength and fatigue resistance), it 
is considered that all the different types of the product concerned share the same basic 
physical and chemical characteristics. They are therefore considered to constitute one 
single product. 

(12)  Regarding  the  claimed  differences  in  cost  structure, it should be noted that this does 
not  constitute  in  itself  a  decisive  criterion  when  determining  whether  HMLS 
constitutes a distinct product from other types of HTY. Differences in costs, prices and 
production  process  do  not  per  se  justify  that  a  certain  product  type  such  as  HMLS 
should be considered as a different product as long as this type shares the same basic 
physical, technical and chemical characteristics with the other product types.  

(13) 

(14) 

It  was  therefore  not  considered  warranted  to  exclude  HMLS  from  the  scope  of  the 
investigation and consequently the claims in this respect had to be rejected. 

In the absence of any other comments concerning the product concerned and the like 
product, recitals (16) to (20) of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.  

3. 

DUMPING 

3.1. 

Taiwan  

3.1.1.  Normal value 

(15)  One  exporting  producer  in  Taiwan  provided  evidence  which  demonstrated  that  the 
price of the main raw materials, Purified Terephthalic Acid (PTA) and Mono Ethylene 
Glycol  (MEG),  it  purchased  to  produce  HTY  varied  during  the  IP.  In  particular  it 
emerged  that  the  purchase  prices  sharply  declined  in  particular  in  the  4th  quarter  of 
2008.  Hence  it  claimed  that  this  should  be  taken  into  account  when  establishing  its 
normal values in order to ensure a fair comparison with the export prices.  

(16)  The findings in recital (18) below are the result of a very detailed analysis of the data 
submitted by the exporter and which was verified during the verification visit. Hence, 
it was considered that establishing normal values for certain periods of the IP to take 
account of the variation in raw material prices was justified in this case.  

(17)  There  were  no  other  comments  concerning  the  method  described  in  the  provisional 
Regulation in recitals (86) and (87). The method used to establish normal value for the 
Taiwanese exporting producers can be confirmed.  

3.1.2.  Export price 

(18)  The investigation showed that the Taiwanese producer mentioned in recital (15) above 
sold higher volumes of the product concerned to the Union market in the first half of 
the  IP  when  raw  material  prices  were  lower. This finding should also  be  seen in the 
light of the contents of recital (16) above.  

(19) 

In  the  absence  of  any  comments  concerning  the  export  price,  recital  (88)  of  the 
provisional Regulation is hereby confirmed.  

3.1.3.  Comparison 

EN 

6 

  EN 

(20)  The normal value and export price were established as explained above. The normal 
value  thus  established  for  the  said  producer  and  its  export  price  were  compared  at 
periods which were as close as possible to take account of differences affecting price 
comparability. This is in line with provisions of Article 2(10) of the basic Regulation.  

(21)  No  other  comments  concerning  the  comparison  of  the  normal  value  and  the  export 
price  of  the  Taiwanese  exporting  producers  were  received.  Hence,  the  contents  of 
recital (89) of the provisional Regulation can be confirmed.  

3.1.4.  Dumping margins 

(22) 

It is recalled that it was concluded in recital (92) of the provisional Regulation that the 
countrywide  dumping  margin  for  Taiwan  was  de  minimis.  The  definitive  dumping 
margin established for the Taiwanese producer mentioned in recital (15) above is now 
below  the  de  minimis  threshold.  It  is  therefore  confirmed  that  the  countrywide 
definitive dumping margin for Taiwan is de minimis.  

3.2. 

The PRC  

3.2.1.  Market Economy Treatment (MET) 

(23) 

It is recalled that 11 exporting producers in the PRC made themselves known. These 
companies  represented  100%  of  total  exports  of  the  product  concerned  to  the  EU 
market  during  the  IP.  A  sample  of  three  exporting  producers  or  groups  of  related 
companies  was  selected  based  on  the  highest  export  volume  for  the  purpose  of 
establishing dumping for the PRC. The three sampled exporting producers requested 
MET, but only one was found to merit it.  

(24)  Following disclosure of the findings concerning MET, the two exporting producers to 
which MET was not granted submitted comments which are summarised below.  

(25)  The  first  exporting  producer  made  comments  concerning  a  restrictive  clause  in  its 
business  activities,  problems  encountered  with  its  accounting  and  the  payment  of 
certain assets such as the land use rights.  

(26)  This  exporter  admitted  the  existence  of  a  restrictive  clause  in  its  Articles  of 
Association  (AoA).  It  claimed  but  did  not demonstrate  that  it  had  ceased  to  produce 
legal effects on its activity. Similarly, regarding the accounting problems, the company 
admitted  the  existence  of  discrepancies  between  the  accounting  records  and  the 
audited  financial  statements,  but  it  claimed  that  these  discrepancies  were  minor  and 
explained during the investigation. It should be clarified that the problems encountered 
in  the  accounting  of  that  company  which  led  to  the  rejection  of  the  MET  were  not 
minor  but  substantial,  in  particular  concerning  the  booking  of  certain  assets  and 
discrepancies  found  between  certain  ledgers  and  documents  provided  during  the  on 
spot visit. 

(27)  The second exporting producer made comments in particular on the findings regarding 
the  capital  contribution,  a  restrictive  clause  in  its  business  activities,  and  the 
acquisition of the land use rights.  

(28)  Regarding the capital contribution, the exporter reiterated the same arguments as those 
made at provisional stage, namely that the capital had been duly contributed. It argued 
that  technical  know-how  is  a  special  category  of  knowledge  which  does  not  require 
being patented or registered, and therefore, the capital contribution, although in kind, 
was  correctly  made.  With  regard  to  the  latter  issues,  it  reiterated  that  the  restrictive 

EN 

7 

  EN 

clause is not mandatory for the company and that the investment requirements linked 
to the acquisition of the land are not distortions but are related to the authorities' land 
development policy. 

(29)  However, these arguments were already raised and rejected at provisional stage. Even 
if the investment requirements are related to the authorities' land development policy, 
they are not considered to be compatible with the MET. No new evidence that could 
change the provisional conclusions reflected in the MET assessment in recitals 50 and 
51 of the provisional Regulation was provided. 

(30)  On the basis of the above, the provisional findings made in recitals (46) to (52) of the 

provisional Regulation are confirmed.  

3.2.2. 

Individual examination  

(31)  As  mentioned  in  recital  (28)  of  the  provisional  Regulation  two  exporting  producers 
which were not included in the sample requested that an individual margin of dumping 
be established pursuant to Article 17(3) of the basic Regulation. However, the requests 
for  individual  examination  could  be  examined  only  after  the  imposition  of  the 
provisional measures.  

(32)  These companies replied to the MET claim form within the given deadlines. After the 
imposition  of  the  provisional  measures,  the  Commission  sought  and  verified  the 
information provided in the claim forms and all other information deemed necessary at 
the premises of the companies in question:  

— Oriental Industries Co., Ltd. 
— Hangzhou Huachun Chemical Fibers Co., Ltd. 

(33)  Briefly, and for ease of reference only, the MET criteria are set out in a summarised 

form below:  

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

Business decisions and costs are made in response to market conditions, and without 
significant  State  interference;  costs  of  major  inputs  substantially  reflect  market 
values;  

Firms have one clear set of basic accounting records which are independently audited 
in  line  with  International  Accounting  Standards  (IAS)  and  are  applied  for  all 
purposes;  

There  are  no  significant  distortions  carried  over  from  the  former  non-market 
economy system;  

Bankruptcy and property laws guarantee legal certainty and stability;  

Exchange rate conversions are carried out at the market rate.  

(34)  For  both  companies  a  restrictive  clause  concerning  the  repartition  of  sales  between 
export and domestic markets exists in the registration documents. For one exporter a 
number of inconsistencies and shortcomings in the accounting system of the applicant 
have  been  found  leading  to  the  conclusion  that  the  accounts  were  not  clear,  not 
prepared  and  audited  in  accordance  with  international  accounting  standards.  Finally, 
certain  distortions  carried  over  from  the  non-market  economy  system  were  found  in 
particular with regard to the purchase of the land use rights of the company. 

EN 

8 

  EN 

 
 
(35)  On this basis, it was concluded that none of the two companies demonstrated that they 
fulfilled  all  the  criteria  of  Article  2(7)(c)  of  the  basic  Regulation  and  could  not  be 
granted MET.  

3.2.3. 

Individual treatment (IT) 

(36)  Pursuant  to  Article  2(7)(a)  of  the  basic  Regulation,  a  countrywide  duty,  if  any,  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 to be granted IT. 

(37)  The two exporting producers which requested individual examination did not meet the 
MET criteria but claimed IT in the event that they would not be granted MET.  

(38)  Briefly, and for ease of reference only, the IT criteria are set out below:  

1. In the case of wholly or partly foreign owned firms or joint ventures, exporters are free to 
repatriate capital and profits;  

2.  Export  prices  and  quantities,  and  conditions  and  terms  of  sale  are  freely
determined;  

3. The majority of the shares belong to private persons. State officials appearing on the board 
of  directors  or  holding  key  management  positions  shall  either  be  in  minority  or  it  must  be 
demonstrated 
independent  from  State 
interference;  

is  nonetheless  sufficiently 

the  company 

that 

4. Exchange rate conversions are carried out at the market rate; and  
5. State interference is not such as to permit circumvention of measures if individual 

exporters are given different rates of duty.  

(39)  On  the  basis  of  information  available,  it  was  established  that  these  two  exporting 
producers  in  the  PRC,  not  included  in  the  sample,  which  required  individual 
examination,  met  all  the  above  requirements  to  be  granted  IT  as  set  forth  in  Article 
9(5) of the basic Regulation.  

3.2.4.  Analogue country  

(40)  As mentioned in recitals (57) to (62) of the provisional Regulation, it was considered 
that the USA was not an appropriate analogue country for the purpose of establishing 
normal  value  for  the  PRC.  Instead  Taiwan  was  chosen  as  the  appropriate  analogue 
country to establish normal value for the PRC in accordance with Article 2(7) of the 
basic Regulation.  

(41)  Following the imposition of provisional measures some parties suggested instead the 
use  of  Korea  as  analogue  country.  They  claimed  that  this  country  was  more 
appropriate than Taiwan because Korean exporting producers also use the recent one-
step production technology, they have a high volume of comparability in end products 
with the PRC, the Korean domestic market is large and comparable to that of the PRC 
and no company in Korea was found to be dumping. 

(42)  Regarding the selection of an analogue country, the following criteria were examined 
for the selection of an analogue country: the comparability of the production volume 
of  end-products  in  the  non-market  economy  country  and  in  the  potential  analogue 
country, the representativity of domestic sales (transactions) to unrelated customers as 
compared to exports of the product concerned originating in the non-market economy 
country, the level of competition in the domestic market of the analogue country, the 

EN 

9 

  EN 

 
 
 
 
 
comparability of access to raw material and energy, the readiness of exporters in the 
potential analogue country to cooperate in the investigation.  

(43)  A  further  analysis  carried  out  after  the  imposition  of  the  provisional  measures  was 
made on the basis of all the information available to analyse the relevant criteria. This 
analysis showed that there are indeed similarities between Korea and Taiwan in terms 
of some criteria. However, it appeared that on balance Taiwan was the most suitable 
analogue country.  

(44)  The analysis showed that Korea and Taiwan have a high level of comparability in the 
volume  of  end  products  manufactured  with  the  producers  in  the  PRC  and  a  large 
volume of products sold domestically in both countries could be compared to exports 
made  from  the  PRC.  This  criterion  showed  a  slightly  higher  level  of  volume 
comparability for Korea as its production volume is larger than Taiwan.  

(45)  However,  the  importance  of  this  criterion  should  not  be  overestimated  over  other 
criteria  such  as  the  representativeness  of  domestic  sales  transactions  as  compared  to 
exports,  the  access  to  raw  material  and  the  level  of  competition  in  the  analogue 
country.  

(46) 

It  was  found  that  both  Korea  and  Taiwan  had  a  high  number  of  representative 
domestic  sales  for  which  normal  value  would  not  be  constructed,  as  compared  to 
exports  from  the  PRC.  However,  the  transactions  made  by  the  Taiwanese  exporters 
were found to be overall more representative than those of the Korean exporters. The 
normal value for a higher volume and for more types of the product concerned would 
have had to be constructed had Korea been chosen as analogue country.  

(47)  Regarding  the  level  of  competition,  one  party  alleged  that  one  Taiwanese  exporting 
producer  held  a  dominant  position  in  its  domestic  market  and  that  this  should  also 
preclude using Taiwan as analogue country.  

(48)  A high number of producers may be an indication of competition in the country. But 
what also needs to be examined is whether or not producers in the analogue country 
are subject to competition which allows sufficient but not excessive profit.  

(49) 

It was found that there are four domestic producers in Korea and that imports of HTY 
are complementing the domestic market. As regards Taiwan, there are two producers 
and  the  domestic  market  is  also  served  by  outside  sources.  Nevertheless,  the 
investigation  showed  that,  despite  lower  costs  in  Korea,  the  level  of  domestic  prices 
was not lower than in Taiwan. The profits realised on the Korean market was 18% on 
average with Korean HTY producers achieving profits above 20% on turnover for the 
product concerned. This is much higher than Taiwan where profits ranged between 5% 
and 9%.  

(50) 

It is therefore considered that there is a high level of competition in Taiwan and that 
profits are not excessive.  

(51)  Concerning the access to raw materials, Korea is by far one of the largest producer and 
exporter of PTA worldwide after Thailand. This competitive advantage of the Korean 
producers may explain, to a certain extent, why the raw material price in Korea was on 
average lower than in Taiwan and in the PRC. The investigation showed that most of 
the verified Korean companies sourced their raw material from related companies or 
could  produce  it  themselves.  By  contrast,  in  Taiwan  none  of  the  companies 
investigated  was  producing  its  raw  material  and  mainly  sourced  it  from  related  and 
unrelated parties, as it is the case in the PRC.  

EN 

10 

  EN 

(52)  The  information  available  and  the  fact  that  the  Taiwanese  exporting  producers  have 
related producers of HTY in the PRC suggest that the same sources of supply of raw 
material are used within the groups in order to realize economies of scale and obtain 
better prices. Hence it was considered that the conditions of access to raw material in 
the PRC are very similar to those in Taiwan. 

(53)  On  that  basis,  it  is  considered  that  the  choice  of  Taiwan  was  not  unreasonable  and 
more appropriate in this case. Taiwan is therefore confirmed as the analogue country.

3.2.5.  Normal value 

3.2.5.1 .Sampled exporting producer granted MET 

(54) 

In the absence of comments concerning the normal values established for the company 
granted MET recitals (64) and (65) of the provisional Regulation are confirmed 

3.2.5.2. Exporting producers not granted MET 

(55)  As  mentioned  in  recitals  (15)  above  one  exporter  in  Taiwan  demonstrated  that  its 
purchase price of the main raw material used for the production of HTY varied during 
the IP and claimed to take this into account when establishing the normal value. This 
claim was considered to be founded and the normal values established for Taiwan, the 
analogue country in this case, were revised accordingly.  

3.2.6.  Export price 

(56)  As  explained  in  recital  (68)  of  the  provisional  Regulation,  all  sales  of  the  product 
concerned made by the sampled exporting producers on the Union market were made 
directly  to  independent  customers  in  the  Union.  Consequently,  the  export  price  was 
established  in  accordance  with  Article  2(8)  of  the  basic  Regulation,  on  the  basis  of 
prices  actually  paid  or  payable.  The  export  sales  of  the  individually  examined 
companies  were  also  made  directly  to  unrelated  customers  and  therefore  the  method 
described  in  recital  (68)  of  the  provisional  Regulation  was  used  also  for  theses 
companies in order to establish their export price. 

(57) 

In  the  absence  of  any  comments  concerning  the  export  price,  recital  (68)  of  the 
provisional Regulation is hereby confirmed.  

3.2.7.  Comparison  

(58)  The revised  normal values established  for  the analogue country were compared with 
the  export  price  of  the  cooperating  exporting  producers  in  the  PRC.  As  shown  in 
recital (63) below this led to reduced definitive dumping margins for the three sampled 
exporting producers in the PRC. 

(59) 

It  is  noted  that  the  indirect  taxation  adjustment  mentioned  in  recital  (69)  of  the 
provisional  Regulation  represents  the  difference  between  the  value  added  tax  (VAT) 
payable  on  domestic  sales  and  that  payable  on  the  export  sales  transactions  due 
account being taken of the VAT refund rate on export sales. The cooperating exporting 
producers contested the manner in which the adjustment was calculated and claimed 
that  VAT  regime  applicable  to  specific  processing  and  sales  operations  should  be 
taken into consideration when assessing the amount of the VAT not refunded. 

EN 

11 

  EN 

 
 
(60)  Regarding  this  claim  it  is  noted  that  the  adjustment  was  based  on  the  provisions  of 
Article  2(10)(b)  of  the  basic  Regulation  which  provides  for  an  adjustment  to  normal 
value for import charges and indirect taxes – a category which includes VAT. On this 
basis the claim was rejected. 

(61) 

In the absence of any other comments concerning the comparison, which would alter 
the provisional findings, recital (69) of the provisional Regulation is hereby 
confirmed. 

3.2.8.  Dumping margins  

(62)  The revised average normal values established for Taiwan, the analogue country, and 
the comparison with the export price of the Chinese exporting producers led to lower 
definitive dumping margins.  

(63)  These definitive dumping margins for the Chinese exporting producers are as follows:

- 5,1% for Zhejiang Guxiandao Industrial Fibre Co., Ltd, 
- 0% for Zhejiang Hailide New Material Co., Ltd 
- 5,5% for Zhejiang Unifull Industrial Fibre Co., Ltd, 
- 5,3% for cooperating companies not included in the sample. 

(64)  For the companies which requested individual examination the definitive dumping 

margins are the following: 

–   - 9,8% for Oriental Industries (Suzhou) Ltd.  

- 0% for Hangzhou Huachun Chemical Fiber Co., Ltd.  

3.3. 

The Republic of Korea  

3.3.1.  Normal value 

(65) 

In  the  absence  of  any  other  comments  concerning  the  normal  value,  explained  in 
recitals (75) to (76) of the provisional Regulation, these findings are hereby confirmed. 

3.3.2.  Export price 

(66) 

In the absence of any comments concerning the export price, recitals (77) to (78) of 
the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.  

3.3.3.  Comparison  

(67) 

In the absence of any other comments concerning the comparison, which would alter 
the provisional findings, recital (79) to (81) of the provisional Regulation are hereby 
confirmed.  

3.3.4.  Dumping margins  

(68) 

In the absence of any other comments concerning the dumping margins, which would 
alter the provisional findings concerning Korea, recitals (82) to (85) of the provisional 
Regulation are hereby confirmed.  

4. 

INJURY 

4.1. 

Union production 

EN 

12 

  EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(69) 

4.2. 

(70) 

4.3. 

(71) 

In the absence of any comments concerning the Union production recitals (94) to (96) 
of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.  

Definition of the Union industry  

In the absence of any comments concerning the definition of the Union industry, 
recital (97) of the provisional Regulation is hereby confirmed. 

Union consumption 

It is recalled that the Union consumption was established on the basis of the total 
imports, derived from Eurostat, the total sales on the Union market of the Union 
industry, including an estimate based on data in the complaint of the sales of the silent 
producers.  

Table 1 

Union 
Consumption 

2005 

2006 

2007 

2008 

IP 

Tonnes 

221 277 

233 969 

265 826 

241 258 

205 912 

Index 2005=100 

100 

106 

120 

109 

93 

Source: Eurostat, complaint data and questionnaire replies. 

(72)  Overall  Union  consumption  decreased  by  7%  during  the  period  considered.  It 
increased by 20% between 2005 and 2007, after which it decreased by 27% between 
2007 and the IP. The downturn in consumption in 2008 and the IP was the result of a 
lower demand, especially in the second half of 2008 due to the economic crisis. 

(73) 

In  the  absence  of  any  comments  concerning  the  Union  consumption,  recitals  (98)  to 
(100) of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.  

4.4. 

Imports into the European Union from the PRC, Republic of Korea and Taiwan 

4.4.1.  Cumulative assessment of the effects of the imports  

(74) 

(75) 

It  is  recalled  that  imports  from  Korea  and  Taiwan  were  not  cumulated  with  the 
dumped imports from the PRC because both the Korean and Taiwanese imports were 
not made at dumped prices during the IP, as mentioned in recitals (102) and (103) of 
the provisional Regulation.  

It  is  noted  that  in  order  to  make  an  assessment  as  to  whether  imports  from  the 
countries  concerned  should  be  cumulatively  assessed  in  the  current  investigation, 
imports  from  each  country  were  individually examined  in  the  light  of  the  conditions 
set out in Article 3(4) of the basic Regulation. Since the margin of dumping in relation 
to the  imports from Korea and  Taiwan was  below  de minimis, it was concluded that 
imports  from  Korea  and  Taiwan  should  not  be  cumulated  with  the  dumped  imports 
from  the  PRC.  Following  this  conclusion,  these  imports  were  analysed  separately  in 
recitals (147) to (152) of the provisional Regulation in accordance with Article 3(7) of 
the basic Regulation. 

4.4.2.  Dumped imports from the PRC 

EN 

13 

  EN 

(76) 

It  is  recalled  that  it  was provisionally  found  that  one  exporting  producer  in  the  PRC 
was  not  dumping  its  products  on  the  Union  market.  Accordingly  these  exports  were 
excluded from the analysis of the development of the dumped imports from the PRC 
on  the  Union  market.  Following  individual  examinations  carried  out  after  the 
imposition of provisional measures, exports by an additional exporting producer in the 
PRC were found not to be dumped, as mentioned in recital (64) above. Therefore these 
exports were also excluded from the analysis concerning the development of dumped 
imports  from  the  PRC  on  the  Union  market  and  the  impact  on  the  Union  industry. 
Accordingly, data regarding the dumped imports from the PRC was revised.  

Table 2 

Dumped imports from the PRC 
Imports (tonnes) 
Index 

2005 
4.350 
100 

2007 

2006 
11.926  31.223  39.072  38.404 
274 

2008 

718 

898 

883 

IP 

Market share  

2,4% 

5,6% 

11,9%  16,3%  18,8% 

Average price in EUR/tonne 

2.783 

1.705 

1.524 

1.574 

1.532 

Index 

100 

61 

55 

57 

55 

Source: Eurostat, complaint data and questionnaire replies 

(77)  Following the revision of data concerning the dumped imports from the PRC, it was 
found  that  their  volume  increased  dramatically  by  over  eight  times  in  the  period 
considered,  while  at  the  same  time  the  average  import  prices  decreased  sharply  by 
45%.  

4.4.3.  Price undercutting 

(78) 

4.5. 

(79) 

In  the  absence  of  any  comments  concerning  price  undercutting,  the  methodology 
described  in  recitals  (110)  and  (111)  of  the  provisional  Regulation  to  establish  price 
undercutting  is  confirmed.  However,  following  the  individual  examinations  granted 
after  the  imposition  of  provisional  measures,  as  mentioned  in  recital  (31)  above,  the 
price  comparison  of  similar  product  types  was  reassessed.  This  reassessment 
confirmed  that  the  dumped  imports  from  the  PRC  were  undercutting  the  Union 
industry’s prices by 24,1% during the IP.  

Economic situation of the Union industry 

It  is  recalled  that  because  imports  from  Korea,  Taiwan  and  two  Chinese  companies 
were found not to be dumped, they should not be cumulated with the dumped imports 
from  the  PRC.  They  were  therefore  excluded  from  the  analysis  of  the  impact  of  the 
dumped imports on the Union industry and assessed separately. 

(80)  As  mentioned  in  recital  (113)  of  the  provisional  Regulation,  the  examination  of  the 
impact  of  the  dumped  imports  on  the  Union  industry  included  an  evaluation  of  all 
economic indicators for an assessment of the state of the Union industry from 2005 to 
the end of the IP. 

(81) 

It  is  recalled  that  the  injury  picture  was  clear  at  provisional  stage  with  most  of  the 
injury  indicators  showing  a  declining  trend  during  the  period  considered:  production 
volume (-36%), sales volume (-29%), sales prices (-9%) and market share (-23%). In 
addition,  the  injury  indicators  related  to  the  financial  performance  of  the  Union 

EN 

14 

  EN 

industry,  such  as  profitability  (-16,3  percentage  points)  and  cash  flow  (-141%)  also 
deteriorated dramatically, while investments decreased significantly (-89%). 

(82) 

In  the  absence  of  any  comments  with  regard  to  production,  production  capacity  and 
capacity utilisation, sales volume and market share, prices, stocks, employment, wages 
and productivity, and the financial performance indicators of the Union industry, the 
provisional findings made in recitals (114) to (126) of the provisional Regulation are 
hereby confirmed.  

(83) 

In the absence of any other comments regarding the economic situation of the Union 
industry, the conclusion that the Union industry suffered material injury, as set out in 
recitals (127) to (130) of the provisional Regulation, is confirmed.  

5. 

CAUSALITY 

5.1. 

(84) 

Preliminary remark 

In  accordance  with  Articles  3(6)  and  3(7)  of  the  basic  Regulation,  it  was  examined 
whether the dumped imports of the product concerned originating in the PRC caused 
injury  to  the  Union  industry  to  a  degree  that  can  be  considered  as  material.  Known 
factors other than the dumped imports, which could at the same time be injuring the 
Union  industry,  were  also  examined  to  ensure  that  possible  injury  caused  by  these 
other factors was not attributed to the dumped imports.  

5.2. 

Effect of the dumped imports  

(85)  The dumped imports from the PRC increased dramatically over the period considered. 
Following  the  revision  of  the  data  concerning  the  dumped  imports  originating  in  the 
PRC, as described in recital (76) above, the volume of the dumped imports from the 
PRC  increased  more  than  eight  times  between  2005  and  IP,  increasing  their  market 
share by about 16 percentage points. During the same period the Union consumption 
decreased by 7%.  

(86)  During the period considered, the Union industry faced a  significant drop of 29% in 
their  sales volume and  consequently lost market  share  from  51,1%  to  39,2%,  almost 
12 percentage points. In the period between 2008 and the IP, the market share of the 
Union  industry  dropped  by  two  percentage  points  whereas  that  of  dumped  imports 
increased, despite the declining demand on the Union market.  

(87)  As  regards  prices  of  the  dumped  imports,  following  the  revision  of  the  data  as 
described in recital (76) they decreased by 45% during the period considered and were 
significantly  undercutting  the  prices  charged  by  the  Union  industry  on  the  Union 
market. Consequently, the Union industry was prevented from increasing its prices to 
cover  the  increase  in  raw  material  prices.  As  a  result,  the  profitability  of  the  Union 
industry's  sales  on  the  Union  market  decreased,  as  explained  in  recital  (81)  of  the 
provisional Regulation, from a profit of 3% in 2005 to a loss of 13,3% in the IP.  

(88)  The  investigation  also  showed  that  the  increasing  volumes  of  low-priced  dumped 
imports from the PRC had a negative impact on the market overall by depressing the 
prices. The continued pressure exercised on the Union market did not allow the Union 
industry  to  adapt  its  sales  prices  to  the  increased  raw  material  costs,  in  particular  in 
2008,  when  raw  material  prices  peaked.  This  explained  the  loss  of  market  share  and 
the loss in profitability of the Union industry.  

EN 

15 

  EN 

(89) 

In view of the above, and in the absence of any comments regarding the impact of the 
dumped imports, it can be confirmed that the surge of the low-priced dumped imports 
from  the  PRC  had  a  considerable  negative  impact  on  the  economic  situation  of  the 
Union industry.  

5.3. 

Effect of other factors 

5.3.1.  Non-dumped imports 

(90)  As regards the effect of the non-dumped imports from the PRC it is recalled that two 
Chinese  exporting  producers  were  found  not  to  be  dumping  HTY  on  the  Union 
market. While it cannot be excluded that these imports may have contributed to some 
extent to the injury of the Union industry, it is considered that in view of the volume 
and  in  particular  the  prices  which  were  on  average  higher  than  the  prices  of  the 
dumped imports, the impact of these non-dumped imports is not such as to break the 
causal  link  established  between  the  dumped  imports  from  the  PRC  and  the  injury 
suffered by the Union industry.  

5.3.2.  Other factors 

(91) 

It  is  recalled  that  other  factors  were  also  examined  in  the  causality  analysis,  namely 
the development of the demand on the Union market, the evolution of the raw material 
prices,  the  captive  production  of  the  Union  industry,  the  export  performance  of  the 
Union  industry,  the  imports  from  other  countries,  including  imports  from  Korea  and 
Taiwan, and the performance of other producers in the Union.  

(92)  One  party  claimed  that  the  causality  analysis  failed  to  prove  that  injury  caused  by 
factors  other  than  the  dumped  imports  was  not  attributed  to  Chinese  imports.  In 
particular, it argued that factors such as the development in demand and increased raw 
material prices contributed to the injury suffered by the Union industry and were not 
taken into account in the causation analysis.  

(93)  As regards the development in demand, it is recalled that in the context of a declining 
consumption  imports  from  the  PRC  still  managed  to  increase  their  market  share. 
Regarding  the  increase  in  raw  material  prices,  it  is  acknowledged  that  prices  of  raw 
materials  increased  in  the  first  half  of  the  IP  as  mentioned  in  recital  (139)  of  the 
provisional Regulation. However, prices decreased in the second half of the IP. These 
fluctuations  in  raw  material  prices  affected  all  economic  operators.  Moreover,  in  the 
absence  of  the  price  pressure  exerted  by  the  low-priced  dumped  imports  from  the 
PRC,  it  could  have  been  expected  that  the  Union  industry  would  have  been  in  a 
position  to  adapt  its  sales  prices,  in  line  with  the  development  of  the  raw  material 
prices. Therefore, recitals (138) to (140) of the provisional Regulation are confirmed 
and this claim is consequently rejected. 

(94) 

In  the  absence  of  any  comments  concerning  captive  production  or  the  export 
performance  of  the  Union  industry,  recitals  (141)  to  (143)  of  the  provisional 
Regulation are hereby confirmed. 

(95)  Some  parties  also  claimed  that  the  Union  producers  would  not  have  been  able  to 
increase  their  prices  to  reflect  the  changes  in  raw  material  costs  in  view  of  the  low 
priced imports from Korea and Taiwan.  

(96) 

In  this  respect  it  is  firstly  noted  that  prices  of  imports  from  Korea  and  Taiwan 
remained  higher  than  the  average  import  prices  from  the  PRC  throughout  the  period 

EN 

16 

  EN 

considered.  Secondly,  import  volumes  decreased  substantially  between  2007  and  the 
end  of  the  IP.  It  is  therefore  considered  that  the  volume  and  prices  of  these  imports 
could not have been the main cause of material injury to the Union industry and thus 
cannot break the causal link between the injury suffered by the Union industry and the 
dumped imports from the PRC. Therefore, this claim was rejected.  

(97) 

In  the  absence  of  any  other  comments  regarding  imports  from  third  countries, 
including Korea and Taiwan, recitals (144) to (152) of the provisional Regulation are 
hereby confirmed. 

(98) 

In  the  absence  of  any  comments  concerning  other  producers  in  the  Union,  recitals 
(153) to (154) of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed. 

(99)  Following the provisional disclosure, one party claimed that the lower profitability of 
the  Union  industry  should  be  attributed  to  the  high  ratio  that  the  so  called  two-step 
production process represented in the Union industry's production capacity and to the 
alleged delays of the Union industry in implementing the modern, so called one-step 
production process.  

(100)  It should be noted that the range of product types produced and sold by the exporting 
producers  in  the  PRC  and  the  Union  industry  is  largely  overlapping.  The  Union 
industry  is  using  the  so  called  two-step  production  process  as  it  allows  producing 
specific  product  types  which  are  normally  sold  at  a  higher  price  on  the  market.  As 
explained in recitals (85) to (89) above, the presence of low-priced dumped imports of 
HTY from the PRC affected the overall EU market by notably exercising a downward 
pressure on prices.  

(101)  It  is  therefore  considered  that  the  existence  of  two  different  production  processes 
cannot per se have had a material impact on profit margins, in particular in view of the 
price  pressure  exerted  by  the  dumped  imports  from  the  PRC.  In  addition,  no 
substantiated evidence was submitted in support of the claim that the Union industry 
suffered material injury because of the lack of more recent technology. Therefore this 
claim was rejected. 

(102)  In the light of the foregoing and in the absence of any other comments, it is concluded 
that  the  dumped  imports  from  the  PRC  caused  material  injury  to  the  Union  industry 
within the meaning of Article 3(6) of the basic Regulation and recitals (155) to (158) 
of the provisional Regulation are confirmed.  

6. 

UNION INTEREST 

6.1. 

Preliminary remark 

(103)  The Union interest analysis has been adapted to take into account the revisions to the 
dumping margins following comments to the provisional disclosure and the individual 
examinations carried out after the imposition of provisional measures. Accordingly, in 
view of the high level of cooperation, the majority of imports from the PRC would be 
subject to a duty level of around 5% as mentioned in recital (63) above.  

6.2. 

Union industry  

(104)  It is recalled that the Union industry is composed of four producers located in different 
Member States, employing directly over 1300 people in activities related to HTY. All 
injury indicators, in particular those related to the financial performance of the Union 
industry,  showed  a  negative  trend  during  the  period  considered.  Employment  also 

EN 

17 

  EN 

decreased significantly by 23%, corresponding to a decrease of around 400 full-time 
equivalents during the period considered. 

(105)  Following  the  imposition  of  provisional  measures,  the  Union  industry  has  submitted 
that  factories  that  had  been  idle  due  to  the  dumped  imports  have  recently  been 
reopened. This shows that already the provisional measures have had a positive impact 
on the Union industry.  

(106)  It  is  expected  that  the  imposition  of  definitive  anti-dumping  duties  against  imports 
originating in the PRC would have a further positive impact on the economic situation 
of  the  Union  industry  and  would  enable  it  to  regain  at  least  part  of  its  lost  market 
share. 

(107)  In the absence of any other comments with regard to the interest of the Union industry, 

recitals (160) to (163) of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed. 

6.3. 

Importers 

(108)  Some parties claimed that the analysis of the impact of measures on importers did not 
address  the  difficulty  of  rapidly  switching  suppliers  of  HTY.  In  this  respect,  it  is 
acknowledged that switching sources of supply may take some time depending on the 
end  application.  However,  there  will  be  other  sources  available,  including  imports 
from Korea and Taiwan as well as imports from the two Chinese exporting producers 
mentioned in recitals (63) and (64), which will not be subject to anti-dumping duties. 
Therefore, this claim was rejected and the provisional conclusion that measures would 
not have a significant negative impact on importers is confirmed.  

(109)  In  the  absence  of  any  other  comments,  recitals  (164)  and  (165)  of  the  provisional 

Regulation are hereby confirmed. 

6.4. 

Users 

(110)  Users  of  HTY  showed  a  strong  interest  in  this  case.  Out  of  68  users  contacted,  33 
cooperated  in  the  investigation.  The  investigation  showed  that  24  of  the  33 
cooperating  users  purchased  HTY  in  the  PRC.  12%  of  these  imports  were  from 
companies that were found not to be dumping.  

(111)  At provisional stage the analysis regarding the impact of measures on users was made 
by grouping the users into four separate industrial sectors (tyres, automotive, ropes and 
industrial  applications).  Before  the  imposition  of  provisional  measures,  four  users 
were verified (two in the tyre sector, one in the automotive and one in the industrial 
applications sectors). Following the imposition of provisional measures, it was further 
investigated  to  what  extent  each  sector  would  be  affected  by  measures.  To  this  end, 
additional  verification  visits  were  carried  out  at  the  premises  of  seven  users  as 
mentioned in recital (5). Of the 11 users verified in total, five were small and medium 
sized enterprises (SMEs). Based on the verified data, the estimated impact of measures 
on the users' profit margins was revised, taking also into account the revised level of 
duties and the fact that one additional Chinese exporting producer was found not to be 
dumping. 

(112)  As regards users in the tyres sector, in total four questionnaire replies were received 
from  tyre  manufacturers.  Out  of  these,  two  were  verified  before  the  imposition  of 
provisional measures and one after the imposition of provisional measures. According 
to  the  available  data  for  this  sector,  the  share  of  HTY  in  relation  to  their  cost  of 
production  is  relatively  limited,  below  1%  on  average.  Only  one  of  the  cooperating 

EN 

18 

  EN 

users  was  found  to  import  the  product  concerned  from  the  PRC.  However,  all  these 
imports were from a company in the PRC which was not found to be dumping. It is 
therefore concluded that on the basis of the data available, the tyre sector will not be 
affected by the proposed measures.  

(113)  In respect of users in the automotive sector (mainly producing seatbelts and airbags), 
representing  5%  of  the  total  imports  of  HTY  from  the  PRC  in  the  IP,  in  total  six 
questionnaire replies were received. Two companies were verified, one before and one 
after the imposition of provisional measures. The share of Chinese HTY used by the 
automotive  sector  was  revised  after  the  verification  visits  to  15%.  Verification  visits 
also showed  that  overall,  the  business  using HTY represented more than  30%  of  the 
total  turnover  of  the  cooperating  companies,  instead  of  4%  as  established  at 
provisional stage. The average profit achieved in this sector on products using HTY is 
confirmed to be around 3%. Based on the above, it is concluded that, should measures 
be imposed, the automotive sector is not likely to be seriously affected overall since it 
would still be profitable and in addition, the PRC is not the main source of supply. 

(114)  Regarding  users  in  the  rope  sector,  in total  three questionnaire  replies  were received 
and  one  company  was  verified  after  the  imposition  of  provisional  measures.  All 
cooperating  companies  in  this  sector  are  SMEs  and  represented  less  than  1%  of  the 
total  imports  from  the  PRC  in  the  IP.  It  is  confirmed  that  the  share  of  the  HTY 
business is around 18% of their total business. The average profit margin achieved in 
the sector using HTY was provisionally established at around 8%. However, following 
the  verification  visit  and  the  subsequent  correction  of  the  data  submitted  in  the 
questionnaire  replies,  the profit margin  achieved  in  this sector  was revised  to -0.4%. 
The investigation showed that the majority of the imports (71%) were from the PRC 
during  the  IP  while  22%  were  from  Korea.  In  view  of  the  revised  level  of  duty, 
however,  the  impact  on  companies  in  this  sector,  if  they  continued  to  source  HTY 
from  the  PRC,  should  be  limited.  In  addition,  a  number  of  alternative  sources  of 
supply exist. 

(115)  Finally,  regarding  the  users  within  the  sector  of  industrial  applications,  in  total  20 
questionnaire replies were received from users representing 21% of the total imports 
from the PRC. Five companies were verified, one before the imposition of provisional 
measures  and  four  after  the  imposition  of  provisional  measures.  Based  on  the 
information  available  for  this  sector  after  the  verification  visits,  the  share  of  the 
business  related  to  HTY  was  revised  to  54%  of  the  total  business.  The  investigation 
showed that these users mainly purchased HTY from the PRC (42%) and from Korea 
(24%), whereas 29% was sourced from suppliers in the Union and in third countries. 
The data collected during the verification visits which took place after the imposition 
of provisional measures lead to an adjustment of the average profit margin achieved in 
this  sector,  which  is  established  at  17%.  However,  the  data  collected  shows  that  the 
average  profit  margin  identified  for  the  whole  sector  is  not  representative  of  the 
situation of the SMEs, which had on average a negative profit margin of -1,9% during 
the IP. In the worst case scenario, i.e. should these SMEs buy from Chinese exporting 
producers subject to measures and not change their source of supply, their profitability 
would decrease from -1,9% to -3,3% with the imposition of definitive measures. This 
would be due to the fact that they source the HTY from the PRC in greater proportion 
compared to the large companies, which would remain highly profitable. It is expected 
however, that these SMEs could shift at least part of their purchases to suppliers not 
subject to measures.  

EN 

19 

  EN 

(116)  Some  users  argued  that  the  negative  impact  of  the  anti-dumping  measures  on  their 
profitability had been underestimated in the provisional analysis regarding the Union 
interest.  They  also  claimed  that  they  would  have  difficulties  in  passing  on  the  cost 
increase to their customers and questioned the possibility to find alternative sources of 
supply.  Some  parties  also  questioned  the  Union  producers'  capacity  to  supply  the 
required products. Finally, the negative effect of measures on the downstream industry 
and consequently on employment in the Union were raised.  

(117)  As regards the claim on profitability, the analysis based on the revised data following 
verification visits after the imposition of provisional measures indeed showed that part 
of the sectors of ropes and industrial applications would be negatively impacted by the 
measures,  should  those  users  that  buy  from  Chinese  exporting  producers  subject  to 
measures  continue  to  do  so  and  not  change  their  source  of  supply.  However,  this 
impact is likely to be limited in view of the reduced level of duty and the existence of 
alternative supply sources. 

(118)  As regards the claim that it would not be possible for users to pass on the cost increase 
to  their  customers,  the  investigation  showed  that  in  some  sectors  it  may  indeed  be 
difficult  to  increase  prices.  However,  it  is  recalled  that  in  view  of  the  high  level  of 
cooperation by the Chinese exporting producers, the majority of imports from the PRC 
would be subject to a duty of around 5% as stated in recital (103) above. Therefore, it 
is  expected  that  users  could  pass  on  at  least  some  of  the  cost  increase  to  their 
customers,  and  in  any  event,  even  without  price  increases,  the  impact  on  their 
profitability is estimated to be rather limited.  

(119)  Concerning the claim that the Union industry would not be able to supply the required 
products  in  case  of  imposition  of  anti-dumping  measures,  the  investigation  showed 
that some irregularities occasionally occurred in the past supplies by Union producers 
to  certain  users.  However,  the  investigation  did  not  point  to  any  evidence  that  these 
irregularities were on a continued basis. As regards the reported difficulty in switching 
sources of supplies, indeed verification visits showed that before a new HTY can be 
used in production on a large scale, it should pass a number of tests aimed at verifying 
both  the  compatibility  of  the  new  raw  material  with  the  machinery  and  the  required 
quality  standards  of  the  end-products.  The  duration  of  the  testing  process  varies 
accordingly  to  the  application  of  the  end  product.  It  is  therefore  acknowledged  that 
switching  suppliers  could  be  a  lengthy  and  costly  process  for  certain  users,  even 
though  to  a  different  extent  depending  on  the  manufactured  products.  Verification 
visits showed, however, that some companies were seeking to put into place a strategy 
of expansion of their suppliers in order to avoid relying solely on one source.  

(120)  Some  parties  also  highlighted  the  situation  of  the  SMEs,  claiming  that  SMEs  have 
difficulties  in  sourcing  their  raw  materials  because  they  do  not  reach  the  minimum 
order  quantities  required  by  producers.  In  this  respect,  it  is  noted  that  difficulties 
regarding  minimum  order  quantities  appear  to  be  an  existing  pattern  of  business 
regardless  of  the  imposition  of  measures  or  not.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  the 
imposition of duties would not per se affect the already established business patterns 
among economic operators. Therefore, these claims were not considered warranted. 

(121)  Finally, some interested parties claimed that the Union industry would not represent a 
reliable  source  due  to  the  incompleteness  of  its  product  range,  the  lower  quality  and 
the higher prices of products. In this respect it is noted that even if Union producers 
were not able to supply the full range of products required, alternative supply sources 
exist  which  should  allow  completing  product  ranges.  Moreover,  the  relatively  low 

EN 

20 

  EN 

duty level should not prohibit users to complete their product range by continuing to 
recur to imports from the PRC as well. In addition, the recent reopening of factories, 
as  mentioned  above,  should  contribute  to  address  this  concern  insofar  as  it  would 
allow for a bigger capacity being allocated to the manufacturing of a wider range of 
products. Therefore this claim was rejected.  

(122)  As  regards  the  claim  on  the  effect  of  measures  on  the  downstream  industry,  and 
consequently  on  the  employment  in  the  Union,  it  is  considered  that  in  view  of  the 
above, the impact should be negligible. 

6.5. 

Conclusion on Union interest 

(123)  Based on the above, it was concluded that there are no compelling reasons against the 
imposition of definitive anti-dumping duties against imports of HTY originating in the 
PRC. 

7. 

DEFINITIVE ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES 

7.1. 

Injury elimination level 

(124)  In  the  absence  of  any  substantiated  comments  that  would  alter  the  conclusion 
regarding  the  injury  elimination  level,  recitals  (179)  to  (183)  of  the  provisional 
Regulation are hereby confirmed. 

7.2. 

Definitive measures 

(125)  In the light of the foregoing, it is considered that, in accordance with Article 9(4) of 
the basic Regulation, definitive anti-dumping measures should be imposed in respect 
of imports of HTY originating in the PRC at the level of the lower of the dumping and 
the injury margins, in accordance with the lesser duty rule. Accordingly, all duty rates 
should be set at the level of the dumping margins found.  

(126)  Given that the dumping margins established for Korea and Taiwan were below the de 
minimis  level,  no  definitive  anti-dumping  duties  are  to  be  imposed  on  imports 
originating in Korea and Taiwan. 

(127)  The proposed anti-dumping duties are the following:  

Company 

Injury 
elimination 
margin 

Dumping 
margin 

Anti-
dumping 
duty rate 

Zhejiang Guxiandao Industrial Fibre Co., Ltd  57,1% 

5,1% 

5,1% 

Zhejiang Hailide New Material Co., Ltd. 

N/A 

0 

Zhejiang Unifull Industrial Fibre Co., Ltd 

57,6% 

5,5% 

Cooperating  companies  not  included  in  the 
sample 

57,3% 

5,3% 

0% 

5,5% 

5,3% 

Hangzhou Huachun Chemical Fiber Co., Ltd   N/A 

0 

0% 

Oriental Industries (Suzhou) Ltd 

53,2% 

9,8% 

9,8% 

EN 

21 

  EN 

All other companies in the PRC 

57,6% 

9,8% 

9,8% 

(128)  The  individual  company  anti-dumping  duty  rates  specified  in  this  Regulation  were 
established  on  the  basis  of  the  findings  of  the  present  investigation.  Therefore,  they 
reflect  the  situation  found  during  that  investigation  with  respect  to  these  companies. 
These  duty  rates  (as  opposed  to  the  countrywide  duty  applicable  to  'all  other 
companies')  are  thus  exclusively  applicable  to  imports  of  products  originating  in  the 
People's  Republic  of  China  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'.  

(129)  Any claim requesting the application of an individual company anti-dumping duty rate 
(e.g. following a change in the name of the entity or following the setting up of new 
production or sales entities) should be addressed to the Commission3 forthwith with all 
relevant information, in particular any modification in the company's activities linked 
to  production,  domestic  and  export  sales  associated  with,  for  example,  that  name 
change  or  that  change  in  the  production  and  sales  entities.  If  appropriate,  the 
Regulation  will  then  be  amended  accordingly  by  updating  the  list  of  companies 
benefiting from individual duty rates.  

(130)  All  parties  were  informed  of  the  essential  facts  and  considerations  on  the  basis  of 
which it was intended to recommend the imposition of definitive anti-dumping duties. 
They  were  also  granted  a  period  within  which  they  could  make  representations 
subsequent  to  this  disclosure.  The  comments  submitted  by  the  parties  were  duly 
considered, and, where appropriate, the findings have been modified accordingly. 

(131)  In  order  to  ensure  equal  treatment  between  any  new  exporters  and  the  cooperating 
companies  not  included  in  the  sample,  mentioned  in  the  Annex  to  this  Regulation, 
provision  should  be  made  for  the  weighted  average  duty  imposed  on  the  latter 
companies to be applied to any new exporters which would otherwise be entitled to a 
review  pursuant  to  Article  11(4)  of  the  basic  Regulation  as  Article  11(4)  does  not 
apply where sampling has been used.  

7.3. 

Definitive collection of provisional duties 

(132)  In view of the magnitude of the dumping margins found and in the light of the level of 
the  injury  caused  to  the  Union  industry,  it  is  considered  necessary  that  the  amounts 
secured  by  way  of  the  provisional  anti-dumping  duty,  imposed  by  the  provisional 
Regulation, be definitively collected to the extent of the amount of the definitive duties 
imposed.  Where  the  definitive  duties  are  lower  than  the  provisional  duties,  amounts 
provisionally  secured  in  excess  of  the  definitive  rate  of  anti-dumping  duties  shall  be 
released.  Where  the  definitive  duties  are  higher  than  the  provisional  duties,  only  the 
amounts secured at the level of the provisional duties shall be definitively collected.  

8. 

TERMINATION OF THE PROCEEDING 

3 

European  Commission,  Directorate-General  for  Trade,  Directorate  H,  Office  N105  04/090,  1049 
Brussels, Belgium.  

EN 

22 

  EN 

                                                 
(133)  In  view  of  the  findings  regarding  imports  originating  in  Korea  and  Taiwan,  the 

proceeding with respect to these two countries shall be terminated,  

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 

Article 1 

1. 

2. 

A definitive anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on imports of high tenacity yarn of 
polyesters  (other  than  sewing  thread),  not  put  up  for  retail  sale,  including 
monofilament of less than 67 decitex, currently falling within CN code 5402 20 00 
and originating in the People's Republic of China. 

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

Company 

Duty (%)  

TARIC additional 
code 

Zhejiang  Guxiandao  Industrial  Fibre 
Co., Ltd. 

Zhejiang  Hailide  New  Material  Co., 
Ltd. 

Zhejiang  Unifull  Industrial  Fibre  Co., 
Ltd. 

Companies listed in the Annex 

Hangzhou  Huachun  Chemical  Fiber 
Co., Ltd.  

Oriental Industries (Suzhou) Ltd. 

All other companies  

5,1 

0 

5,5 

5,3 

0 

9,8 

9,8 

A974 

A976 

A975 

A977 

A989 

A990 

A999 

3. 

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

The  anti-dumping  proceeding  concerning  imports  of  high  tenacity  yarn  of  polyesters 
originating in Republic of Korea and Taiwan is hereby terminated. 

Article 2 

Article 3 

The amounts secured by way of the provisional anti-dumping duty pursuant to Commission 
Regulation  (EU)  No  478/2010  on  imports  of  high  tenacity  yarn  of  polyesters  (other  than 
sewing  thread),  not  put  up  for  retail  sale,  including  monofilament  of  less  than  67  decitex 
currently falling within CN code 5402 20 00 and originating in the People's Republic of China 

EN 

23 

  EN 

 
shall be definitively collected at the rate of the definitive duty imposed pursuant to Article 1. 
The  amounts  secured  in  excess  of  the  definitive  rates  of  the  anti-dumping  duty  shall  be 
released.  

Article 4 

Where  any  new  exporting  producer  in  the  People's  Republic  of  China  provides  sufficient 
evidence to the Commission that: 

–  it  did  not  export  to  the  Union  the  product  described  in  Article  1(1)  during  the 

investigation period (1 July 2008 to 30 June 2009), 

–  it  is  not  related  to  any  of  the  exporters  or  producers  in  the  People's  Republic  of 

China which are subject to the measures imposed by this Regulation, 

–  it has actually exported to the Union the product concerned after the investigation 
period  on  which  the  measures  are  based,  or  it  has  entered  into  an  irrevocable 
contractual obligation to export a significant quantity to the Union, 

the  Council,  acting  by  simple  majority  on  a  proposal  submitted  by  the  Commission  after 
consulting  the  Advisory  Committee,  may  amend  Article  1(2)  by  adding  the  new  exporting 
producer  to  the  cooperating  companies  not  included  in  the  sample  and  thus  subject  to  the 
weighted average duty rate of 5,3%. 

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

Article 5 

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

Done at Brussels,  

For the Council 

The President 

[…] 

EN 

24 

  EN 

 
 
 
 
CHINESE COOPERATING EXPORTING PRODUCERS NOT SAMPLED 

TARIC Additional Code A977 

ANNEX 

Company name 

Heilongjiang Longdi Co., Ltd.  

Hyosung Chemical Fiber (Jiaxing) Co., Ltd. 

City 

Harbin 

Jiaxing 

Shanghai Wenlong Chemical Fiber Co., Ltd. 

Shanghai 

Shaoxing Haifu Chemistry Fibre Co., Ltd. 

Sinopec Shanghai Petrochemical Company 

Wuxi Taiji Industry Co., Ltd. 

Shaoxing 

Shanghai 

Wuxi 

EN 

25 

   EN