COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Accompanying the document Report from the Commission to the European Parliament - 29th Annual Report from the Commission to the European Parliament on the EU's Anti-dumping, Anti-subsidy and Safeguard activities (2010)
Date: 2012-02-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Armenia, Belarus, China, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, Viet Nam, anti-dumping legislation, common commercial policy, market economy, raw material, trade dispute

EN 

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 16.2.2012  
SWD(2012) 9 final 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

Accompanying the document 

Report from the Commission to the European Parliament - 29th Annual Report from 
the Commission to the European Parliament on the EU's Anti-dumping, Anti-subsidy 
and Safeguard activities (2010) 

{COM(2012) 59 final} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Executive summary .................................................................................................................. 4 

1. 

1.1. 

1.2. 

1.3. 

2. 

2.1. 

2.2. 

3. 

4. 

4.1 

4.2 

4.3 

4.4 

4.5 

Overview of the legislation .......................................................................................... 6 

Anti-dumping and anti-subsidy.................................................................................... 6 

Safeguards .................................................................................................................... 7 

Anti-subsidy and unfair pricing instrument for airline services................................... 8 

Basic concepts.............................................................................................................. 9 

Anti-dumping and anti-subsidy.................................................................................... 9 

Safeguards .................................................................................................................. 13 

TDI Review................................................................................................................ 15 

Country-wide market economy status (MES)............................................................ 16 

China .......................................................................................................................... 17 

Vietnam ...................................................................................................................... 17 

Armenia...................................................................................................................... 17 

Kazakhstan ................................................................................................................. 18 

Mongolia .................................................................................................................... 18 

4.6.  

Belarus ....................................................................................................................... 18 

5. 

6. 

6.1. 

6.2. 

7. 

8. 

8.1. 

8.2. 

9. 

9.1. 

9.2. 

9.3. 

10. 

Trade Defence Instruments – Raw Material Strategy ................................................ 18 

Information and Communication activities / Bilateral contacts................................. 18 

Small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) ............................................................ 18 

Bilateral contacts/information activities – industry and third countries .................... 19 

The Hearing Officer ................................................................................................... 19 

General overview of anti-dumping and anti-subsidy investigations and measures ... 22 

New investigations ..................................................................................................... 22 

Review investigations ................................................................................................ 23 

Overview of activities in 2010 ................................................................................... 25 

New investigations ..................................................................................................... 25 

Review investigations ................................................................................................ 41 

Safeguard investigations ............................................................................................ 54 

Enforcement of anti-dumping/countervailing measures ............................................ 55 

EN 

1 

   EN 

 
10.1. 

Follow-up of measures............................................................................................... 55 

10.2.  Monitoring of undertakings ....................................................................................... 56 

11. 

12. 

Refunds ...................................................................................................................... 57 

Judicial review: decisions given by the Court of Justice / Court of First Instance .... 57 

12.1.  Overview of the judicial reviews in 2010 .................................................................. 57 

12.2.  Cases pending ............................................................................................................ 57 

12.3.  New cases................................................................................................................... 57 

12.4. 

Judgments rendered and orders issued by the General Court .................................... 57 

12.5. 

Judgments rendered by the Court of Justice .............................................................. 62 

13. 

Activities in the framework of the World Trade Organization (WTO) ..................... 62 

13.1.  Dispute settlement in the field of anti-dumping, anti-subsidy and safeguards .......... 62 

13.2.  Other WTO activities ................................................................................................. 64 

14. 

Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 65 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
ANNEX A ................................................................................................................................ 68 

ANNEX B ................................................................................................................................ 70 

ANNEX C ................................................................................................................................ 72 

ANNEX D ................................................................................................................................ 74 

ANNEX E ................................................................................................................................ 75 

ANNEX F................................................................................................................................. 76 

ANNEX G ................................................................................................................................ 77 

ANNEX H ................................................................................................................................ 79 

ANNEX I.................................................................................................................................. 81 

ANNEX J ................................................................................................................................. 83 

ANNEX K ................................................................................................................................ 84 

ANNEX L ................................................................................................................................ 85 

ANNEX M ............................................................................................................................... 86 

ANNEX N ................................................................................................................................ 87 

ANNEX O ................................................................................................................................ 89 

ANNEX P............................................................................................................................... 126 

ANNEX Q .............................................................................................................................. 131 

ANNEX R .............................................................................................................................. 132 

ANNEX S............................................................................................................................... 138 

ANNEX T .............................................................................................................................. 141 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
 
 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

This report is submitted to the European Parliament following its resolution of 16 December 
1981  on  the  EU's  anti-dumping  activities1,  and  the  report  of  the  European  Parliament’s 
Committee on industry, external trade, research and energy2.  

This report, as in previous years, gives an overview of the EU legislation in force with regard 
to trade defence instruments, including safeguards.  
The  report  also  summarises  the  developments  in  general  policy.  As  in  previous  years,  the 
report no longer contains a commentary on each individual case. It gives an overview of all 
investigations  together  with  the  most  essential  information,  such  as  for  instance  the  rate  of 
individual duty imposed.  
In turn, cases which merit some special attention are treated in more detail.  
Consequently, the report is more factual and condensed and covers the essential facts of the 
year. 
 The  detailed  annexes  which  cover  all  cases  ensure  that  the  factual  content  of  the  report 
remains meaningful and sufficient to provide a full overview of the activity in 2010.  

2010  saw  a  slight  decrease  in  the  number  of  new  cases  initiated  when  compared  to  the 
previous year, 18 as compared to 21 in 2009. Regarding other activities, 2010 saw an increase 
in the number of provisional measures imposed, 13 compared to 10 the previous year while 
the number of investigations terminated without measures dropped slightly from 11 in 2009 to 
10 in 2010.  There was a drop in the number of definitive measures imposed down from 11 in 
2009 to 9 in 2010.  
As regards review investigations initiated, there was a slight decrease from 34 in 2009 to 31 
in 2010.  These included 14 expiry reviews and 12 interim reviews as well as 3 new exporter 
reviews  and  2  anti-circumvention  investigations.    In  the  period  10  expiry  reviews  were 
concluded with confirmation of the measures and 9 interim reviews were concluded with the 
measures being confirmed and/or amended.   
There  was  one  new  safeguard  investigation  opened  in  2010.    There  were  no  safeguard 
measures in place at the start of 2010, a situation which did not change in the course of the 
year.   

As in previous years, this report continues to provide an overview on the Court cases relating 
to the trade policy instruments. 
 In  2009,  the  Court  of  Justice  (COJ)  and  the General  Court  (GC)  rendered  13  judgments  in 
total relating to the areas of anti-dumping or anti-subsidy.  
2010  was  the  third  year  of  activity  for  the  Hearing  Officer  in  DG  Trade,  who  became 
operational in April 2007.   
The main task of the Hearing Officer is to guarantee the full exercise of rights of defence in 
trade  proceedings  before  the  European  Commission.    In  doing  so  the  Hearing  Officer  also 
contributed to improved transparency in TDI activities.  
2010  also  saw  the  role  of  SMEs  in  trade  defence  investigations  being  examined  with  the 
results  of  a  specially  commissioned  survey  being  finalised.  This  report  also  highlights  the 
main finding of that study.  

1 
2 

OJ C 11, 18.1.1982, p. 37. 
PE 141.178/fin of 30.11.1990, reporter Mr Gijs DE VRIES. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
The European Parliament's INTA Committee continued to be  informed about developments 
in the EU's trade defence activities. 
The  relevant  activities  in  the  framework  of  the  World  Trade  Organisation  (WTO)  are  also 
reported  including  dispute  settlement  procedures  initiated  against  the  EU.  The  report  also 
addresses  the  continuation  of  the  negotiations  at  WTO  level  on  the  Anti-dumping  and 
Subsidies Agreements, in which the Commission continued to play an active role.    

The annexes to this report provide easy access to the activities in table form. 
This report is also available to the general public.  
Internet Website : http://ec.europa.eu/trade/tackling-unfair-trade/trade-defence/anti-dumping/ 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
 
1. 

OVERVIEW OF THE LEGISLATION 

1.1. 

Anti-dumping and anti-subsidy 

1.1.1.  The international framework 

On an international level, unfair trading practices such as dumping and the granting 
of subsidies were identified as a threat to open markets as early as  1947, when the 
first  GATT  agreement  was  signed.  The  agreement  contained  specific  provisions 
allowing  GATT  members  to  take  action  against  these  practices  if  they  caused 
material  injury  to  the  domestic  industry  of  a  GATT  member.  Even  though,  the 
beginning of the disciplines dates back quite some time, world trade is currently still 
distorted by unfair practices, making the instruments still relevant. 

Since  the  beginning,  considerable  efforts  have  been  made  to  harmonise  the  rules 
relating to trade instruments. During the last GATT round (the « Uruguay Round ») 
which  led  to  the  creation  of  the  WTO  and  the  detailed  Anti-Dumping  and  Anti-
Subsidy  Agreements,  much  of  the  attention  was  focused  on  the  procedural  and 
material conditions to be fulfilled before measures can be adopted. The EU played an 
active role in the negotiation of these relevant criteria which are reflected in its own 
legislation. The EU's role is the more so important today as a number of new users 
take  action  without  the  necessary  rigor  and  restraint,  affecting  negatively  also  EU 
operators. The role the EU plays as a prudent user has therefore also an exemplary 
function at WTO level. 

1.1.2.  The EU legislation 

The  EU’s  anti-dumping  and  anti-subsidy  legislation  was  first  enacted  in  1968  and 
has since been modified several times. The current basic texts, which form the legal 
basis of anti-dumping and anti-subsidy investigations in the EU, entered into force in 
March 1996 and October 1997 respectively. These are in line with the Anti-Dumping 
and  Anti-Subsidy  Agreements  adopted  during  the  GATT/WTO  negotiations.  The 
basic texts are: 

– 

– 

Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  1225/2009  of  30  November  2009  on  protection 
against  dumped  imports  from  countries  not  members  of  the  European  EU  – 
Codified Version3 

Council Regulation (EC) No 597/2009  of 11  June 2009  on protection  against 
subsidized imports from countries not members of the European EU – Codified 
Version4. 

These regulations will overall be referred to as the "basic Regulation(s)". 

The  EU  legislation  contains  a  number  of  provisions  aimed  at  ensuring  a  balanced 
application  of  the  EU’s  Anti-Dumping  and  Anti-Subsidy  rules  on  all  interested 

3 
4 

OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p.51 Codified version 
OJ L 188, 18.07.2009, p. 93 Codified Version 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
parties.  These  provisions  include  the  “EU  interest  test”  and  the  “lesser  duty  rule”, 
which go beyond the WTO obligations. 

The EU interest test is a public interest clause and provides that measures can only be 
taken  if  they  are  not  contrary  to  the  overall  interest  of  the  EU.  This  requires  an 
analysis of all the economic interests involved, including those of the EU industry, 
users, consumers and traders of the product concerned. The EU interest test does not 
involve wider aspects such as foreign or development policy considerations. 

The lesser duty rule requires the measures imposed by the EU to be lower than the 
dumping or subsidy margin, if such lower duty rate is sufficient to remove the injury 
suffered by the EU industry. Such a “no-injury” rate is determined by using the cost 
of production of the EU industry and a reasonable profit margin; it reduces the anti-
dumping measures for individual exporting companies in almost half of the cases and 
is applied, on a world-wide level, only by the EU on a regular basis. 

1.2. 

Safeguards 

1.2.1.  The international framework 

The  principle  of  liberalisation  of  imports  was  set  under  the  GATT  1947  and 
strengthened  under  the  1994  WTO  Agreements.  As  safeguard  measures  consist  of 
the  unilateral  withdrawal  or  suspension  of  a  tariff  concession  or  of  other  trade 
liberalisation obligations formerly agreed, they have to be considered as an exception 
to this  principle. Article XIX GATT 1994 and the WTO Agreement on Safeguards 
do not only impose strict conditions for the application of this "escape clause”, but 
also  put  in  place  a  multilateral  control  mechanism  under  the  WTO  Committee  on 
Safeguards. 

Under  WTO  rules,  safeguard  action  has  to  be  viewed  as  a  temporary  defence 
measure that applies to all imports of the product covered by a measure, irrespective 
of origin. As regards non-WTO members, safeguard measures may be selective and 
apply  to  products  originating  in  a  specific  country.  WTO  Accession  Protocols  may 
also provide for such selective safeguard mechanisms as is the case in the People's 
Republic of China's Protocol of Accession.  

WTO safeguards should only be adopted after a comprehensive investigation which 
provides  evidence  of  the  existence  of  a)  unforeseen  developments  leading  to  b) 
increased  imports,  c)  the  existence  of  a  serious  injury  for  EU  producers  and d)  a 
causal link between the imports and the injury.  

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
1.2.2. The EU legislation 

The  above-mentioned  principles  are  all  reflected  in  the  relevant  EU  regulations, 
except  for  the  “unforeseen  development  requirement”  (which  is  not  in  the  EU  law 
but  has  been  confirmed  as  a  self-standing  condition  by  WTO  jurisprudence). 
Additionally, the adoption of measures in the EU requires an analysis of all interests 
concerned,  i.e.  the  impact  of  the  measures  on  producers,  users  and  consumers.  In 
other words, safeguard action can only be taken when it is in the EU’s interest to do 
so. The current EU safeguard instruments are covered by the following regulations: 

– 

– 

– 

Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  260/20095  on  the  common  rules  of  imports  – 
Codified Version 

Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  519/946  on  common  rules  for  imports  from 
certain third countries and repealing Regulations (EEC) Nos 1765/82, 1766/82 
and  3420/83.  This  Regulation  was  amended  in  2003  when  a  Transitional 
Product-Specific Safeguard Mechanism for imports originating in the People’s 
Republic  of  China  was  adopted7.  This  Regulation  ensures  that  Council 
Regulation (EC) No 519/94 is no longer applicable to the People’s Republic of 
China; 

Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  517/948  on  common  rules  for  imports  of  textile 
products  from  certain  third  countries  not  covered  by  bilateral  agreements, 
protocols or other arrangements, or by other specific EU import rules. 

These regulations will overall be referred to as the "basic safeguard Regulation(s)". 

1.3. 

Anti-subsidy and unfair pricing instrument for airline services 

Regulation No 868/20049 dealing with the effect of subsidisation and unfair pricing 
for air services from third countries which was adopted by the EP and the Council in 
2004  requested  the  Commission  to  prepare  a  methodology  to  assess  unfair  pricing 
practices. This complex work, involving different services of the Commission as well 
as external experts, is on-going. The resulting methodology should be both derived 
from  the  significant  EU  experience  in  trade  in  goods  and  adapted  to  the  highly 
specific sector of the air-services. 

5 

6 
7 

8 

9 

EN 

last  amended  by  Regulation 

OJ  L  349,  31.12.94,  p.  53,  as 
(OJ L 374, 22.12.2004, p. 1). 
OJ L 67, 10.3.94, p. 89, as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 427/2003 (OJ L 65, 8.3.2003, p. 1) 
Council Regulation (EC) No 427/2003 (OJ L 65, 8.3.2003, p. 1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) 
No 1985/2003 (OJ L 295, 13.11.2003, p. 43) 
last 
OJ  L  67,  10.3.94,  p.  1, 
(OJ L 337, 5.12.2006, p. 12). 
OJ L 162, 30.4.2004, p. 1 

amended  by  Regulation 

(EC)  No  1786/2006 

(EC)  No  2200/2004 

as 

8 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2. 

BASIC CONCEPTS 

2.1. 

Anti-dumping and anti-subsidy 

2.1.1.  What  is  dumping  and  what  are  countervailable  subsidies  -  the  material  conditions 

for the imposition of duties? 

2.1.1.1.  Dumping and subsidies 

Dumping is traditionally defined as price discrimination between national markets, or 
as  selling  below  cost  of  production,  plus  profit.  The  EU’s  anti-dumping  legislation 
defines  anti-dumping  as  selling  a  product  in  the  EU  at  a  price  below  its  “normal 
value”. This “normal value” is usually the actual sales price on the domestic market 
of  the  exporting  country.  Therefore,  a  country  is  selling  at  dumped  prices  if  the 
prices in its home market are higher than its export prices (i.e. price discrimination). 

Where sales in the domestic market are not representative, for instance because they 
have only been made in small quantities, the normal value may then be established 
on another basis, such as the sales prices of other producers on the domestic market 
or  the  cost  of  production,  plus  profit.  In  the  latter  case,  a  company  is  selling  at 
dumped prices if its export prices are below the cost of production, plus profit. 

A certain segregation of the market, triggered by a variety of distortions, exists in the 
majority  of  the  cases  where  dumping  occurs  on  a  more  than  incidental  basis.  That 
segregation may be caused, amongst other reasons, by government intervention. As a 
result,  exporters  are  shielded,  at  least  to  a  certain  degree,  from  international 
competition on their domestic market. 

Subsidies  can  have  similar  effects  to  sales  at  dumped  prices  in  that  they  allow 
exporters to operate from a distorted home base. Subsidies involve a direct support 
from  a  government  or  a  government-directed  private  body  which  has  the  effect  of 
conferring a benefit to producers or exporters (e.g. grants, tax and duty exemptions, 
preferential  loans  at  below  commercial  rates,  export  promotion  schemes,  etc.),  all 
aimed at allowing the exporters to sell at low prices in the EU. Only subsidies which 
are  “specific”,  i.e.  targeted  at  individual  companies  or  certain  sectors  of  the 
economy, can be subject to trade defence measures. 

Both anti-dumping and anti-subsidy measures are thus only second-best solutions in 
the absence of internationally agreed and enforced competition rules. 

2.1.1.2.  Material injury and causation 

For measures to be taken against these unfair trading practices, it is not sufficient that 
companies  are  exporting  their  products  to  the  EU  at  dumped  or  subsidised  prices. 
Measures can only be taken if these exports cause material injury to EU producers. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
Typical  indicators  of  injury  are  that  the  dumped  and/or  subsidised  import  volumes 
increase over a certain period and import prices undercut the sales prices of the EU 
industry. As a consequence, the latter is forced to decrease production volumes and 
sales prices thus losing market shares, making losses or having to make employees 
redundant. In extreme cases, exporters may try to eliminate viable EU producers by 
using  a  predatory,  below  cost,  pricing  strategy.  In  any  event,  the  injury  analysis 
requires  that  all  relevant  factors  be  taken  into  account  before  deciding  whether  the 
EU industry is in fact suffering “material injury”. 

A further condition for the imposition of measures is the need for “a causal link”: the 
injury must be caused by the dumping or the subsidy. This condition is often fulfilled 
when  the  injury  to  the  EU  industry  coincides  with  the  increase  in  dumped  and 
subsidised imports. It is important to note that the dumped or subsidised imports do 
not have to be the only cause of the injury. 

2.1.1.3.  EU interest 

Finally,  it  has  to  be  established  whether  there  are  compelling  reasons  according  to 
which measures would be contrary to the overall interest of the EU. In this respect, 
the  interests  of  all  relevant  economic  operators  which  might  be  affected  by  the 
outcome  of  the  investigation  must  be  taken  into  account.  These  interests  typically 
include  those  of  the  EU  industry,  users,  consumers  and  traders  of  the  product 
concerned and the analysis assesses the positive impact measures will have on some 
operators  as  opposed  to  the  negative  impact  on  others.  Measures  should  not  be 
imposed  only  if  it  can  be  clearly  concluded  that  their  negative  impact  would  be 
disproportionate,. 

2.1.2.  Procedure 

Investigations  are  carried  out  in  accordance  with  the  procedural  rules  laid  down  in 
the  basic  Regulations.  These  rules  guarantee  a  transparent,  fair  and  objective 
proceeding by granting significant procedural rights to interested parties. In addition, 
the  results  of  an  investigation  are  published  in  the  Official  Journal,  and  the  EU  is 
obliged to justify its decisions in this publication. Finally, it is ensured that each case 
is decided on its merits and the Commission does not hesitate to terminate a case if 
the conditions to impose measures are not met. 

Whereas  each  investigation  is  different  depending  on  the  products  and  countries 
involved,  all  cases  follow  the  same  procedural  rules.  However,  certain  preferential 
rules  apply  to  any  candidate  countries.  The  rules  relating  to  a  new  case  are 
summarised below. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
Initiation 

A  case  normally  starts  with  a  sufficiently  substantiated  complaint  from  the  EU 
industry  manufacturing  the  same  or  a  similar  product  to  the  one  referred  to  in  the 
complaint. Then, the Commission assesses whether the complaint contains sufficient 
evidence  to  allow  for  the  initiation  of  the  case.  A  case  is  opened  by  a  notice  of 
initiation  published  in  the  Official  Journal.  In  this  notice,  all  interested  parties, 
including  users,  exporting  country  authorities  in  anti-subsidy  investigations  in 
particular  and,  where  appropriate,  consumer  organisations  are  invited  to  participate 
and  co-operate  in  the  proceedings.  Detailed  questionnaires  are  sent  to  producers  in 
the  exporting  countries,  in  anti-subsidy  investigations  also  to  the  exporting  country 
authorities, and in the EU to the producers, traders (in particular importers) and other 
interested parties, such as users. These questionnaires  cover all different  conditions 
to  be  fulfilled,  i.e.  dumping/subsidy,  injury,  causation  and  EU  interest.  The  parties 
are  also  informed  that  they  can  request  a  hearing  and  ask  for  access  to  the  non-
confidential files which will help them defend their case. 

The investigation up to the provisional measures 

Following receipt of the replies to the questionnaire, investigations are carried out by 
Commission officials at the premises of the co-operating parties. 

The  main  purpose  of  these  visits  is  to  verify  whether  the  information  given  in  the 
questionnaires is reliable. The verified information is subsequently used to calculate 
or  determine  the  dumping  margin  and  the  injury  factors,  in  particular  the  price 
undercutting  margin  and  injury  elimination  level,  as  well  as  for  the  EU  interest 
analysis.  The  respective  calculations  and  analysis  often  involve  the  processing  of 
thousands  of  transactions,  the  complex  examination  of  production  costs  and  the 
assessment of the economic situation of numerous economic operators. 

The  results  of  the  calculations  and  other  findings  are  summarised  in  a  working 
document,  on  the  basis  of  which  it  is  decided  -  after  consultation  of  the  Member 
States in the Advisory Committee - whether to impose provisional measures, whether 
to  continue  the  investigation  without  proposing  duties  or  whether  to  terminate  the 
proceedings.  In  either  eventuality,  at  this  stage  the  decision  is  the  Commission's 
responsibility. 

The investigation up to the definitive stage 

Following  the  publication  in  the  Official  Journal  of  a  Commission  regulation 
imposing  provisional  duties,  interested  parties  which  so  request  receive  a  full 
disclosure  which  allows  them  to  verify  the  Commission’s  findings  and  to  submit 
comments. Comments can also be made at a hearing. These provisional submissions 
and comments are taken into account when a second, definitive, working document 
is prepared by the Commission. 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
After final disclosure, assessment of comments of interested parties and consultation 
of the Member States on the basis of the second working document, the Commission 
makes  a  proposal  to  the  Council  whether  or  not  to  impose  definitive  measures. 
Another  possibility  is  that  the  Commission  accepts  undertakings  offered  by 
exporters,  which  undertake  to  respect  minimum  prices.  In  the  latter  case,  no  duties 
are generally imposed on the companies from which undertakings are accepted. 

As set out above, throughout the process and at various specific steps, the procedure 
-  consisting  e.g.  of  requests  for  information,  hearings,  access  to  the  file  and 
disclosure – ensures that the rights of defence of interested parties are fully respected 
in this quasi-judicial process. 

Unless  the  Council  decides  by  a  simple  majority  not  to  adopt  the  Commission 
proposal  for  definitive  measures,  such  measures  are  imposed.  The  regulation 
imposing definitive duties, and deciding on the collection of the provisional duties, is 
published in the Official Journal. 

In view of the findings made, it may also be decided to terminate a case without the 
imposition  of  measures.  The  same  procedure  (disclosure,  comments,  hearing, 
working  document)  as  described  above  applies.  The  termination  of  the  case  would 
generally  be  made  by  a  Commission  Decision  after  consultation  of  the  Member 
States. 

Timing 

The procedure described above is subject to strict statutory time limits. A decision to 
impose provisional duties must be taken within nine months of the initiation and the 
total duration of an investigation is limited to fifteen months in anti-dumping cases 
and  to  thirteen  months  in  anti-subsidy  cases.  This  leads  to  significant  time 
constraints, taking into account, inter alia, internal consultations and the necessity to 
publish regulations and decisions in all EU languages at the same time. 

Anti-dumping  or  countervailing  measures  will  normally  remain  in  force  for  five 
years, and may consist of duties or undertakings concluded with exporters. Measures 
are  taken  on  a  countrywide  basis,  but  individual  treatment,  i.e.  the  application  of  a 
company-specific  duty,  can  be  granted  to  exporters  which  have  co-operated 
throughout  the  investigation.  During  the  five-year  period,  interested  parties  may, 
under certain conditions, request a review of measures or the refund of anti-dumping 
duties  paid.  Measures  may  also  be  suspended  for  a  certain  period,  subject  to  given 
criteria. 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
2.1.3.  Review of measures 

The  basic  Regulations  provide  for  administrative  reviews  and  distinguish  between 
interim reviews, newcomer reviews and expiry reviews.  

The  expiry  review  is  initiated  at  the  end  of  the  five  year  life-time  of  the  measures. 
Initiation of such a review requires a request by the EU industry evidencing that the 
expiry  of  the  measures  would  lead  to  continuation  or  recurrence  of  dumping  and 
injury. Since the amendment to the basic Regulations, expiry reviews initiated after 
20 March 2004 are subject to strict deadlines, i.e. they shall normally be concluded 
within 12 months of the date of initiation of the review, but in all cases be concluded 
within 15 months. 

During the five year life-time of measures, the Commission may perform an interim 
review.  Under  the  latter  procedure,  the  Commission  will  consider  whether  the 
circumstances with regard to subsidy/dumping and injury have changed significantly 
or  whether  existing  measures  are  achieving  the  intended  results  in  removing  the 
injury. Since 20 March 2006, the deadline for concluding an interim review is set at 
12 months, but no later than 15 months. 

Finally, the basic Regulations provide that a review shall be carried out to determine 
individual  margins  for  new  exporters  in  the  exporting  country  concerned.  Since  20 
March 2006, the deadline for conclusion of newcomer reviews is nine months.  

During  these  reviews,  the  main  procedural  rules  outlined  in  chapter  2.1.2  are  also 
applicable. 

2.1.4. 

Judicial reviews 

The  procedural  rights  of  the  parties,  including  hearings  and  access  to  non-
confidential  files,  are  respected  in  the  course  of  the  proceeding,  and  a  system  of 
judicial review is in place to ensure their correct implementation. The competence to 
review anti-dumping and anti-subsidy cases lies with the Court of First Instance and 
the  Court  of  Justice  in  Luxembourg.  Furthermore,  WTO  members  may  recourse  to 
the WTO dispute settlement mechanism. 

2.2. 

Safeguards 

2.2.1.  What are safeguard measures? 

Safeguard measures allow temporary protection against the adverse effects of import 
surges.  Under  the  EU  legislation10  implementing  the  WTO  Safeguards  Agreement, 
they  can  be  applied  under  the  following  conditions:  safeguard  measures  may  be 
imposed if, as a result of unforeseen developments, a product is being imported into 
the EU in such increased quantities and/or on such terms and conditions as to cause, 
or  threaten  to  cause,  serious  injury  to  EU  producers  of  like  or  directly  competitive 
products. Safeguard measures may only be imposed to the extent and for such time 
as may be necessary to prevent or remedy the injury.  

10 

Council Regulation (EC) No 260/2009 on common rules for imports (Codified version). 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2.2.2.  Procedure 

Investigations  are  carried  out  in  accordance  with  the  procedural  rules  laid  down  in 
the  basic  safeguard  Regulations.  These  rules  guarantee  a  transparent,  fair  and 
objective  proceeding.  In  addition,  the  results  of  safeguard  investigations  are 
published in the Official Journal, and the EU is obliged to justify its decisions in this 
publication. 

Initiation 

The Commission is informed by one or more Member States should trends in imports 
of  a  certain  product  appear  to  call  for  safeguard  measures.  This  information  must 
contain evidence available, of the following criteria: a) the volume of imports, b) the 
price  of  imports, c)  trends in certain  economic factors such as production, capacity 
utilisation, stocks, sales, market share, prices, profits, employment, etc.. Where there 
is a threat of serious injury, the Commission must also examine whether it is clearly 
foreseeable that a particular situation is likely to develop into actual injury. 

This information is immediately passed on by the Commission to all other Member 
States,  at  which  stage  consultations  are  held  within  the  Advisory  Safeguard 
Committee. If there is sufficient evidence to justify an investigation, the Commission 
publishes a notice of initiation in the Official Journal within one month of receipt of 
the  information  and  commences  the  investigation,  acting  in  co-operation  with  the 
Member States. 

Provisional measures 

Provisional measures may be imposed at any stage of the investigation. They shall be 
applied in critical circumstances where delay would cause damage which would be 
difficult  to  repair,  making  immediate  action  necessary,  and  where  a  preliminary 
determination  provides  clear  evidence  that  increased  imports  have  caused,  or  are 
threatening to cause, serious injury. 

The duration of the provisional measures can, however, not exceed 200 days (i.e. six 
months). 

Definitive measures 

If, at the end of the investigation, the Commission considers that definitive safeguard 
measures are necessary, it will take the necessary decisions no later than nine months 
from the initiation of the investigation, at which stage the results of the investigation 
are  being  published  in  the  Official  Journal.  In  exceptional  circumstances,  this  time 
limit  may  be  extended  by  a  further  maximum  period  of  two  months,  provided  a 
notice  is  published  in  the  Official  Journal  specifying  the  duration  of  the  extension 
and a summary of its reasons. 

EN 

14 

   EN 

 
Safeguard measures shall be applied only to the extent to prevent or remedy serious 
injury, thereby maintaining as far as possible traditional trade flows. As to the form 
of the measures, the EU will choose the measures most suitable in order to achieve 
these objectives. These measures could consist of quantitative quotas, tariff quotas, 
duties, etc. 

Duration and review of the measures 

The duration of safeguard measures must be limited to the period of time necessary 
to prevent or remedy serious injury and to facilitate adjustments on the part of the EU 
producers, but should not exceed four years, including the duration of the provisional 
measures, if any. Under certain circumstances, extensions may be necessary but the 
total period of application of safeguard measures should not exceed eight years. 

If the duration of the measures exceeds one year, the measures must be progressively 
liberalised  at  regular  intervals  during  the  period  of  application.  If  the  duration 
exceeds  three  years,  the  Commission  should  seek  consultations  with  the  Advisory 
Safeguard Committee in order to examine the effects of the measures, to determine 
the  appropriateness  of  further  liberalisation  and  to  ascertain  that  the  application  of 
the measures is still necessary. Depending on the consultations, the measures may be 
revoked or amended. 

3. 

TDI REVIEW  

The  Trade  Commissioner's  portfolio  includes  e.g.  the  question  of  updating  and 
modernising  our  current  trade  defence  instruments.  At  the  European  Parliament 
hearing  in  2009  the  Trade  Commissioner  signalled  openness  to  this  debate  but 
highlighted the need to obtain consensus among stakeholders.  
In the meantime the Commission implemented in 2010 measures (such as revamp of 
TDI  website;  specific  assistance  for  SMEs;  improved  disclosure  etc)  that  would 
improve transparency in trade defence investigations.  
Apart  from  any  comprehensive  reform,  the  internal  policies  of  the  European 
Commission  require  the  Commission  services  to  evaluate  all  their  activities  in  a 
planned,  systematic  and  regular  manner.  Since  trade  defence  activities  were  last 
evaluated  in  2005,  a  new  evaluation  arose  within  the  normal  cycle  of  DG  Trade's 
evaluation  planning.  Such  evaluation  would  help  the  Commission  to  design  or 
improve  its  policy  interventions,  and  to  monitor  their  effectiveness.  It  would  also 
help citizens to exercise their right to scrutinize, criticise and influence the policies 
and activities conducted by the Commission on their behalf. 
Accordingly, the Commission published at the end of September 2010 an invitation 
to  tender  for  an  evaluation  of  the  European  Union's  trade  defence  instruments 
(limited to anti-dumping and anti-subsidy). The objectives of the evaluation are: 
-  To  provide  a  concise  description  of  the  European  Union's  trade  defence 

instruments (TDI) and of the current practice in this area;  

-  To provide a balanced economic analysis of the fundamental arguments in favour 
of  and  against  the  use  of  trade  defence  instruments  and  their  application  in  the 
context of the current international legal framework (e.g., in view of the absence of 
international competition laws) and economic realities;  

EN 

15 

   EN 

 
-  To  provide  an  evaluation  of 

the  performance,  methods,  utilisation  and 

effectiveness of the present TDI scheme in achieving its trade policy objectives; 

-  To provide an evaluation of the effectiveness of the existing and potential policy 
decisions of the European Union (e.g., the Union interest test, the lesser duty rule, 
the  duty collection system) in comparison  with the policy decisions made by the 
following  EU  trading  partners:  Australia,  Canada,  China,  India,  New  Zealand, 
United States;  

-  To provide an examination of the basic anti-dumping and anti-subsidy Regulations 
in light of the administrative practice of the EU institutions, the judgments of the 
Court  of  Justice  of  the  European  Union  and  the  recommendations  of  the  WTO 
Dispute Settlement Body. 

Following the evaluation of the offers submitted, the Commission awarded a contract 
to BKP Development Research & Consulting GmbH, which was signed in December 
2010. The work was ongoing in 2011 with results expected early 2012.  

4. 

COUNTRY-WIDE MARKET ECONOMY STATUS (MES) 

A  normal  anti-dumping  investigation  can  only be  conducted  if  costs  and  prices  are 
reliable and the result of market forces. There are five criteria to determine whether a 
country  can  be  considered  a  full  market  economy  for  the  purpose  of  anti-dumping 
investigations  (according  to  Article  2  (7)  of  the  basis  antidumping  Regulation). 
These criteria are:  

a  low  degree  of  government  influence  over  the  allocation  of  resources  and 
i. 
decisions  of  enterprises,  whether  directly  or  indirectly  (e.g.  public  bodies),  for 
example  through  the  use  of  state-fixed  prices,  or  discrimination  in  the  tax,  trade  or 
currency regimes; 

an absence of state-induced distortions in the operation of enterprises linked to 

ii. 
privatisation and the use of non-market trading or compensation system; 

iii. 
the  existence  and  implementation  of  a  transparent  and  non-discriminatory 
company  law  which  ensures  adequate  corporate  governance  (application  of 
international accounting standards, protection of shareholders, public availability of 
accurate company information); 

the existence and implementation of a coherent, effective and transparent set of 
iv. 
laws which ensure the respect of property rights and the operation of a functioning 
bankruptcy regime; 

v. 
the existence of a genuine financial sector which operates independently from 
the state and which in law and practice is subject to sufficient guarantee provisions 
and adequate supervision. 

To  obtain  Market  Economy  Status  for  trade  defence  investigations  all  five  criteria 
must be met.  

EN 

16 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
2010 saw the continued evaluation of five of the six requests for country-wide MES 
from  China,  Vietnam,  Armenia,  Kazakhstan,  Mongolia  and  Belarus.  All  countries, 
except Belarus, continued to provide additional information in support of their claims 
throughout  the  year  and  their  requests  are  at  various  stages  of  progress.  The 
Consultations with the authorities of the Republic of Belarus were put on hold due to 
the  political  situation  in  the  country.  These  five  applicant  countries  are  at  different 
stages of progress in terms of meeting the five criteria for MES. 
  Companies  from  these  applicant  countries  have  the  possibility  to  request  market 
economy  treatment  on  an  individual  basis  in  the  context  of  anti-dumping 
investigations.  

China 
China is undoubtedly the most important MES applicant country and the first of the 
six countries to have requested the status. 
The first preliminary assessment was prepared in 2004 which concluded at that time 
that China fulfilled only one of the five MES criteria i.e. the second criteria outlined 
above. 
In September 2010 the 10th thematic MES Working Group China met in Beijing in a 
good  and  constructive  atmosphere.  The  meeting’s  focus  was  on  criterion  4.  The 
Chinese  authorities  provided  information  on  new  developments  in  the  area  of 
bankruptcy  practices;  in  particular  on  the  development  of  a  set  of  laws  regulating 
bankruptcy  and  on  how  these  laws  were  implemented  on  the  ground.  Furthermore 
Chinese  experts  explained  how  and  to  what  extend  Chinese  property  laws  allow 
private property. 
At the working group meeting both parties also discussed the ongoing joint study on 
the  accounting  practices  in  the  People’s  Republic  of  China,  especially  the  issue  of 
access by the consultants to the Chinese companies.   
The  Commission  will  continue  their  evaluation  in  close  cooperation  with  relevant 
Chinese's authorities and a further report is expected towards the end of 2011.  

Vietnam 
Vietnam's  second  preliminary  assessment  report  was  completed  in  February  2010. 
The report concluded that Vietnam fulfils one of the five criteria (criterion 1) which 
relates  to  the  degree  of  government  interference  in  the  economy.  The  report 
concluded  that  the  Vietnamese  government  does  not  exercise  an  undue  influence 
over the allocation of economic resources in the economy or decisions of companies. 
In  September  2010  the  3rd  thematic  working  group  meeting  took  place  in  Hanoi 
during which the Vietnamese provided the Commission with further information on 
their efforts to meet the remaining 4 criteria. A third assessment report is expected in 
2011. 

4.1 

4.2 

4.3 

Armenia 

The  first  assessment  report  on  Armenia's  MES  request  was  transmitted  to  the 
Armenian  authorities  early  in  2010.  The  report,  completed  late  in  2009,  had 
concluded that Armenia had made good progress in certain areas fulfilling two of the 
five  criteria  for  MES,  nos.  i  and  v  above.    The  Commission  services  followed  this 
with a series of questions to the Armenian authorities in June 2010 in order to have 
information  on  further  developments  in  their  progress  towards  becoming  a  fully 
fledged market economy.  By the end of 2010 no new information had been sent to 
the Commission from Armenia.    

EN 

17 

   EN 

 
4.4 

Kazakhstan 

At  the  end  of  2010,  DG  Trade's  services  assessed  Kazakhstan's  progress  towards 
fulfilling  the  market  economy  status  criteria.  DG  Trade's  services  concluded  that 
although there have been positive developments and Kazakhstan has been following 
a route to create a functioning market economy, their progress has been hampered by 
their response to the impact of the global financial crisis on their economy.  

It  is  hoped  that  the  cooperation  between  the  Commission  services  and  the 
Kazakhstani authorities will continue and that a road map will be jointly developed 
setting out the next steps to be taken in order to achieve progress on this matter.  

Mongolia 
After the decision of the Mongolian Government to postpone the on spot verification 
mission  scheduled  for  autumn  2008  the  Commission  repeated  its  readiness  for  a 
further  mission  but  could  not  take  place  in  2010.  The  Commission  provided 
information  on  progress  of  the  MES  assessment  at  the  Joint  EU-Mongolia  Trade 
Committee  in  October  2010  and  in  December  2010,  the  Commission  gave  a  list  of 
questions  to  the  authorities  of  Mongolia,  in  order  to  make  further  progress  on  the 
MES  assessment  report.  Based  on  the  replies  to  these  questions,  an  on  spot 
verification mission will be organised.  

Belarus 
In May 2009 the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Belarus addressed an 
official request to the EU for market economy status. The official MES assessment 
process  was  launched  formally  in  July  2010  during  a  visit  to  the  authorities  of 
Belarus.  The  Commission  has  continued  analysing  the  submitted  application 
documents  from  Belarus,  as  well  as  information  from  third  sources  concerning  the 
concrete  market  situation  and  the  existence  and  application  of  laws  which  are 
relevant to the context of the MES assessment.  

4.5 

4.6.  

5. 

TRADE DEFENCE INSTRUMENTS – RAW MATERIAL STRATEGY 

The first case where MET was refused on the grounds that the costs of a major input 
did not substantially reflect market values happened in 2009 and was reported in last 
year's Annual Report.   During 2010 the Commission services continued to examine 
the  costs  of  major  inputs  in  cases  where  MET  is  being  claimed  to  ensure  that  they 
reflect true market values. The existence of such distortions is also taken into account 
when  assessing  requests  for  global  Market  Economy  Status  (MES)  by  non-market 
economies.  In this context the role of the country concerned is examined vis-à-vis 
their  interference  in  the  market  and  any  policies  which  result  in  distorted  prices  of 
raw materials.      

6. 

INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION ACTIVITIES / BILATERAL CONTACTS 

6.1. 

Small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) 

At  the  end  of  2009  the  Commission,  in  recognising  the  important  role  that  SMEs 
have  in  the  EU's  economy  and  the  difficulties  they  face  in  participating  in  trade 
defence  investigations,  launched  a  study  to  identify  the  needs  of  SMEs  in  the  EU 

EN 

18 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
when  participating  in  trade  defence  investigations.  At  the  end  of  2010,  the 
Commission received from a contractor the results of the study identifying the needs 
of SMEs in the 27 EU Member States when submitting a complaint or participating 
in  trade  defence  investigations  as  an  importer  or  as  a  user  or  as  exporters  in 
investigations initiated by third countries. The outcome of the study also laid down 
specific proposals on how the Commission and the Member States could better assist 
SMEs in all areas of such investigations. 

The  Review  identifies  a  set  of  concrete  measures  to  support  SMEs  growth  and 
competitiveness  and  proposes  in  particular,  actions  to  increase  information  and 
assistance  to  SMEs  with  regard  to  the  use  of  the  EU  Trade  Defence  Instruments. 
Such actions were discussed with National authorities involved in Trade Defence and 
DG  TRADE,  Trade  Defence  services  with  the  intention  of  adopting  in  2011  a 
declaration  outlining  a  number  of  concrete  actions  to  address  the  difficulties 
encountered by SMEs involved in Trade Defence Instruments.  

The Trade Defence Helpdesk for SMEs was set up in December 2004 in view of the 
complexity of TDI proceedings, especially for SME's, because of their small size and 
their fragmentation. Its role is to address specific SME questions and problems 
regarding TDIs, both of a general nature or case-specific. A part of the TDI website 
is dedicated to SMEs, and refers to the Trade Defence Helpdesk contact points. This 
TDI website was further updated, making it more accessible and user-friendly, 
especially for SMEs. 
In 2010 these contact points received many requests for information, which were all 
immediately addressed. These requests concerned both the procedures and content of 
TDI proceedings. 

6.2. 

Bilateral contacts/information activities – industry and third countries 

Explaining  the  legislation  and  practice  of  the  EU's  trade  defence  activity  is  an 
important part of the work of the TDI services.   
A seminar on trade defence for officials from third countries took place in 2010.  In 
addition,  there  were  a  number  of  bilateral  contacts  dedicated  to  discussing  various 
trade defence related topics with a number of third countries including China, Korea, 
Vietnam, India, Belarus and Australia held in 2010. 
There were also several meetings with key stakeholder associations and companies in 
2010, including a number of events with Business Europe (namely a seminar with all 
the  most  relevant  members  of  the  association  and  several  bilateral  meetings  with 
Business  Europe's  Committee  on  Trade  Policy),  as  well  as  a  seminar  and  regular 
meetings  with  the  most  relevant  associations  of  importers  and  distributors,  such  as 
Eurocommerce and FTA.  

7. 

THE HEARING OFFICER 

2010  was  the  third  year  of  activity  for  the  Hearing  Officer  for  DG  Trade,  who 
became  operational  in  April  2007.  The  Hearing  Officer  acts  independently.  He  is 
attached for administrative purposes to the Director General of DG Trade to whom 
he reports.  

The  Hearing  Officer's  principal  role  is  to  safeguard  the  effective  exercise  of  the 
procedural rights of interested parties and to ensure that the trade proceedings before 
the  European  Commission  are  handled  impartially,  fairly  and  within  a  reasonable 

EN 

19 

   EN 

 
time. The Hearing Officer also advises the Director General of DG Trade on issues 
related  to  due  process  and  on  any  issue  arising  out  of  a  trade  proceeding,  where 
appropriate.  

An  update  of  the  Guidelines  on  cooperation  between  the  Hearing  Officer  and  the 
Commission  trade  investigation  services  was  adopted.  They  set  out  a  number  of 
operating  principles  and  introduce  time  windows  for  the  organisation  of  hearings. 
There  are  rules  on  interventions  with  regard  to  confidentiality  issues  and  access  to 
files  and  a  number  of  mechanisms  for  communication  and  follow-up  on  the 
interventions of the hearing officer. The updated guidelines were used as a basis for a 
draft Terms of Reference of the Hearing Officer. In the course of 2010 this decision 
was subject of internal consultations and its adoption is foreseen in 2011. 

In 2010 the Hearing Officer had 55 interventions in 29 trade defence cases and held 
24  hearings  which  represent  a  significant  increase  in  comparison  with  2009.  The 
Hearing  Officer  was  contacted  by  interested  parties,  Commission  investigation 
services,  and  stakeholders.  He  intervened  on  issues  covering  all  stages  of  the 
investigation.  

A  number  of  good  practices  have  been  adopted  at  the  recommendation  of  the 
hearing  officer  and  after  the  conclusions  of  the  working  groups  created  by  the 
Commission  services.  For  example,  the  services  have  started  including  in  the  file 
for  consultation  by  interested  parties  notes  to  the  file  on  pre-decisions  such  as 
sampling. The  timing of sending disclosure documents to  interested parties seems 
to  have  improved  as  well.  The  hearing  officer  has  not  received  many  complaints 
with  the  exception  of  the  Market  Economy  Treatment  (MET)  disclosure 
documents.  In  a  case,  the  services  contracted  an  expert  who  helped  to  analyse 
possible circumvention. The hearing officer expects that more experts will be used 
in future cases. 

The  main  issues  that  the  hearing  officer  faced  in  2010  could  be  grouped  in  six 
categories:  (i)  MET  determinations;  (ii)  non-confidential  files  and  confidentiality; 
(iii)  content  and  timing  of  disclosures;  (iv)  definition  of  a  Union  producer,  an 
importer, or a user; (v) criteria for the selection of an analogue country; and (vi) use 
of experts.  

MET determinations 

A  number  of  exporters  who  were  refused  MET  asked  for  the  intervention  of  the 
Hearing Officer. Their main concern was that before they receive an MET disclosure 
there was no indication from the Commission services that there were problems with 
their MET claim. At the time of an MET disclosure it is usually difficult to provide 
the necessary evidence and to have it verified. The Hearing Officer made a number 
of suggestions to the Commission  services which aim at increasing transparency in 
those cases. 

Non-confidential files and confidentiality 

Many of the interventions of the Hearing Officer related to access to the file, quality 
of non-confidential summaries of confidential information and confidentiality issues. 
The Hearing Officer observed improvements of the overall quality of the files after 

EN 

20 

   EN 

 
his  interventions.  A  recurring  issue  is  the  requests  by  complainants  to  the 
Commission  to  keep  their  identity  confidential.  In  most  of  the  cases  there  was 
evidence  which 
justified  such  requests.  However,  such  requests  decrease 
transparency. In particular, they prevent the other interested parties from submitting 
arguments in their defence, which they would have otherwise submitted. In view of 
this  the  Hearing  Officer  would  encourage  complainants  not  to  request  such 
confidentiality unless there would be no other solution.  

Content and timing of disclosures 

The Hearing Officer continued insisting on more detailed disclosure documents sent 
to the parties as early as possible in order to enable the latter to exercise effectively 
their  rights  of  defence.  The  cases  in  which  the  Hearing  Officer  intervened  were 
complex in view of the difficult balance that had to be drawn between the obligation 
of  the  Commission  not  to  divulge  business  secrets  and  the  right  to  information  of 
interested parties. The Hearing Officer believes that in those cases the Commission 
services  should  provide  as  detailed  as  possible  description  of  the  methodology  that 
the  Commission  services  followed  to  arrive  at  their  findings.  The  power  of  the 
Hearing Officer to check the confidential file on behalf of a party that has no access 
to  this  file  can  also  contribute  to  ensuring  that  the  rights  of  the  parties  in  trade 
proceedings are respected fully. 

Definition of a Union producer, an importer, or a user 

The  European  producers,  importers  and  users  spread  their  business  activities 
internationally. This is a global trend which concerns companies in countries outside 
the EU as well. The modems case, in particular, has demonstrated that this fact has to 
be carefully considered in trade defence cases. The Hearing Officer would encourage 
more detailed explanations of the reasons to determine that a company is a producer, 
importer or user in any future case. 

Criteria for the selection of an analogue country 

It  is  very  rare  that  producers  in  two  or  more  "analogue"  or  "reference"  countries 
agree  to  cooperate  for  the  establishment  of  a  normal  value.  The  normal  value  and 
thus the dumping margin could be different depending on the choice of an analogue 
country.  However,  there  is  little  case-law  on  the  basis  of  what  criteria  to  select  the 
more appropriate country. The Hearing Officer, therefore, considers that the reasons 
to  choose  a  country  should  be  explained  in  detail  in  the  regulation  imposing 
measures. This would enable the parties to exercise effectively their rights of defence 
and will help further developing the criteria. 

Use of experts 

There  appears  to  be  an  increasing  need  for  the  use  of  experts  in  trade  defence 
investigations.  Detailed  discussions  on  the  product  scope  of  the  investigations,  in 
particular,  have  become  a  usual  practice  and  in  certain  more  complicated  cases  the 
Commission  services  do  not  have  the  necessary  expertise.  Their  analysis  would 
therefore be strengthened, if they would be able to rely on an independent opinion. 
This was already done in a case and proved to be useful. 

EN 

21 

   EN 

 
Taking into account the increased number of interventions and the variety of issues 
dealt with, it could be claimed that the function of the Hearing Officer is now well 
established. 

8. 

GENERAL  OVERVIEW  OF  ANTI-DUMPING  AND  ANTI-SUBSIDY  INVESTIGATIONS  AND 
MEASURES 

The number of new investigations initiated in 2010 decreased in comparison to the 
previous  year,  18  compared  to  21.  The  number  of  definitive  measures  imposed 
dropped  slightly  while  the  number  of  provisional  measures  imposed  in  2010 
increased  by  almost  a  third  compared  to  2009.    Below  are  details  on  new 
investigations and review investigations. 

8.1. 

New investigations 

At  the  end  of  2010,  the  EU  had  124  anti-dumping  measures  and  11  countervailing 
measures  in  force11.  The  anti-dumping  measures  covered  68  products  and  27 
countries  (see  Annex  O);  the  countervailing  measures  covered  6  products  and  7 
countries  (see  Annex  P).  Of  the  measures,  the  large  majority  was  in  the  form  of 
duties; however, in a number of cases, undertakings were accepted. 

Of  the  124  anti-dumping  measures  in  force  at  the  end  of  2010  the  main  countries 
affected  were  China  56,  India,  Russia  and  Thailand  7  each,    Ukraine  6,  Korea  and 
Taiwan 5 each, Indonesia 4 and Belarus, Malaysia and USA 3 each.  Of the 11 anti-
subsidy measures in place the majority concern imports from India – 5 in total, with 
1 each for Brazil, Israel, Iran, Pakistan, United Arab Emirates and USA.  

Regarding the of anti-dumping measures one has to look at the trade volume of the 
products  concerned,  which  varies  considerably  depending  on  the  sector  concerned. 
The  largest  trade  volumes  are  often  generated  by  high  technology,  such  as 
electronics,  which  are  high-value  products.  It  should  be  noted  that  in  2010,  only 
0.43%12  of  total  imports  into  the  EU  was  affected  by  anti-dumping  or  anti-subsidy 
measures. 

Table 1 below provides statistical information on the new investigations for the years 
2006 – 2010.  

11 
12 

The measures are counted per product and country concerned. 
Source Comext. 

EN 

22 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
TABLE 1 

Anti-dumping and anti-subsidy new investigations 
during the period 1 January 2005 - 31 December 200913 

Investigations in progress at the beginning of 
the period 
Investigations initiated during the period 
Investigations in progress during the period 
Investigations concluded : 

imposition of definitive duty or 

- 
acceptance of undertakings 
terminations14 
- 
Total investigations concluded during the 
period 
Investigations in progress at the end of period 
Provisional measures imposed during the 
period 

2006 
28 

2007 
33 

2008 
20 

2009 
26 

2010 
25 

36 
64 

13 

18 
31 

33 
13 

9 
42 

12 

10 
22 

20 
12 

20 
42 

16 

3 
16 

26 
5 

21 
47 

11 

11 
22 

25 
10 

18 
43 

9 

10 
24 

19 
13 

Details on the conclusions can be found under heading 9.1. 

8.2. 

Review investigations 

Anti-dumping  measures,  including  price  undertakings,  may  be  subject,  under  the 
basic  Regulation,  to  five  different  types  of reviews:  expiry  reviews  (Article  11(2)), 
interim reviews (Article 11(3)), newcomer investigations (Article 11(4)), absorption 
investigations (Article 12) and circumvention investigations (Article 13).  

13 

14 

The initiation of a case concerning several countries is accounted as separate investigations/proceedings 
per country involved. 
Investigations  might  be  terminated  for  reasons  such  as  the  withdrawal  of  the  complaint,  de  minimis 
dumping or injury, etc. 

EN 

23 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Also  anti-subsidy  measures  may  be  subject,  under  the  basic  Regulation,  to  five 
different types of reviews: expiry reviews (Article 18), interim reviews (Article 19), 
absorption  investigations  (Article  19(3)),  accelerated  reviews  (Article  20)  and 
circumvention investigations (Article 23). 

These  reviews  continue  to  represent  a  major  part  of  the  work  of  the  Commission's 
TDI services. In the period from 2006 to 2010, a total of 164 review investigations 
were  initiated.  These  review  investigations  represented  61%  of  all  investigations 
initiated in that period. 

In  2010,  31  reviews  were  initiated.  Of  these,  14  were  expiry  reviews,  12  interim 
reviews, 3 newcomer review, and 2 circumvention investigation. 

An overview of the review investigations in 2010 can be found in Annexes F to K. 
Table 2 provides statistical information for the years 2006 – 2010. 

TABLE 2 

Reviews of anti-dumping and anti-subsidy investigations  

during the period 1 January 2006 - 31 December 201015 

Reviews in progress at the beginning of the 
period 

2006 

2007 

2008 

2009 

2010 

63 

52 

46 

32 

33 

Reviews initiated during the period 

35 

41 

Reviews in progress during the period 

98     

93 

Total reviews concluded during the period16 

Reviews in progress at the end of the period 

46 

52 

47 

46 

23 

69 

37 

32 

34 

66 

30 

33 

31 

64 

30 

34 

Details on the conclusions can be found under heading 9.2. 

15 

16 

The initiation of a case concerning several countries is accounted as separate investigations/proceedings 
per country involved. 
Investigations  which  were  conducted  and  concluded  under  the  specific  provisions  of  the  Regulation 
imposing the original measures are not counted as there was no publication of the initiation. 

EN 

24 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
9. 

OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES IN 2010 

9.1. 

New investigations 

9.1.1. 

Initiations 

In 2010, 15 new anti-dumping  investigations  and 3  new anti-subsidy investigations 
and  1  safeguard  were  initiated  in  the  period.  The  anti-dumping  investigations 
involved  13  different  products  from  8  different  countries.  The  anti-subsidy 
investigations  involve  3  products  from  2  different  countries.  Details  of  these 
investigations are given in Annex A. The country most affected by the anti-dumping 
investigations  is  China  with  8  investigations,  India  2  investigations  and  1 
investigation  each  opened  concerning  Bosnia  &  Herzegovina;  Thailand,  Indonesia, 
Malaysia and USA.  The main sector concerned by these new cases is chemicals.  

In  the  five-year  period  from  2006  to  2010,  104  investigations  were  initiated  on 
imports  from  24  countries.  The  main  sectors  concerned  by  the  investigations  were 
chemical  and  allied  -  33  investigations,  iron  and  steel  –  24  investigations,  other 
metals  -  13  investigations  and  electronics    -  8  investigations.  A  breakdown  of  the 
product sectors is given in Annex B(A). 

The  main  countries  concerned  during  the  period  from  2006  to  2010  include  the 
People's  Republic  of  China  with  41  investigations,  India  and  USA  with  7  each, 
Thailand with 6, Taiwan and Malaysia with 5 each, Korea, Russia and Turkey with 3 
each,  Pakistan  and  Turkey  with  3  each.      A  table  showing  all  the  investigations 
initiated over the last five years broken down by country of export is at Annex B(B). 

The list of cases initiated in 2010 can be found below, together with the name of the 
complainant.  More  information  can  be  obtained  from  the  Official  Journal  to  which 
reference is given in Annex A. 

Product 

Zeolite A powder 

Country of origin  Complainant 
Bosnia & Herzegovina 

 Industrias Quimicas del 
Ebro, SA; MAL Magyar 
Aluminium; PQ Silicas 
B.V.; Silkem d.o.o. and 
zeolite Mira Srl 
Unipersonale  

Melamine 

P.R. China 

Coated fine paper 

Stainless steel bars 

Open mesh fabrics of glass fibres 

P.R. China 

India 

P.R. China 

 Borealis Agrolinz 
Melamine GmbH, DSM 
Melamine B.V. and 
Zaklady Azotowe 
Pulawy  

CEPIFINE 

EUROFER 

 Saint-Gobain Vertex 
s.r.o., Tolnatext 
Fonalfeldolgozo, 

EN 

25 

   EN 

 
 
Ring binder mechanisms 

Ceramic tiles 

Thailand 

P.R. China 

Wireless wide area networking modems 

Tris (2-chloro-1-methylethyl) phosphate 

P.R. China 

P.R. China 

Fatty alcohols and their blends 

India 
Indonesia 
Malaysia 

Seamless pipes and tubes of stainless steel 

P.R. China 

Vinyl acetate 

Graphite electrode systems 

Stainless steel bars (AS) 

Coated fine paper (AS) 

U.S.A. 

P.R. China 

India 

P.R. China 

Wireless wide area networking modems (AS)  P.R. China 

Valmieras ‘Stikla 
Skiedra’ AS and 
Vitrulan Technical 
Textiles GmbH  

 Ring Alliance 
Ringbuchtechnik GmbH 

 European Ceramic Tile 
Manufacturers’ 
Federation (CET)  

 Option NV  

 European Chemical 
Industry Council 
(CEFIC)  

 Cognis GmbH and 
Sasol Olefins & 
Surfactants GmbH  

 Defence Committee of 
the seamless stainless 
steel tubes industry of 
the European Union  

 Ineos Oxide Ltd  

 European Carbon and 
Graphite Association  

EUROFER 

CEPIFINE 

 Option NV  

Wireless wide area networking modems 
(Safeguard) 

P.R. China 

Belgian Government 

Initiation  of  safeguard  case  concerning  imports  of  Wireless  wide  area  networking 
modems. 

In  June  2010  the  Commission  initiated  a  safeguard  investigation  under  Article  6 
Regulation  (EC)  No  260/2009  and  Article  5  of  Regulation  (EC)  on  imports  of 
Wireless wide area networking modems.  This followed a request from the Belgian 
Government  with  evidence  showing  that  imports  into  the  Union  of  the  product 
concerned  were  increasing  rapidly  both  in  absolute  terms,  and  relative  to  Union 
production  and  consumption,  and  that  imports  had  increased  by  more  than  4  100 
percentage  points  from  2006  to  2009.      The  request  stated  that    there  is  one  single 
Union  producer  of  the  like  or  directly  competitive  product  which  is  located  in 
Belgium with some production in other Union Member States  

The  request  also  alleged  that  the  volumes  and  conditions  of  the  imports  concerned 
had a negative impact on the prices of like products in the Union, and on the market 
share  held,  the  quantities  sold  and  the  level  of  prices  charged  by  the  Union 
producers. As a result there was serious injury to the Union producers.  

The safeguard investigation was still ongoing at the end of 2010.  

EN 

26 

   EN 

 
9.1.2.  Provisional measures 

In 2010, provisional duties were imposed in 9 anti-dumping proceedings and 4 anti-
subsidy  proceeding.  The  AD  measures  involved  imports  from  8  products  and 
covering  4  countries  while  for  anti-subsidy  they  concern  of  2  products  covering  4 
countries.  As  shown  in  Table  1  (see  point  8.1),  this  figure  compares  to  10  in  2009 
and 5 in 2008. 

The list of cases where provisional measures were imposed during 2010 can be found 
below,  together  with  the  measure(s)  imposed.  More  information  can  be  obtained 
from the Official Journal to which reference is given in Annex C. 

Product 

Originating from  Type17 and level of measure 

Sodium gluconate 

P.R. China 

AD Duty ranging :5.6% - 27.3% 

Aluminium wheels 

P.R. China 

Polyethylene terephthalate 
(PET) 

Iran 
UAE 

Others rate: 53.4% 

AD Duty 20.6% 

AD Duty ranging 0 Eur/tonne – 

54.80 Eur/tonne 

High tenacity yarn of 
polyesters 

P.R. China 

AD Duty ranging: 0% - 8.9% 
Others rate: 9.3% 

Continuous filament glass fibre 
products 
Melamine 

P.R. China 

P.R. China 

Zeolite A powder 

Coated fine paper 

Polyethylene terephthalate 
(PET) (AS) 

Stainless steel bars (AS) 

Bosnia & 
Herzegovina 

P.R. China 

Iran 
Pakistan 
UAE 

India 

AD duty 8,5% 
Others rate: 43.6% 

AD Duty ranging: 44.9% - 49% 
Others rate: 65.2% 
AD Duty: 28.1% 

AD Duty: 19.7% 

Others rate: 39.1% 

AS Duty 142.97 Eur/ tonne 

AS Duty 83.64 Eur/tonne 

AS Duty 42.34 Eur/tonne 

AS Duty Ranging 3.3% - 4.3% 

Others rate 4.3% 

9.1.3.  Definitive measures 

During  2010,  definitive  duties  were  imposed  in  6  anti-dumping  cases  and  1  anti-
subsidy  case.  They  involved  imports  from  4  different  countries  and  covered  7 
products.  The  People’s  Republic  of  China  featured  with  6  anti-dumping  measures, 
with Ian, Pakistan and UAE with  1 measure each. 

17 

AD = anti-dumping duty, CVD = countervailing duty, UT = undertaking. 

EN 

27 

   EN 

 
 
 
                                                 
The list of cases where definitive measures were imposed during 2010 can be found 
below,  together  with  the  measure(s)  imposed.  More  information  can  be  obtained 
from the Official Journal to which reference is given in Annex D.  

Product 

Originating from 

Type18 and level of measure  

Cargo scanning systems 

P.R. China 

Molybdenum wires 

P.R. China 

Aluminium road wheels 

P.R. China 

Sodium gluconate 

P.R. China 

High tenacity yarn of 
polyesters 

P.R. China 

AD Duty: 34% 

AD Duty: 64.3% 

AD Duty: 22.3% 

AD  Duty  ranging:  5.6%  - 
27.1% Others rate: 53.2% 

AD Duty ranging 0% - 9.8% 

Others rate: 9.8% 

Ironing board (Since 
Hardware) 

Polyethylene 
terephthalate (PET) (AS) 

P.R. China 

AD Duty 35.8% 

Iran 
Pakistan 
UAE 

AS Duty 139.70 Eur/tonne 

AS Duty 44.02 Eur/tonne 

AS Duty 42.34 Eur/tonne 

9.1.4  Details on individual cases  

Cargo scanning systems originating in the People's Republic of China 

An anti-dumping investigation was initiated in February 2009 following a complaint 
lodged  by  Smiths  Detection  Group  Limited  on  behalf  of  EU  producers.    The 
investigation period (IP) was from  1 July 2007 to 31 December 2008 with  trends 
relevant  for  the  assessment  of  injury  being  examined  over  a  period  covering  1 
January  2004  to  the  end  of  the  IP.    An  18-month  period  was  selected  due  to  the 
specific  particularities  of  the  product  concerned/like  product  market,  i.e.    public 
procurement/ tendering processes with long lead time periods for transactions and the 
existence  of  relatively  few  transactions.    Provisional  measures  were  imposed  in 
December 2009. The product concerned is systems for scanning of cargo, currently 
falling within CN codes ex 9022 19 00, ex 9022 29 00, ex 9027 80 17 and ex 9030 
10  00  and  motor  vehicles  equipped  with  such  systems  currently  falling  within  CN 
code ex 8705 90 90 originating in the People’s Republic of China. 

Dumping 

Only  one  Chinese  producer  co-operated  with  the  proceeding  and  did  not  claim 
market  economy  treatment  but  did  claim  individual  treatment.  However,  the 

18 

AD = anti-dumping duty, CVD = countervailing duty, UT = undertaking. 

EN 

28 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
investigation revealed that there was significant state interference in the activities of 
the  company.    This  coupled  with  the  fact  that  there  was  difficulties  in  obtaining 
specific  import/export  data.    In  line  with  the  Basic  Regulation  regarding  imports 
from  non-market  economy  countries,  normal  value  was  based  on  information  from 
an analogue country, in this case, the USA.  The US producer only manufactured one 
type of the product concerned and therefore normal value for that product was based 
on  the  that  producers'  prices  for  domestic  sales  in  the  US.  For  other  types  of  the 
product it was decided to use verified information on costs of the Union industry to 
construct normal value.   

The  sole  cooperating  exporting  producer  in  the  PRC  made  export  sales  to  the 
Community  only  to  public  authorities  following  the  award  of  public  tenders. 
However the investigation revealed that the accounting of the company was deficient 
so  that  the  exact  details  of  export  sales  and  prices  could  not  be  established  with 
certainty  for  a  number  of  transactions.  As  a  result  export  prices  of  the  product 
concerned were established pursuant to Article 18(1) of the basic Regulation on the 
basis of the prices paid for the product concerned. The comparison between normal 
value and export price was made on an ex-factory basis. Allowances in the form of 
adjustments  were  made  for  differences  affecting  prices  and  price  comparability  in 
accordance  with  the  basic  Regulation  including  for  transport  and  insurance  costs, 
packing costs, credit costs, warranty and guarantee costs, commissions, civil  works 
and  on-spot  installation,  and  service  costs  have  been  made  where  applicable  and 
justified. This resulted in a dumping margin of 38.8%.  

Injury 

The  analysis  of  the  economic  indicators  of  the  Community  industry  showed  that 
there  was  injury  to  the  EU  industry.        The  most  important  injury  indicators  were 
profitability,  market  share  and  undercutting  as  they  reflect  directly  the  situation  of 
the Union industry as regards its activity on the EU market.  Certain other indicators 
were not considered as important as they relate to the production of cargo scanning 
equipment sold on the export market e.g. labour cost and productivity per worker. As 
regards  profitability,  the  Union  industry  became  loss  making  over  the  period 
considered with the sales volume of the Union producers falling by 24 % and market 
share  by  20  percentage  points.  Furthermore,  the  Chinese  producer  undercut  the 
complainant by a range of 15 to 20 %.   

Financial indicators also confirmed that the future of the Community industry was at 
risk  and  that  the  presence  of  dumped  imports  from  China  prevented  it  from 
increasing sales volumes or prices to levels that could restore its financial situation.  

Causation 

It  was  concluded  from  the  investigation  that  the  material  injury  to  the  Union 
industry, which was evident by a decrease in EU sales and market share in the EU 
market  as  well  as  negative  financial  results,  was  caused  by  the  dumped  imports 
concerned. Imports from other countries were considered, however, these were found 
to be sporadic and not of sufficient volume to cause injury to the EU producers. The 
Chinese  argued  that  the  fact  that  EU  producers  did  not  participate  in  all  tenders 
caused injury. However the investigation confirmed that neither the EU industry nor 
the  sole  cooperating  Chinese  exporting  producer  presented  a  bid  in  each  and  every 

EN 

29 

   EN 

 
tendering  process.  The  EU  industry  presented  bids  only  when  it  could  submit  a 
reasonable  commercial  offer.  No  compelling  factor  was  found  to  suggest  that  the 
injury  suffered  resulted  from  the  Community  industry  not  participating  in  bids  that 
were  not  deemed  reasonable  business  options.    Furthermore  it  was  found  that  the 
the  competition  between 
export  performance  of 
Community  producers  and  the  above-mentioned  bid-related  issues  did  not  have  a 
significant effect on the Community industry’s negative developments.  

the  Community 

industry, 

EU Interest 

The  investigation  found  that  imposing  measures  would  clearly  be  in  the  interest  of 
the  EU  industry.  Without  the  imposition  of  measures  the  already  bad  financial 
position  of  the  EU  industry  would  deteriorate  further  and  ultimately  lead  to  the 
Community  industry  closing  down.    The  imposition  of  measures  would  restore  the 
import price to non-injurious levels, allowing the EU industry to compete under fair 
trade  circumstances.        Given  the  nature  of  the  product  concerned  the  EU  interest 
analysis  was  limited  to  the  effect  of  measures  on  users,  in  this  case  customs 
authorities.  In any event, in the context of the investigation, no upstream suppliers 
made  themselves  known,  there  were  no  representations  received  from  consumers’ 
organisations and no unrelated importers/ distributors of the product concerned were 
known to exist in the EU.  Some users were concerned about the negative impact that 
measures could have both on competition and on stimulating innovative solutions but 
no  concrete  evidence  was  provided  that  could  substantiate  this  claim.  The  main 
general  concern  of  users  was  that  measures  might  have  a  negative  impact  on  their 
budgets and increase the cost of investment by Customs administrations. However, it 
was considered that as  the product concerned is considered as a fixed asset  any anti-
dumping  duties  paid  could  be  spread  over  the  useful  life  of  the  cargo  scanner.    As 
regards procurement procedures it was noted that such procedures are not designed 
to counteract dumping practices. The EU industry would clearly be in a position to 
benefit from any measures by increased economies of scale because of an increase in 
production and sales by the EU producers.   

Definitive anti-dumping measures of 34% were imposed in June 2010 based on the 
injury margin.  

Aluminium road wheels originating in the People's Republic of China.  

An  anti-dumping  investigation  on  imports  of  aluminium  road  wheels 
originating in the People's Republic of China was initiated in May 2010 on the basis 
of  a  complaint  lodged  by  the  Association  of  European  Wheel  Manufacturers 
(EUWA).    Provisional  anti-dumping  measures  were  imposed  in  the  case  in 
December 2010. 

The investigation period (IP)  for dumping and injury covered 1 July 2008 to 30 June 
2009 while the examination of trends relevant for the assessment of injury covered 
the period from 1 January 2006 to the end of the IP.  The product concerned by the 
investigation  was  ‘aluminium  road  wheels  of  the  motor  vehicles  of  CN  headings 
8701 to 8705, whether or not with accessories and whether or not fitted with tyres, 
falling within CN codes ex 8708 70 10 and ex 8708 70 50 (TARIC codes 8708 70 10 
10 and 8708 70 50 10)’. In view of the large number of exporting producers in the 

EN 

30 

   EN 

 
 
PRC, importers and Union producers, sampling was used in the investigation in line 
with Article 17 of the basic Regulation.  

Dumping 

Four Chinese groups of companies were included in the sample (representing 43% of 
total exports from the PRC to the EU) and all requested market economy treatment 
However, none of the PRC companies that had requested MET could show that they 
fulfilled the criteria set out in the basic Regulation. All the companies which claimed 
MET  also  claimed  individual  treatment  (IT).    IT  was  granted  to  three  of  the  four 
groups  of  companies  who  claimed  IT.    As  regards  the  fourth  company  CITIC 
Dicastal, a State-owned company directly controlled by the State (the majority of its 
shares belong to the State)it was considered that the State interference was such that 
it would permit circumvention of measures if it obtained a different rate of duty. In 
other  words,  production  of  other  State-controlled  companies  could  be  re-directed 
through CITIC Dicastal.  In line with the basic Regulation and the rules concerning 
the  establishment  of  normal  value  in  cases  concerning  non-market  economies, 
Turkey was selected as an analogue country.   

Normal  value  was  calculated  on  the  basis  of    actual  domestic  profitable  prices  in 
Turkey  for  certain  types  of  the  product  concerned  while for  another  type  where  no 
profitable  sales  were  made,  normal  value  was  based  on  the  manufacturing  costs  of 
the product type sold in the domestic market, plus selling, general and administrative 
costs and a reasonable value for profit where for a limited number of product types, 
normal  value  was  calculated  on  the  basis  of  normal  value  for  comparable  types  of 
products making adjustments for physical differences.   

The  export  prices  were  based  on  export  prices  actually  paid  or  payable  in  the  EU. 
Where  sales  were  made  via  a  related  importer  or  trader,  the  export  prices  were 
constructed  in  accordance  with  Article  2(9)  of  the  basic  Regulation  on  the  basis  of 
the  resale  prices  of  that  related  importer/importer  to  first  independent  customers  in 
the  Union,  with  appropriate  adjustments  for  all  costs  incurred  between  importation 
and resale. 

The  normal  value  and  export  prices  were  compared  on  an  ex-works  basis.  For  the 
companies  granted  IT,  dumping  margins  were  established  by  comparing  the 
weighted  average  normal  value  established  for  the  Turkish  producers  with  each 
company's weighted average export price to the Union For the purpose of ensuring a 
fair comparison between the normal value and the export price, due allowance in the 
form  of  adjustments  was  made  for  differences  affecting  prices  and  price 
comparability  in  accordance  with  Article  2(10)  of  the  basic  Regulation.  The  price 
comparison  between  the  wheels  exported  from  the  PRC  and  those  sold  on  the 
Turkish  market  by  the  Turkish  cooperating  producers  was  made  by  distinguishing 
sales to OEMs and sales in the After-market.  The dumping margins calculated from 
23,81% to 67,66%.   

Injury 

The  product  concerned  is  sold  in  the  Union  via  two  distribution  channels:  to  the 
Original  Equipment  Manufacturer  (OEM)  segment  and  to  the  so-called  aftermarket 
(AM) segment.  Although the ‘OEM and AM’ aluminium road wheels were found to 

EN 

31 

   EN 

 
have  different  channels  of  distribution  it  was  considered  that  they  share  the  same 
physical  and  technical  characteristics  and  interchangeable.  In  addition,  ARWs  are 
sold and imported from China in significant quantities via both sales channels.   In 
analysing  the  situation  of  the  EU  market  while  the  two  segments  were  considered 
together some indicators were analysed separately.  This analysis confirmed that the 
trends found for the product segment as a whole in general corresponded to those for 
the  OEM  and  AM  segments  which  were  considered  separately.  The  investigation 
concluded  that  Union  industry  suffered  material  injury.  This  conclusion  was 
reinforced by the number of companies or production sites that would have closed (5 
in  the  OEM  segment)  or  that  would  have  gone  under  insolvency  procedures  (21  in 
the AM and 4 in the OEM segment) over the period considered.   The market share 
of EU producers dropped from 84,5% to 82,3% in OEM and for 57,4% to 48,5% for 
AM while the market share for the Chinese imports doubled.   Price undercutting by 
imports from the PRC was found in the range of 20% to 38%. Overall profitability 
for the EU industry dropped from 3,2% on 2006 to -5,4% during the IP. Return on 
investments collapsed during the period considered, reaching -40% in the IP.   

Causation 

The investigation found there was a significant decrease of production and sales, loss 
of market share, as well as price depression leading to losses of the Union industry 
while imports from the PRC, which undercut substantially the Union industry prices, 
as well as their market share increased during the same period of time.  

All  other  factors  that  might  have  contributed  to  the  material  injury  suffered  by  the 
Union  industry  were  also  analysed.  In  this  respect,  it  was  found  that  the  economic 
crisis,  the  imports  from  Turkey  and  the  competition  between  Union  producers 
leading to a concentration process may have had some impact on the injury situation. 
However, it was concluded that their impact was not such as to break the causal link 
between the dumped imports and the injury found.  It was concluded that there was a 
causal  link  between  the  dumped  imports  from  the  PRC  and  the  material  injury 
suffered by the Union industry.   

Union interest 

This case found a high level of cooperation and support from the Union production 
(more  than  70  %)  suggesting  that  the  imposition  of  measures  was  clearly  in  the 
interest of the EU producers. If measures were not imposed, it was considered that 
the increase of low-priced, dumped ARWs, in particular on the AM segment, would 
continue,  if  not  increase.  The  low  level  of  co-operation  of  unrelated  importers 
suggested that the imposition of measures would not have any significant impact on 
their  activity.  As  regards  users  i.e.  car  manufacturers  the  investigation  found  that 
they appear to rely on Chinese supplies only to a limited extent.  Some were found 
not to import from China at all, others import less than 5 %, but some import up to 
30  %  of  their  needs.  However,  this  argument  was  not  decisive  because  of  the 
existence  of  significant  imports  from  other  third  countries.    As  regards  the  cost  of 
measures t was found that ARWs represent about 1 % of the cost of a car so therefore 
a  measure  of  20  %  on  ARWs  would  lead  to  a  cost  increase  of    only  0,2  %.  No 
argument has been raised as regards the impact of measures on final consumers.  As 
regards the impact on suppliers to the EU industry it was found that for some their 
sales  to  the  Union  industry  range  between  30  %  and  50  %  of  their  total  turnover. 

EN 

32 

   EN 

 
Given that these companies are SMEs, the viability of the Union industry is essential 
to  their  operations.      Some  parties  claimed  that  the  imposition  of  duties  on  ARWs 
originating in the PRC would give an advantage to South Korean car manufacturers, 
in addition to the 0 % duty on cars under the Free Trade Agreement (FTA). In this 
respect  it  was  found  that  the  market  share  of  cars  originating  in  South  Korea 
amounted  at  that  time  to  only  3  %  of  the  EU  car  market.  While  it  was  difficult  to 
foresee the import evolution for Korean  cars,  but having  regard to the very  limited 
direct cost impact of measures on the EU car makers, it could not be concluded that 
the imposition of an anti-dumping on ARWs from China would play any meaningful 
role  in  that  respect.    It  was  therefore  considered  to  be  in  the  interest  of  the  EU  to 
impose anti-dumping measures on imports of ARW originating in China.  

For the purpose of determining the level of duties to be imposed account was taken 
of  the  dumping  margins  found  and  the  amount  of  duty  necessary  to  eliminate  the 
injury  sustained  by  the  Union  industry.    The    ARW  market  is  characterised  by  the 
existence  of  two  relatively  distinct  market  segments  with  sales  by  the  Union 
producers concentrated in the OEM segment, counting for 85 % of all Union industry 
sales. For that reason it was therefore  found appropriate to assess an injury margin 
that takes into account this specific market situation.   

In  the  OEM  segment,  ARW  purchasers  (which  are  carmakers)  typically  place  their 
orders pursuant to tender proceedings. It was therefore found appropriate to calculate 
the underselling margin on the basis of the prices identified from the data submitted 
by EU producers and Chinese exporters when they compete for such tenders.  

When calculating the amount of duty necessary to remove the effects of the injurious 
dumping,  it  was  considered  that  any  measures  should  allow  the  Union  industry  to 
cover  its  costs  of  production  and  achieve  a  reasonable  profit.  Further,  it  was 
considered that a reasonable profit before tax that could be reasonably achieved by 
an industry of this type under normal conditions of competition, i.e. in the absence of 
dumped  imports,  on  sales  of  the  like  product  in  the  Union  should  be  assessed  by 
reference  to  the  profitability  achieved  in  2006  which  amounted  to  +  3,2  %,  a  year 
where  the  volume  of  imports  from  China  was  still  relatively  low.  On  this  basis,  a 
non- injurious price was calculated for the Union industry for the like product.  This 
resulted in an injury margin of 22,3%. 

Definitive anti-dumping measures were imposed in October 2010 at a rate of 22,3%.    

Ironing Boards (Since Hardware) originating in the People's Republic of China  

 Following  an  anti-dumping  investigation  concerning  imports  of  ironing  boards 
originating  in  the  People’s  Republic  of  China  (‘PRC’)  and  Ukraine  (‘the  first 
investigation’), anti-dumping measures were imposed in April 2007. At that time the 
rate of the definitive anti-dumping duty imposed on ironing boards produced by the 
Chinese  exporting  producer  Since  Hardware  (Guangzhou)  Co.,  Ltd.  (‘Since 
Hardware’) was 0 % while it ranged between 18,1 % and 38,1 % for other Chinese 
exporting  producers.  Following  a  subsequent  interim  review  these  duty  rates  were 
increased to up to 42,3 % in March 2010 amending the original definitive regulation.  

In October 2009, the Commission initiated an anti-dumping investigation pursuant to 
Article 5 of the basic Regulation concerning imports into the Union of ironing boards 

EN 

33 

   EN 

 
originating  in  the  PRC,  limited  to  Since  Hardware.  The  anti-dumping  investigation 
was  initiated  following  a  complaint  lodged  on  20  August  2009  by  three  Union 
producers, representing a major proportion of the total Union production of ironing 
boards.  

The new anti-dumping investigation based on Article 5 of the basic Regulation was 
initiated  against  Since  Hardware  rather  than  an  interim  review  pursuant  to  Article 
11(3) of the basic Regulation, in the light of the WTO Appellate Body report entitled 
‘Mexico  —  Definitive  Anti-dumping  Measures  on  Beef  and  Rice’  (AB-2005-6)  . 
That  report  stipulated  that  an  exporting  producer  not  found  to  be  dumping  in  an 
original  investigation  has  to  be  excluded  from  the  scope  of  the  definitive  measure 
imposed  as  a  result  of  such  investigation  and  cannot  be  made  subject  to 
administrative and changed circumstances reviews.  

Since Hardware argued that the Commission could not initiate a new anti-dumping 
investigation  based  on  Article  5  of  the  basic  Regulation  against  one  company  as  it 
thereby violated the general principle enshrined in GATT Article VI and the WTO 
Anti-dumping  Agreement  (WTO  ADA)  as  well as that in the basic Regulation that 
anti-dumping  proceedings  are  directed  against  imports  of  countries  and  not  of 
individual companies. 

However  it  was  considered  that  none  of  the  provisions  of  the  basic  Regulation 
excluded the opening of a new anti-dumping investigation based on Article 5 of the 
basic Regulation against one company. It was also considered that EU must, so far as 
possible,  be  interpreted  in  a  manner  that  is  consistent  with  international  law,  in 
particular  where  the  provisions  concerned  are  intended  to  give  effect  to  an 
international  agreement  concluded  by  the  Union.  Since  the  WTO  ADA  on  the  one 
hand allows WTO members to impose duties to counteract harmful dumping, but on 
the other hand was interpreted by  the Appellate Body  in the  WTO Appellate Body 
report  as  not  allowing  reviews  of  companies  found  not  to  be  dumping  during  an 
original investigation, the basic Regulation must therefore be interpreted to allow the 
Union to open an investigation based on Article 5 of the basic Regulation against an 
individual company in circumstances such as the ironing boards case presented. 

The investigation of dumping and price undercutting covered the period from 1 July 
2008 to 30 June 2009 (the ‘investigation period’ or ‘IP’). The examination of import 
volumes  of  Since  Hardware  products  relevant  for  the  assessment  of  injury  covered 
the  period  from  1  January  2006  to  the  end  of  the  IP.    However,  given  that  another 
original investigation concerning the same product and country took place only some 
years beforehand, and because the duties resulting from that investigation were still 
in  place,  in  the  injury  analysis  reference  to  the  investigation  period  of  that  earlier 
investigation was also made. 

There were no provisional measures imposed in this case.  

Dumping 

Since  Hardware  requested  market  economy  treatment  (‘MET’)  or  individual 
treatment  (‘IT’)  in  case  MET  was  not  granted.    The  company  did  not  fulfil  all  the 
criteria for MET but did qualify for IT.   In cases concerning non-market economies 
normal value is normally based on data from an analogue country. However, given 

EN 

34 

   EN 

 
the lack of co-operation from any producers in third countries it was decided to use 
data from co-operating Union producers to establish  normal value.   The export price 
was based on prices paid for exports of the product by Since Hardware. The normal 
value and export price were compared on an ex-works basis with allowances made 
for differences in factors which were claimed and demonstrated to affect prices and 
price  comparability  including    transport  costs,  insurance,  handling  charges,  credit 
costs and indirect taxes.   This revealed dumping of 51,7%. 

Injury 

A full analysis of injury in respect of all imports of ironing boards originating, inter 
alia, in the PRC was already carried out in the framework of the first investigation. 
Indeed,  in  that  investigation  the  Commission  established  that  dumped  imports  of 
ironing  boards  originating,  inter  alia,  in  the  PRC  had  caused  material  injury  to  the 
Union  industry.  These  findings  were  based  on  an  assessment  of  the  effects  of  all 
imports  originating  in  the  PRC  and  Ukraine,  with  the  sole  exclusion  of  imports  of 
ironing boards produced by Since Hardware which had been found to be sold at non-
dumped prices.  

As a result, during the IP in the second case, anti-dumping duties were applicable to 
all imports from those countries (only Since Hardware was subject to a zero duty). 
As  the  Union  industry  was  already  protected  against  the  harmful  effects  of  these 
imports  during  the  IP,  it  was  impossible  to  perform  a  normal  full  injury  analysis. 
Therefore,  a  specific  approach  was  developed  with  focus  on  particular  injury 
indicators.  In  particular  the  analysis  focussed  on  whether  Since  Hardware  had 
undercut the EU prices and what was the profitability of those prices.   

The  average  undercutting  margin  found  for  Since  Hardware,  expressed  as  a 
percentage  of  the  Union  industry’s  price,  is  16,1  %.    Over  the  period  considered, 
Since  Hardware’s  exports  to  the  Union  increased  strongly,  by  64  %.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  imports  of  other  Chinese  and  Ukrainian  producers  have  constantly 
decreased following the imposition of provisional duties in 2006. 

Causation 

It was concluded that imports of ironing boards from Since Hardware caused injury 
to the Union producers given it offered its products, during the IP, at heavily dumped 
prices which strongly undercut the Union industry’s prices. As a result, it succeeded 
to sell quantities during the IP which were much higher than, for instance, in 2005 or 
2006. It was concluded that no factor existed that could break the causal link between 
the dumped imports from Since Hardware and their contribution to injury which was 
found. 

Anti-Dumping duty 

When calculating the amount of duty necessary to remove the effects of the injurious 
dumping,  it  was  considered  that  any  measures  should  allow  the  Union  industry  to 
cover its costs and obtain a profit before tax that could be reasonably achieved in the 
absence of dumped imports. The pre-tax profit margin used for this calculation was 7 
% of turnover as  it was demonstrated in the course of the first investigation that this 
was  the  profit  level  that  could  reasonably  be  expected  in  the  absence  of  injurious 

EN 

35 

   EN 

 
dumping.    This  resulted  in  an  injury  elimination  level  of  35,8%.    Definitive  anti-
dumping  measures  at  that  level  were  imposed  on  ironing  boards  from  Since 
Hardware  in  December  2010  to  be  effective  until  April  2012  which  is  the  normal 
expiry date of the anti-dumping measures on the same product originating in China.      

Polyethylene  terephthalate  (PET)  originating  in  Iran,  Pakistan  and  UAE  –  Anti-
subsidy measures 

An anti-subsidy complaint was lodged by the Polyethylene Terephthalate Committee 
of  Plastics  Europe  in  July  2009  regarding  imports  of    certain  polyethylene 
terephthalate originating in Iran, Pakistan and United Arab Emirates (UAE).  Prior to 
the  initiation  of  an  investigation    the  respective  Governments  were  invited  for 
consultations  with  the  aim  of  clarifying  the  situation  as  regards  the  contents  of  the 
complaint and arriving at a mutually agreed solution. All the Governments accepted 
the offer of consultations and consultations were subsequently held. However during 
the  consultations,  no  mutually  agreed  solution  was  foundt.      An  investigation  was 
subsequently initiated in September 2009.  A parallel anti-dumping investigation on 
the  same  product  originating  in  the  same  countries  was  also  initiated  on  the  same 
date. 
imposed 
simultaneously  in  June  2010  on  imports  of  the  product  concerned  from  the  three 
countries subject to the proceedings.  

  Provisional  anti-subsidy  and  anti-dumping  measures  were 

The  investigation  of  subsidisation  covered  the  period  from  1  July  2008  to  30  June 
2009  (IP).  The  examination  of  trends  relevant  for  the  assessment  of  injury  covered 
the  period  from  1  January  2006  to  the  end  of  the  IP.  The  product  concerned  was 
polyethylene  terephthalate  which  for  the  purposes  of  the  investigation  was 
subdivided  into  different  product  types  according  to  different  viscosity  numbers 
given  the  viscosity  number  was  essential  to  determine  the  different  possible 
applications of the PET type produced.  

Subsidisation 

Iran 

There  were  two  schemes  investigated  which  allegedly  involved  the  granting  of 
subsidies  by  the  Iranian  Government  i.e.  Measures  connected  to  Special  Economic 
Zones  (‘SEZs’)  –  Petrochemical  SEZ  and  Financing  from  National  Petrochemical 
Company to the PET exporting producer. Both schemes were deemed to be specific 
and countervailable under Article 4(4)(a) of the basic Regulation with the amount of 
countervailable  subsidies  being  calculated  at  51,88%  for  the  one  co-operating 
exporter. 

Pakistan 

There  were  seven  schemes  investigation  concerning  Pakistan  which  allegedly 
involved the granting of subsidies, these were: Manufacturing Bond Scheme; Imports 
of  plant,  machinery  and  equipment  in  Manufacturing  Bond;    Tariff  protection  on 
purchases  of  PTA  in  the  domestic  market;  Final  Tax  Regime  (FTR);  Export  Long-
Term Fixed Rate Financing Scheme (LTF-EOP);  Export Finance Scheme from the 
State Bank of Pakistan (EFS);(VII) Finance under F.E. Circular No 25 of the State 
  All  seven  schemes  were  deemed  to  be  specific  and 
Bank  of  Pakistan. 

EN 

36 

   EN 

 
countervailable  under  Article  4(4)(a)  of  the  basic  Regulation  with  the  amount  of 
countervailable  subsidies  being  calculated  at  5.15%  for  the  one  co-operating 
exporter. 

UAE 

There  were  two  schemes  investigated  which  allegedly  involved  the  granting  of 
subsidies by the UAE Government. These were: Federal Law No 1 of 1979 and  Free 
Trade Zone (FTZ).   Both schemes were deemed to be specific and countervailable 
under  Article  4(4)(a)  of  the  basic  Regulation  with  the  amount  of  countervailable 
subsidies being calculated at 5.13% for the one co-operating exporter. 

Injury 

12 Union producers cooperated with the investigation representing more than 80 % 
of  the  total  Union  production  of  PET.  Given  the  large  number  of  companies 
sampling was used and six companies selected for the sample.  For the purposes of 
the  injury  assessment,  the  imports  from  the  three  countries  were  cumulated  in 
accordance with the basic Regulation. The volume of these subsidised imports of the 
product concerned into the EU rose by more than 5 times between 2006 and the IP 
reaching 304 202 tonnes in the IP. The market share held by the  subsidised imports 
from the countries concerned stood at 2,1 % during 2006 and increased to 10,2 % in 
the IP.  At the same time the average import prices decreased by 14 % in the period 
considered  with  the  sharpest  decline  between  2008  and  the  IP.  These  low  prices 
undercut the EU's prices by 3,2 % overall and on an individual basis as follows; UAE 
- 3,9 %, Iran - 3,2 % and Pakistan - 1,4 %.  

As regards injury, macroeconomic data showed that the Union producers decreased 
their production and sales during the period considered.  Union production decreased 
by 4 % between 2006 and the IP.  While the decrease was not dramatic as such, it 
was  examined  in  the  context  of  the  increase  in  demand.  During  the  period 
considered,  the  Union  producers  lost  10  percentage  points  of  market  share,  which 
decreased from 85 % in 2006 to 75 % in the IP. This loss of market share reflects the 
fact that, despite an increase in consumption, the Union industry’s sales dropped by 3 
% in the period considered. At the same time the relevant microeconomic indicators 
showed  a  clear  deterioration  of  the  economic  situation  of  the  sampled  Union 
producers. The profitability and return on investment remained negative and overall 
declined further between 2006 and the IP. The cash flow, despite an overall positive 
development, also remained negative in the IP.  The employment level of the Union 
producers  also  showed    a  decrease  of  15  %  between  2006  and  the  IP.    It  was 
therefore  concluded  that  the  Union  industry  suffered  material  injury  within  the 
meaning of Article 8(4) of the basic Regulation  

Causation 

The increased imports from the countries concerned at subsidised prices were found 
to have exerted a downward pressure on prices, preventing the Union industry from 
keeping its sales prices to a level that would have been necessary to cover its costs 
and  to  realise  a  profit.    As  a  result  it  was  considered  that  a  causal  link  existed 
between  those  imports  and  the  injury  suffered  by  the  EU.    Other  factors  were  also 
analysed  but  were  found  not  to  break  the  causal  link  between  the  effects  of  the 

EN 

37 

   EN 

 
subsidised  imports  and  the  injury  suffered  by  the  Union  industry.    These  factors 
included  imports  from  other  sources  (found  to  be  decreasing  in  volume  and 
increasing in price), the export performance of the Union industry, competition from 
the  other  Union  producers,  the  economic  downturn,  the  geographical  location  and 
lack of vertical integration, none of which were found to contributed to the injury of 
the  Union  industry  to  an  extent  that  would  break  the  causal  link.  It  was  however 
acknowledged that mports from the Republic of Korea may have contributed to the 
injury  suffered  by  the  Union  industry,  but the  small  price  difference  between  these 
imports  and  the  Union  market  prices  was  not  considered  to  break  the  causal  link 
established with the subsidised imports from the countries concerned.  

Union interest 

It was considered that that the imposition of measures on imports from the countries 
concerned would provide an opportunity for the Union industry, as well as the other 
Union  producers,  to  improve  their  situation  through  increased  sales  volumes,  sales 
prices  and  market  share.    While  it  was  acknowledged  that  some  negative  effects 
could  occur  in  the  form  of  cost  increases  for  users  (mainly  converters),  it  was 
considered that they would be likely to be outweighed by the expected benefits for 
the  producers  and  their  suppliers.      It  was  also  concluded  that  restoring  fair 
competition  and  maintaining  a  reasonable  price  level  in  the  EU  would  encourage 
PET recycling, thus, assisting in the protection of the environment.  As a result it was 
found  that  no  compelling  reasons  existed  for  not  imposing  measures  on  imports  of 
PET from the countries concerned. 

Measures 

Given the lesser duty rule i.e. that measures be imposed only at a level sufficient to 
eliminate the injury caused to the Union industry by the subsidised imports, without 
exceeding  the  subsidy  margin  found,  an  injury  elimination  level  was  calculated.   
This  was  done  on  the  basis  that  any  measures  should  allow  the  Union  industry  to 
cover  its  costs  of  production  and  obtain  overall  a  profit  before  tax  that  could  be 
reasonably  achieved  under  normal  conditions  of  competition,  i.e.  in  the  absence  of 
subsidised imports. 5 % was considered as the most appropriate target profit.  On this 
basis the injury elimination level was calculated as Iran - 17,0 %;  Pakistan - 15,2 % 
and UAE - 18,5 % .   

9.1.5. 

Investigations terminated without measures 

In accordance with the provisions of the respective basic Regulations, investigations 
may be terminated without the imposition of measures if a complaint is withdrawn or 
if measures are unnecessary (i.e. no dumping/no subsidies, no injury resulting there 
from, measures not in the interest of the EU). 

In  2010,  10  new  proceedings  (8  anti-dumping  and  2  anti-subsidy)  were  terminated 
without measures, compared to 11 in 2009 and 3 in 2008.  

The  alphabetical  list  of  cases  which  were  terminated  without  the  imposition  of 
measures during 2010 can be found below. More information can be obtained from 

EN 

38 

   EN 

 
 
the Official Journal to which reference is given in Annex E. 

Product (type of 
investigation19) 

Originating from  Main reason for termination 

Ring binder mechanisms 

Thailand 

Stainless steel fasteners 

Polyethylene terephthalate 
(PET) 

India 
Malaysia 

Iran 
Pakistan 
United Arab 
Emirates 

High tenacity yarn of 
polyesters 

Korea (Rep. of) 
Taiwan 

Stainless steel fasteners 
(AS) 

India 
Malaysia 

9.1.6.  Details on some individual cases 

Complaint withdrawn 

Complaint withdrawn 

No injury 
No dumping 
No dumping 

No dumping 

No dumping 

Complaint withdrawn 

Anti-dumping proceeding concerning Polyethylene terephthalate originating in Iran, 
Pakistan, UAE  

 In  September  2009,  the  Commission  initiated  an  anti-dumping  proceeding  on 
imports of certain polyethylene terephthalate (PET) originating in Iran, Pakistan and 
the  United  Arab  Emirates.    The  proceeding  was  initiated  following  a  complaint 
lodged  in  July  2009  by  the  Polyethylene  Terephthalate  Committee  of  Plastics 
Europe.  The  investigation  period  was  from  1  July  2008  to  30  June  with  the 
assessment of injury covering the period from 1 January 2006 to the end of the IP. In  
June 2010, the Commission imposed a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of 
the product originating in Iran and the United Arab Emirates.   The dumping  levels 
found at that stage for Pakistan were de minimus for the sole exporting producer in 
the country and therefore no provisional measures were imposed. 

In June 2010 in a parallel anti-subsidy proceeding concerning the same product from 
the  same  countries,  the  Commission  imposed  a  provisional  countervailing  duty  on 
imports of the product originating in Iran and the United Arab Emirates.  

Dumping 

Except for Iran, quarterly data was used in establishing the normal value and export 
price in this case. This was due to the considerable fluctuations in raw material costs 
and  PET  market  prices  observed  during  the  IP  .    For  each  of  the  three  countries 
concerned,  normal  value  was  based  on  the  actual  domestic  prices,  calculated  as  a 
weighted average of profitable sales.   Regarding export prices concerning Iran these 

19 

AD = anti-dumping investigation; AS = anti-subsidy investigation, AD + AS = parallel anti-dumping 
and anti-subsidy investigation. 

EN 

39 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
were  based  on    prices  from  of  a  related  importer  to  independent  customers  in  the 
Union.    Exports  from  Pakistan    and  the  UAE  were  made  directly  to  independent 
customers in the Union and therefore the export prices were established on the basis 
of the prices actually paid or payable by these independent customers for the product 
concerned. 

The normal values and the export prices of the countries concerned were compared 
on  an  ex-works  basis.    Where  necessary,  in  order    to  ensure  a  fair  comparison,  
allowance  in  the  form  of  adjustments  were  made  for  differences  affecting  price 
comparability  in  accordance  with  Article  2(10)  of  the  basic  Regulation.    These 
adjustments  included  differences  in  import  charges,  discounts,  rebates,  transport, 
insurance,  handling,  loading  and  ancillary  costs,  packing  costs,  credit  costs,  after-
sales costs (technical assistance and services), commissions, and other factors (bank 
charges.  The  Iranian  exporting  producer  submitted  a  claim  regarding  the  alleged 
impact  of  the  international  sanctions  against  Iran.  However,  the  Iranian  exporting 
producer  was  unable  to  quantify  the  alleged  impact  of  the  sanctions  in  a  way  that 
could be supported by any evidence. As a result it was concluded that there were no 
grounds  to  make  an  allowance  in  the  form  of  an  adjustment  for  the  impact  of 
sanctions on Iran.  

The dumping margins calculated expressed as a percentage of the CIF Union frontier 
price, duty unpaid, were 26.8% for Iran and  0.6% for both Pakistan and UAE, the 
latter two being below de minimis according to the basic Regulation.   

Injury 

Given that the dumping found for both Pakistan and UAE was de minimis there was 
no cumulation of imports for the purposes of injury.  As regards the dumped imports 
from  Iran  these  more  than  doubled  between  2006  and  2007  and  between  2006  and 
the  IP  by  over  350%.    The  market  share  of  the  imports  from  Iran  increased  from 
0.4%  in  2006  to  1.9%  in  the  IP.    This  increase  in  imports  was  accompanied  by  a 
decrease in prices which undercut the Union producers by 3.2%.  The analysis of the 
macroeconomic data show that the Union producers decreased their production and 
sales during the period considered. Although it was found to be not dramatic as such, 
when seen in the context of increased demand between 2006 and the IP, it resulted in 
the Union producers’ market share dropping by 10 percentage points to 75 %.  

The relevant microeconomic indicators showed a clear deterioration of the economic 
situation of the sampled Union producers in the period. The profitability and return 
on investment remained negative and they overall declined further between 2006 and 
the  IP.  The  cash  flow,  despite  an  overall  positive  development,  also  remained 
negative  in  the  IP.      It  was  therefore  concluded  that  the  Union  industry  suffered 
material injury within the meaning of Article 3(5) of the basic Regulation.  

Causation 

In  the  parallel  anti-subsidy  proceeding,  the  cumulated  subsidised  imports  from 
Pakistan,  the  UAE  and  Iran  were  found  to  cause  material  injury  to  the  Union 
industry.  However it was also acknowledged in that investigation that the low prices 
of imports from Korea and Pakistan also contributed to a certain extent to the injury 
suffered  by  the  Union  industry.    In  addition  it  was  found  that  in  the  anti-dumping 

EN 

40 

   EN 

 
investigation, considerable imports from the UAE were also undercutting the Union 
industry  prices.      In  this  context  it  was  also  found  that  that  the  undercutting 
established  for  the  Iranian  producer  was  in  fact  lower  than  in  the  case  of  the  non-
dumped imports from the UAE.  It was also noted that the market share of the Iranian 
imports was below 1 % in 2006 and in 2007 and in the IP it was only close to 2 %, 
corresponding  to  55  000  t.    It  was  therefore  concluded  while  dumped  imports 
originating in Iran had some negative impact on the situation of the Union industry, 
this  impact,  taken  in  isolation,  did  not  exist  to  a  degree  that  it  could  be  classed  as 
material.   

It was therefore concluded that in light of the de minimis dumping from Pakistan and 
UAE as well as the lack of material injury resulting from the dumped Iranian PET, 
the case should be terminated. A notice terminating the investigation was published 
in September 2010.  

9.2. 

Review investigations 

9.2.1.  Expiry reviews 

Article  11(2)  and  Article  18  of  the  basic  Regulations  provide  for  the  expiry  of 
measures after five years, unless an expiry review demonstrates that they should be 
maintained in their original form. 

In  2010,  14  anti-dumping  measures  and  0  anti-subsidy  measure  expired 
automatically. The references for these measures are set out in Annex N. 

Since the expiry (or "sunset") provision of the basic Regulations came into force in 
1985, a total of 452 measures have been allowed to expire automatically. 

9.2.1.1.  Initiations 

During 2010, 14 expiry review investigations were initiated, all anti-dumping cases. 
It  should  be  noted  that  investigations  initiated  after  20  March  2004  are  under 
deadline, i.e. conclusions should be reached within 12 months but not later than 15 
months from the date of initiation. 

The alphabetical list of these cases can be found below, together with the name of the 
complainant.  It  should  be  noted  that  some  expiry  reviews  may  be  carried  out  in 
parallel with interim reviews, which allow the amendment of the duty rates. In such 
case, these reviews are marked with an asterisk. More information can be obtained 
from the Official Journal to which reference is given in Annex F.   

Product (type of 
investigation20) 
Polyester staple fibres 

Furfuraldehyde 

Originating from  Complainant 

P.R. China 

P.R. China 

 European Man-made Fibres 
Association (CIRFS)  
 Lenzing AG and Tanin Sevnica 

20 

A = anti-dumping investigation; AS = anti-subsidy investigation, AD + AS = parallel anti-dumping and 
anti-subsidy investigation. 

EN 

41 

   EN 

 
 
 
                                                 
Antibiotics (broad spectrum) 
(AS) 

India 

Bicycles 

P.R. China 

Barium carbonate 

Hand pallet trucks and their 
essential parts 
Castings 

P.R. China 

P.R. China 

P.R. China 

Trichloroisocyanuric acid 

P.R. China 

Magnesia bricks 

Steel ropes and cables 

Stainless steel fasteners and 
parts thereof 

P.R. China 

P.R. China 
South Africa 
Ukraine 

P.R. China 
Taiwan 

kemicna industrija d.d.  

 DSM, and Sandoz  

 European Bicycle 
Manufacturers Association 
(EBMA) 

 Solvay  &  CPC  Barium 
Strontium GmbH & Co. KG  
 BT Products AB and Lifter S.r.l 

 Eurofonte,  acting  on  behalf  of 
seven  of  its  members,  and  by 
Fundiciones de Odena  
 European  Chemical 
Council (CEFIC)  
 Magnesia  Bricks  Production 
Defence Coalition (MBPDC)  
 Liaison Committee of EU Wire 
Rope Industries (EWRIS)  

Industry 

 European  Industrial  Fasteners 
Institute (EIFI)  

9.2.1.2.  Reviews concluded with confirmation of duties 

During 2010, 10 expiry reviews were concluded with confirmation of the duties for a 
further five years.  

The  alphabetical  list  of  the  cases  which  were  concluded  with  confirmation  of  duty 
during 2010, together with the result of the investigation, can be found below. More 
information can be obtained from the Official Journal to which reference is given in 
Annex F. 

Product 

Originating from 

Ethanolamines 

USA 

Ring binder 
mechanisms 

P.R. China 

Result of the investigation/ Type21 
and level of measure 

Continuation  of  the  meaures  in  place 
for a further period of 2 years/ AD 
Continued imposition of measure for a 
further 5 years ranging from 32,5 % to 
39,4 % for certain RBMs and ranging 
between    51,2  %  to  78,8  %  for  other 
types of RBMs/AD.   

Silicon * 

P.R. China 

Duties  continued  for  a  further  period 

21 

AD = anti-dumping duty, CVD = countervailing duty, UT = undertaking. 

EN 

42 

   EN 

 
  
 
 
 
                                                 
Sodium cyclamate 

P.R. China 
Indonesia 

Ammonium nitrate 

Ukraine 

Polyethylene 
terephthalate (PET) 

P.R. China 

Graphite electrode 
systems 

Graphite electrode 
systems (AS) 

India 

India 

Synthetic fibre ropes 

India 

9.2.1.3   Details on some individual cases  

of  5  years.  Reduction  in  the  level  of 
imposed  from 
anti-dumping  duties 
49% to 19%/ AD 

Continuation  of  the  meaures  in  place 
for a further period of 5 years/ AD 

Continuation  of  the  meaures  in  place 
for a further period of 5 years/ AD 

Measures continued for further period 
of 5 Years /AD 

Measures continued for further period 
of 5 Years /AD 

Measures continued for further period 
of 5 Years /AS 

Measures continued for further period 
of 5 Years /AS 

Ammonium Nitrate originating in Peoples Republic of China (PRC)  

In  January  2001,  the  EC  imposed,  definitive  anti-dumping  duties  on  imports  of 
ammonium  nitrate  (‘AN’)  originating,  inter  alia,  in  Ukraine.  Following  the 
imposition  of  these    original  measures  an  interim  review,  concluded  in  May  2004 
resulted in the acceptance of undertakings from a number of exporters while another 
partial  interim  review,  concluded  in  June  2005,  resulted  in  the  measures  being 
extended to AN when incorporated into other fertilizers. Following an expiry review, 
concluded  in  June  2007,  the  EU  decided  to  prolong  the  existing  measures  for  a 
period of two years.  

In  April  2009,  following  a  request  from  the  European  Fertilizer  Manufacturers 
Association (EFMA), the EU initiated an expiry review  of the measures on imports 
of AN originating in Ukraine (‘the country concerned’. 

The investigation of continuation or recurrence of dumping covered the period from 
1  April  2008  to  31  March  2009  (‘review  investigation  period’  or  ‘RIP’),  while  the  
continuation or recurrence of injury was examined over the period from 2005 to the 
end of the RIP. 

Owing to the large number of EU producers willing to cooperate, sampling was used 
for  the  EU  producers.  Five  Union  producers,  accounting  for  57  %  of  the  total 
production  of  the  Union  industry  during  the  RIP,  were  selected  for  the  sample.  
Three Ukrainian exporting producers cooperated in the investigation accounting for 
more  than  90  %  of  all  Union  imports  from  Ukraine  during  the  RIP.  The  level  of 
cooperation was therefore considered to be high.  

Recurrence of Dumping 

EN 

43 

   EN 

 
In  the  previous  expiry  review,  Ukraine  was  not  yet  considered  a  market  economy 
country  and  as  a  result  the  normal  value  was  based  on  data  obtained  from  an 
analogue country, the USA.  

In the  present review,  normal value  was based on data obtained and verified at the 
premises of the three cooperating exporting producers in Ukraine. It was found that 
apart from one product type exported by one producer, domestic sales were made in 
the ordinary course of trade during the RIP. Normal value was therefore established 
either  based  on  the  price  paid  or  payable  on  the  domestic  market  in  Ukraine  and 
based  on  constructed  normal  value  for  the  product  type  not  sold  in  the  ordinary 
course  of  trade.  In  the  latter  case,  normal  value  was  constructed  by  adding  to  the 
manufacturing costs of the exported type a reasonable amount of selling, general and 
administrative expenses (SG&A) and a reasonable margin of profit.  

As regards gas costs, it was found that Ukraine was importing the majority of the gas 
consumed  in  the  production  of  AN  from  Russia.  The  data  indicated  that  Ukraine 
imported natural gas from Russia at a price which was during the RIP, around 40 % 
below the price of natural gas from Russia when exported to the Union. However, it 
was found that in the last quarter of the RIP the prices were similar. In spite of the 
apparently distorted gas prices there was no adjustment for these costs to the normal 
value of the Ukrainian producers as it was clear that dumping took place during the 
RIP. Given that the purpose of the expiry review was to determine whether dumping 
would be likely to continue or recur should measures be repealed, it was considered 
that  it  was  not  necessary  to  examine  whether  an  adjustment  under  the  Basic 
Regulation was justified in this case.  

The  export  price  was  established  by  reference  to  the  price  actually  paid  or  payable 
for  the  product  concerned  when  exported  to  the  Community  with  all  sales  of  the 
three cooperating exporting producers made directly to independent customers in the 
Union.   

The  normal  value  and  export  price  were  compared  on  an  ex-works  basis.  For  the 
purpose of ensuring a fair comparison, due allowance in the form of adjustments was 
made  for  the  differences  affecting  price  comparability  including  for  transport, 
handling,  loading  and  ancillary  costs,  insurance,  commissions  and  packing.    This 
resulted  in  a  weighted  average  dumping  margin  of  6-7  %  for  the  three  cooperating 
exporting producers concerned.  

Injury and likelihood of recurrence of injury  

The  investigation  found  that  between  2005  and  the  RIP,  most  injury  indicators 
developed  positively:  unit  sales  prices  and  profitability  improved  substantially,  the 
latter reaching a level of 28,1 % during the RIP. Investments, return on investment 
and  cash-flow  also  evolved  positively.      While  production  and  sales  volumes 
decreased  considerably  over  the  period  considered,  this  was  in  the  context  of  a 
shrinking Union market in the order of minus 10 %.  Overall, the investigation found 
that the situation of the Union industry had improved significantly as compared to its 
situation  prior  to  the  imposition  of  the  anti-dumping  measures  on  imports  of  AN 
from Ukraine in 2001.  

EN 

44 

   EN 

 
In  the  context  of  the  likelihood  of  recurrence  of  injury,  two  main  issues  were 
analysed: (i) the likely export volumes and prices in Ukraine and (ii) the likely effect 
of projected volumes and prices from Ukraine on the EU market.   The investigation 
found that there was a known spare capacity of around 650 thousand tonnes available 
for the cooperating Ukrainian producers, representing 9 % of the Union market. This 
surplus  of  capacity  showed  that  Ukrainian  producers  would  have  the  possibility  to 
quickly increase their production and therefore their exports of AN. It was found that 
the  Ukrainian  domestic  market  was  relatively  small  and  therefore  Ukrainian 
producers are heavily dependent on exports to third countries. It was considered that, 
should the measures be allowed to lapse, a considerable part of the volumes exported 
to third countries would be directed toward the EU. The proximity of the EU market 
would  also  increase  the  likelihood  of  a  redirection  of  current  exports  by  Ukrainian 
producers from third countries to the Union.  As a result, it was considered that was 
likely that significant volumes of AN produced in Ukraine would be redirected to the 
Union market at dumped prices substantially undercutting Union industry’s prices, if 
the  measures  were  allowed  to  lapse.  This  in  turn  would,  in  all  likelihood,  have  the 
effect  of  introducing  a  price-depressive  trend  on  the  market,  with  an  expected 
negative impact on the economic situation of the Union industry. This would impede 
the  financial  recovery  that  was  achieved  during  the  period  considered,  leading  to  a 
recurrence of injury.  

Union interest 

As  regards  the  EU  producers  it  was  considered  the  removal  of  measures  would  be 
likely to result in increased imports at dumped prices from Ukraine thereby causing 
injury to the Union industry by exerting a downward pressure on sale prices which 
will negatively affect its currently positive financial situation.  It was concluded that 
the maintenance of the measures will allow the EU producers to further recover by 
maintaining and stabilising its profitability .  There was a lack of cooperation from 
importers  and  therefore  no  reliable  information  available  indicating  that  the 
maintenance of the measures will have a significant negative effect on importers or 
traders.   As regards users, in this case farmers, the original investigation  concluded 
that given the small incidence of AN on the farmers’ activity, any increase in these 
costs was unlikely to have a significant adverse effect on them.  In this investigation 
two  farmer  associations  submitted  comments  requesting  the  termination  of  the 
measures  arguing  that  ony  the  free  choice  of  AN  suppliers  could  prevent  prices  of 
farm  products  from  increasing  substantially.  However  it  was  concluded  that  the 
continuation  of  the  anti-  dumping  measures  would  not  prevent  users  from  freely 
choosing  their  AN  suppliers,  but  would  maintain  a  fair  level  playing  field  in  the 
Union  market  where  effective  competition  would  be  enhanced.  As  a  result  it  was 
concluded that the continuation of the anti-dumping measures against Ukraine were 
in the Union interest. It was decided to limit the maintenance of the measures to two 
years. A notice to that effect was published in the Official Journal in June 2010.     

Graphite electrode systems originating in the India  (anti-subsidy) 

In  September  2009,  the  Commission  initiated  an  expiry  review  of  the  anti-subsidy 
measures  in  place  on  imports  of  certain  graphite  electrode  systems  originating  in 
India, following a request received from  there Union producers of the like product: 
Graftech International, SGL Carbon GmbH, and Tokai ERFTCARBON GmbH. The 
request was based on the grounds that the expiry of the measures would be likely to 

EN 

45 

   EN 

 
result  in  a  continuation  or  recurrence  of  subsidisation  and  injury  to  the  Union 
industry.  

Prior to the initiation of the expiry review, and in accordance with Articles 22(1) and 
10(7) of the basic Regulation, the Commission invited the Government of India for 
consultations  with  the  aim  of  clarifying  the  situation  as  regards  the  contents  of  the 
review request and arriving at a mutually agreed solution. Consultations were held in 
September 2009. However, no mutually agreed solution could be reached.  

Only  one  of  the  two  known  exporting  producers  in  India,  namely  HEG  Limited 
(‘HEG’),  fully  cooperated  in  the  review  by  submitting  a  response  to  the 
questionnaire.  

Likelihood of recurrence of subsidisation 

During  the  expiry  review  the  following  four  schemes,  which  allegedly  involve  the 
granting of subsidies, were investigated:  Nationwide schemes covered  (a) Advance 
Authorisation Scheme (‘AAS’); (b) Duty Entitlement Passbook Scheme (‘DEPBS’) 
and  (c)  Export  Promotion  Capital  Goods  Scheme  (‘EPCGS’);  Regional  Scheme 
covered (d) Electricity Duty Exemption Scheme (‘EDES’).  

With  regard  to  the  first  scheme  mentioned  above,    Advance  Authorisation  Scheme 
(‘AAS’) the investigation found that the cooperating Indian producer did not obtain 
any benefits under the AAS scheme during the RIP. It was therefore not necessary to 
further  analyse  this  scheme  in  this  investigation.    For  the  remaining  three  schemes 
the investigation found these were all countervailable and specific in accordance with 
the basic Regulation.  

The  amount  of  countervailable  subsidies  determined  in  accordance  with  the 
provisions  of  the  basic  Regulation,  expressed  ad  valorem,  for  the  investigated 
exporting producer amounted to 7,1 %.  The investigation found that during the RIP, 
the  cooperating  exporting  producer  continued  to  benefit  from  countervailable 
subsidies from the Indian authorities. The subsidy schemes analysed were also found 
to give recurring benefits with no indications that the programmes would be phased 
out or modified in the foreseeable future or that the cooperating exporting producer 
would  stop  obtaining  benefits  under  these  schemes.        As  regards  the  other  known 
exporting producer in India, according to the review request, it continued to benefit 
from  the  subsidy  schemes  investigated  in  the  review.  There  was  no  information 
available which would indicate that this was not the case and so it was concluded that 
the  subsidisation  at  country-wide  level  also  continued.  Given  that  the  investigation 
showed that subsidisation continued during the RIP and that was likely to continue in 
the future, the issue of likelihood of recurrence of subsidisation was irrelevant.   

Injury and likelihood of recurrence of injury 

The following three groups of producers, representing over 90 % of the total Union 
production  of  certain  graphite  electrode  systems,  cooperated  in  the  investigation: 
Graftech International, SGL Carbon GmbH, and Tokai ERFTCARBON GmbH.   

The  investigation  showed  that  the  volume  of  imports  from  the  country  concerned 
more than doubled between 2006 and the RIP. Given that consumption declined by 

EN 

46 

   EN 

 
almost 25 % over the same period, this resulted in a sharp rise in the market share 
held by Indian exporters from around 1,5 % in 2006 to around 5 % during the RIP 
with  the  EU's  market  share  down  by  15,9  percentage  points  between  2006  and  the 
RIP.  While  Indian  export  prices  to  the  Union  increased  considerably  during  the 
period  considered  as  an  effect  of  generally  high  market  prices,  they  were  still 
undercutting  the  prices  of  the  Union  industry.  Between  2006  and  the  RIP,  and 
notwithstanding  the  existence  of  the  anti-dumping  and  countervailing  measures,  a 
number of important indicators developed negatively: production and sales volumes 
decreased by 29 % and 39 % respectively, capacity utilisation went down by 28 % 
and  was  followed  by  a  decrease  in  employment  and  productivity  levels.    It  was 
concluded  that  the  Union  industry’s  situation  deteriorated  overall  during  the  period 
considered  and  that  the  Union  industry  was  in  a  fragile  situation  at  the  end  of  the 
RIP, despite a relatively high level of profit at that stage, when its efforts to maintain 
sales  volumes  and  a  sufficient  level  of  prices,  in  a  situation  of  weakened  demand, 
were  hampered  by  the  increased  presence  of  the  Indian  subsidised  imports.    It  was 
therefore concluded that the repeal of the measures would, in all likelihood, result in 
a worsening of the EU's industry situation, and a recurrence of material injury .  

Union interest 

None of the nine unrelated importers that were contacted came forward to cooperate. 
It was recalled that, in the original investigation, it was found that the impact of the 
imposition of measures would not be significant for the users.  In any event despite 
the  existence  of  measures  for  5  years,  importers/users  in  the  Union  continued  to 
source  their  supply,  inter  alia,  from  India.  There  was  no  information  provided  to 
show  that  there  have  been  difficulties  in  finding  other  sources.  It  was  also 
highlighted  that,  it  was  concluded  in  the  original  investigation  that,  given  the 
negligible  incidence  of  the  cost  of  graphite  electrodes  on  user  industries,  any  cost 
increase  was  unlikely  to  have  a  significant  effect  on  the  user  industry.    It  was 
therefore  concluded  that  it  was  not  against  the  EU  interest  to  maintain  the  existing 
measures.  

9.2.1.3.  Reviews concluded by termination 

During 2010, 1 expiry review was concluded by termination.  

Glyphosate originating in the People's Republic of China. 

 Following  an  expiry  review  in  September  2004  the  EC  imposed  a  definitive  anti-
dumping duty on imports of glyphosate originating in the People’s Republic of China 
falling  within  CN  codes  ex  2931  00  99  and  ex  3808  93  27.  The  duty  had  been 
extended to imports of the product from Malaysia and Taiwan whether declared as 
originating in these countries or not. The rate of the anti-dumping duty was 29,9 %.  

In May 2009 Commission suspended the definitive anti-dumping duties for a period 
of 9 months which was further extended for a period of 1 year in February 2010.  

In  September  2009  the  Commission    initiated  an  expiry  review  of  the  measures 
following the receipt of a request the European Glyphosate Association  containing 
prima  facie  evidence  showing  that  the  expiry  of  the  measures  would  be  likely  to 
result in a continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury to the Union industry.  

EN 

47 

   EN 

 
In September 2010 the applicant formally withdrew its request.  In accordance with 
the basic Regulation, a proceeding may be terminated where a request for a review is 
withdrawn unless the termination would not be in the Union interest.  

In  view  of  the  fact  that  investigation  did  not  bring  to  light  any  considerations 
showing  that  termination  would  not  be  in  the  Union  interest  it  was  decided  to 
terminate the proceeding  .  Iterested parties were informed  and  invited  to  comment.  
However,  no  comments  were  received  to  change  the  decision.      It  was  therefore 
concluded  that  the  anti-dumping  expiry  review    should  be  terminated  and  the 
measures repealed.  A notice to that effect was published  in the Official Journal in 
December 2010. 

9.2.2. 

Interim reviews 

Article  11(3)  and  Article  19  of  the  basic  Regulations  provide  for  the  review  of 
measures  during their  period of  validity on the  initiative  of the Commission,  at the 
request of a Member State or, provided  that  at  least  one  year  has  elapsed  since  the 
imposition  of  the  definitive  measure,  following  a  request  containing  sufficient 
evidence  by  an  exporter,  an  importer  or  by  the  EU  producers.  In  carrying  out  the 
investigations,  it  is  being  considered,  inter  alia,  whether  the  circumstances  with 
regard to dumping/subsidization and injury have changed significantly. Reviews can 
be limited to dumping/subsidization or injury aspects. 

During  2010,  a  total  of  12  interim  reviews  were  initiated  (10  anti-dumping  and  2 
anti-subsidy). 9 interim reviews were concluded with confirmation or amendment of 
duty and none were concluded by terminating the measures. The alphabetical list of 
cases  which  were  concluded  during  2010  by  confirming  or  amending  the  duties, 
together with the result of the investigation, can be found below. It should be noted 
that some interim reviews may be carried out in parallel with expiry reviews, which 
allow the amendment of the duty rates. In such case, these reviews are marked with 
an  asterisk.  More  information  can  be  obtained  from  the  Official  Journal  to  which 
reference is given in Annex G. 

Product 

Originating from 

Result of the investigation/ 
Type22  

Ironing boards 

P.R. China 

Silicon * 

P.R. China 

Ironing boards 

Ukraine 

PET (polyethylene 

India 

22 

AD = anti-dumping, AS = anti-subsidy, UT = undertaking. 

to 

39.6% 

Increase  in  the  level  of  AD 
measures 
for 
Guangzhou  Power  Team  and 
42.3% for 'All others'/AD 
Duties continued for a further 
period  of  5  years.  Reduction 
in  the  level  of  anti-dumping 
duties  imposed  from  49%  to 
19%/ AD 
Reduction in the level of anti-
dumping duties imposed from 
9.9% to 7%/ AD 
Reduction  in  the  level  of 

EN 

48 

   EN 

 
                                                 
terephthalate) film (AS) 

Trichloroisocyanuric acid 

P.R. China 

Tungsten electrodes 

Ammonium nitrate 

P.R. China 

Russia 

PET (polyethylene 
terephthalate) film AD/AS 

India 

CVD  duty  imposed  on  Jindal 
Poly  Films  Ltd    from  17.1% 
to  8.4%  -  No  change  in  the 
level  of  measures  for  'All 
others'/CVD 
Reduction in the level of anti-
dumping duties imposed from 
14.1% 
to  3.2%  for  Heze 
Huayi  Chemical  Co.  Limited 
/AD 
Review request withdrawn 

of 
offer 

investigation 
without 
revised 
from 

Review 
terminated 
acceptance 
undertaking 
applicant./AD 
Review 
investigation 
terminated  without  changing 
the 
the  product  scope  of 
measures/AD and AS 

9.2.2.4  Details on individual cases 

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film originating in India - AS 

In  December  1999,  the  EU  imposed  a  definitive  countervailing  duty  on  imports  of 
polyethylene  terephthalate  (PET)  film  originating  in  India.    These  measures  were 
extended  in  2006  after  an  expiry  review.    In  September  2007,  following  a  partial 
interim review the definitive countervailing duty imposed on Jindal , an Indian PET 
film  producer,  was  amended.  There  are  also  anti-dumping  measures  on  imports  of 
the same product also originating in India. Jindal Poly Films Limited is subject to an 
anti-dumping duty of 0 %.   

In  September  2009,  following  a  request  by  Jindal  Poly  Films  Limited,  the 
Commission initiated a partial interim review, limited to the level of subsidisation to 
the applicant, with a view to determining whether the measures should be removed 
or amended for the applicant.  

The partial interim review investigation also assessed the need to amend the rate of 
duty  applicable  to  imports  of  the  product  concerned  from  ‘all  other  companies’  in 
India,  i.e.  those  companies  not  individually  mentioned  in  the  Regulation  imposing 
measures.  

The investigation of the level of subsidisation covered the period from 1 April 2008 
to 31 March 2009 (‘review investigation period’ or ‘RIP’).  

Level of subsidisation 

EN 

49 

   EN 

 
 
On the basis of the information submitted by the Government of India,  and the other 
interested  parties  the  following  schemes  were  investigated:  Advance  Authorization 
Scheme    (AAS);  Duty  Entitlement  Passbook  Scheme;  Export  Promotion  Capital 
Goods Scheme; Export Credit Scheme and the regional scheme Package Scheme of 
Incentives (PSI).  

The  investigation  found  that  all  of  the  subsidy  schemes  investigated  were 
countervailable  in  accordance  with  the  basic  regulation  and  that  the  applicant  had 
benefited  in  the  RIP  from  them.  The  calculation  of  the  amount  of  countervailable 
subsidies for Jindal, expressed ad valorem, was found to be 8,4 % which represented 
a decrease in the level of subsidisation from the previous level of 17,1%.  

in  January  2009,  where 

interim  review  published 

The investigation also examined whether the changed circumstances with regard to 
the examined schemes could be considered to be of a lasting nature.  In this context it 
was  found  that  the  findings  in  this  partial  interim  review  were  in  line  with  the 
subsidy  amounts  established  for  five  Indian  PET  film  producers  in  the  an  earlier 
partial 
the  amount  of 
countervailable subsidies, expressed ad valorem, were found to be ranging from 5,4 
% to 8,6 %. This represented a certain constancy in the level of subsidisation existing 
in India for the product.  It was also found that the main benefit was conferred under 
the AAS and that the benefit under this scheme has dropped significantly during the 
RIP and this continued to be the case also after the RIP.  As a result it was concluded 
that there were indications Jindal would continue to receive subsidies in the future of 
an  amount  which  is  less  than  the  one  determined  in  the  previous  partial  interim 
review investigation.   As a result it was decided that the level of the measure should 
be amended to reflect the new findings.  

Regarding  the  rate  of  duty  applicable  to  imports  of  the  product  concerned  from 
exporting producers not individually mentioned in the existing Regulation imposing 
measures  it  was  considered  that  modalities  of  the  investigated  schemes  and  their 
countervailability had not changed with respect to the previous investigation.  As a 
result  there  was  no  recalculation  of  the  subsidy  amounts  and  duty  rates  of  these 
companies.    

A  regulation  amending  the  level  of  countervailing  duty  applied  to  Jindal  was 
published in the Official Journal in July 2010.   

Partial interim review Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film originating in India – AD/AS 

 In December 1999, the EU imposed a definitive countervailing duty on imports of 
polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film originating in India.  Following that in August 
2001  the  EU  imposed  a  definitive  anti-dumping  duty  on  imports  of  polyethylene 
terephthalate  (PET)  film  originating,  inter  alia,  in  India.    Following  expiry  review 
both the AD and CVD measures have been continued.  

In September 2009 the Commission initiated a partial interim review in accordance 
with the provisions of Article 11(3) of the basic anti-dumping Regulation and Article 
19  of  the  basic  anti-subsidy  Regulation  limited  to  the  examination  of  the  product 
scope. In particular, the review had to determine whether or not SPRL is part of the 
product  concerned  as  defined  in  the  original  investigations.    The  request  for  the 
review  was  lodged  by  Polyplex  Corporation  Limited,  an  exporting  producer  from 

EN 

50 

   EN 

 
India requesting the exclusion of ‘siliconised polyester release liner’ (SPRL) in so far 
as  it  falls  within  the  definition  of  the  product  concerned,  from  the  scope  of  the 
current  anti-dumping  and  countervailing  measures  on  imports  of  PET  film 
originating  in  India.  The  applicant  provided  prima  facie  evidence  that  the  basic 
physical,  technical  and  chemical  characteristics  of  SPRL  significantly  differ  from 
those of the product concerned.   

Findings of the investigation 

In order to assess whether SPRL and other types of PET film should be considered as 
one  single  product  or  two  different  products,  it  was  examined  whether  SPRL  and 
other types of PET film shared the same basic physical and chemical characteristics. 
In addition, the production process, differences in end-uses and interchangeability as 
well as differences in costs and prices were examined.  

The  applicant  claimed  the  following:  that  the  relatively  low  release  force  of  SPRL 
and  its  low  surface  tension  make  the  film  slippery  and  consequently  its  surface 
becomes  inactive  to  inks,  coatings,  adhesives  and  metallisation;  SPRL  requires 
separate manufacturing facilities compared to other types of PET film produced; that 
there  is  no  interchangeability  in  the  applications  between  SPRL  and  other  types  of 
PET film and  that the process of siliconising of base PET film involves additional 
costs.  

As  regards  the  claims  of  the  applicant  the  investigation  showed  that  as  regards  the 
two characteristics specific to SPRL, i.e. low release force and low surface tension, it 
was  found  that  these  are  not  the  characteristics  of  PET  film  as  such,  but  rather  the 
characteristics of its siliconised surface or effectively the characteristics of silicone. 
Coating  with  silicone,  as  well  as  coating  with  any  other  substances,  changes  some 
features of the surface of the film but does not change the basic physical, technical 
and chemical characteristic of the base PET film itself, which under the coating layer 
remains the same. The investigation showed that there are two different technologies 
of  manufacturing  SPRL.  However  it  was  found  that  the  two  different  coating 
methodologies did not alter the basic physical, technical and chemical characteristics 
of SPRL, which remain the same as compared to those of other types of PET film. 
The  investigation  confirmed  that  the  purpose  of  coating,  or  of  any  other  special 
treatment  of  PET  film,  is  to  make  it  suitable  for  certain  specific  applications.  The 
substance chosen as the coating layer in each case has certain characteristics serving 
the  relevant  purpose.  Therefore,  whilst  SPRL  is  specifically  used  for  certain 
applications, its basic physical, technical and chemical characteristics are the same as 
those of the other types of PET film. It was indeed found that the additional cost of 
silicone coating can amount to up to 10 % of the costs of manufacturing, depending 
on the choice of coating methodology. In this respect, however, it is considered that 
the additional cost of silicone coating does not constitute in itself a decisive criterion 
when determining whether SPRL form a distinct product.  

As  a  result  of  these  findings  it  was  decided  to  terminate  the  review  investigation 
without any amendment of the measures and a notice to that effect was published in 
the Official Journal in November 2010.  

EN 

51 

   EN 

 
9.2.3.  “Other” interim reviews 

A number of other reviews, not falling under Article 11(3) or Article 19 of the basic 
Regulations were concluded during 2010.  

A  list  of  the  cases  concerned  is  given  in  Annex  H  which  shows,  in  footnotes,  the 
main issues concerned. More information can be obtained from the Official Journal 
to which reference is given in the Annex . 

9.2.4.  New exporter reviews 

As far as anti-dumping measures are concerned, Article 11(4) of the basic Regulation 
allows  for  a  review  ("newcomer"  review)  to  be  carried  out  in  order  to  determine 
individual margins of dumping for new exporters located in the exporting country in 
question which did not export the product during the investigation period.  

Such parties have to show that they are genuine new exporters, i.e. that they are not 
related  to  any  of  the  exporters  or  producers  in  the  exporting  country,  which  are 
subject to the anti-dumping measures, and that they have actually started to export to 
the  EU  following  the  investigation  period,  or  that  they  have  entered  into  an 
irrevocable contractual obligation to export a significant quantity to the EU. 

When a review for a new exporter is initiated, the duties are repealed with regard to 
that exporter, though its imports are made subject to registration under Article 14(5) 
of  the  basic  Regulation  in  order  to  ensure  that,  should  the  review  result  in  a 
determination of dumping in respect of such an exporter, anti-dumping duties may be 
levied retroactively to the date of the initiation of the review. 

As  far  as  anti-subsidy  measures  are  concerned,  Article  20  of  the  basic  Regulation 
allows  for  a  review  ("accelerated"  review)  to  be  carried  out  in  order  to  establish 
promptly an individual countervailing duty. Any exporter whose exports are subject 
to a definitive countervailing duty but who was not individually investigated during 
the  original  investigation  for  reasons  other  than  a  refusal  to  co-operate  with  the 
Commission can request such review. 

In 2010, 3 new exporter review were initiated. Since the Commission carried out the 
first reviews of this type in 1990, a total of 63 such investigations have been initiated. 
There  were  5  new  exporter  reviews  concluded  during  2008  all  of  were  concluded  
with imposition of the duty.  

More  information  can  be  obtained  from  the  Official  Journal  to  which  reference  is 
given in Annex I. 

9.2.5.  Absorption investigations 

Where  there  is  sufficient  information  showing  that,  after  the  original  investigation 
period  and  prior  to  or  following  the  imposition  of  measures,  export  prices  have 
decreased or that there has been no or insufficient movement in the resale prices or 
subsequent selling prices of the imported product in the EU, an "absorption" review 
may  be  opened  to  examine  whether  the  measure  has  had  effects  on  the  above-
mentioned  prices.  Dumping  margins  may  as  such  be  recalculated  and  the  duty 

EN 

52 

   EN 

 
increased to take account of such lower export prices. The possibility of "absorption" 
reviews is included in Articles 12 and 19(3) of basic Regulations. 

In  2010,  there  were  no  anti-absorption  investigations  initiated  or  concluded.    – 
Annex J. 

9.2.6  Circumvention investigations 

The possibility of investigations being re-opened in circumstances where evidence is 
brought to show that measures are being circumvented was introduced by Article 13 
and Article 23 of the basic Regulations. 

Circumvention is defined as a change in the pattern of trade between third countries 
and  the  EU  which  stems  from  a  practice,  process  or  work  for  which  there  is 
insufficient due cause or economic justification other than the imposition of the duty. 
The duties may be extended to imports from third countries of like products, or parts 
thereof, if circumvention is taking place. 

In 2010, 4 anti-circumvention investigation was initiated. 1 such investigations was 
concluded with an extension of the duty. More information can be obtained from the 
Official Journal to which reference is given in Annex K. 

Steel ropes and cables originating in Korea and Malaysia 

In August 1999 the Council imposed definitive antidumping duties on steel ropes and 
cables  originating  in  the  People’s  Republic  of  China.    Following  the  imposition  of 
these  measures,  it  was  found  that  they  were  being  circumvented  by  means  of 
transhipment  of  the  product  via  Morocco  and  the  measures  were  consequently 
extended to cover imports of the product from that country in 2004.  On the basis of a 
request  from  the    EU  Wire  Rope  Industries  (EWRIS)  ,  the  Commission  initiated  an  anti-
circumvention investigation in August 2009.  The requests was based on allegations  
of  a  significant  change  in  the  pattern  of  trade  in  the  product  concerned  from  the 
Republic of Korea and Malaysia. The investigation period (the ‘IP’) covered 1 July 
2008  to  30  June  2009.    Data  was  collected  from  1999  up  to  the  end  of  the  IP  to 
investigate the alleged change in the pattern of trade and other aspects. 

Circumvention  

Trade statistics showed an increase in imports of the product concerned from Korea 
between 2000 and 2004 where their share of total imports into the EU of the product 
increased from 29% to 52% respectively.  This significant increase contrasted with 
relatively  stable  production  volumes  by  the  Korean  exporters  at  the  same  time  but 
very significant increase in exports of the product from China to Korea at that time. 
While imports from Malaysia  also increased in the period under consideration,  this 
reflected the increased production by Malaysian exporters in the same period.  At the 
same time imports form China dropped by more than 40% between 2006 and the IP. 
It  was  concluded  that  in  the  absence  of  any  information  to  the  contrary  that  the 
change  in  the  pattern  in  trade  particularly  since  2005  when  both  Korean  and 
Malaysian  exporters  increased  their  volumes  while  the  Chinese  exports  to  the  EU 
dropped was as a result of the imposition of the anti-dumping measures on imports 
from PRC.   

EN 

53 

   EN 

 
 
A dumping test was carried out regarding the exports from Korea and it was found 
that when compared to the normal value from the expiry review (based on analogue 
data  from  turkey)  it  was  found  that  dumping  existed.  It  was  also  found  that  the 
imports from Korea undermined the remedial effects of the original measures owing 
to significantly increased quantities and dumped prices significantly below the injury 
elimination level established for the sunset review investigation.   

Extension of the measures 

The  investigation  concluded that there was  clear  circumvention  of  the  measures  on 
the product concerned from the PRC via transhipment via Korea. On the other hand 
the  investigation  concluded  that  exports  to  the  EU  of  the  product  concerned  from 
Malaysia were of genuine Malaysian origin.  As a result the anti-dumping measures 
imposed  by  the  original  definitive  Regulation  on  imports  of  the  product  concerned 
originating  in  the  PRC  were  extended  in  May  2010  to  the  same  product  consigned 
from Korea, whether declared as originating in Korea or not.   At the same time the 
investigation regarding Malaysia was terminated without extending the measures to 
imports from that country.   

9.3. 

Safeguard investigations 

Safeguard measures have always been and remain an exceptional instrument which 
the  Commission  would  only  apply  in  truly  exceptional  circumstances.  Indeed,  they 
are only used where it is clear that, applying the highest standards, such measures are 
necessary  and  justified  because,  due  to  unforeseen  circumstances,  there  has  been  a 
surge in imports and this has caused or threatens to cause serious damage to the EU 
industry.  

The  Commission  expects  the  EU’s  commercial  partners  to  follow  a  similarly  strict 
approach. However, more and more countries are adopting safeguard measures, often 
in circumstances which do not appear to be entirely in line with Article XIX of the 
GATT  1994,  the  WTO  Agreement  on  Safeguards  and  other  WTO  rules. 
Consequently, the activities of the Commission in relation to safeguards is more and 
more driven towards the defence of the export interests of EU producers, if necessary 
at WTO level. 

As  regards  conventional  trade  regimes,  the  Commission  has  agreed  within  the 
various bilateral agreements to which it is a party (Europe Agreements, Agreements 
with  Mediterranean  countries,  Free  Trade  Agreements  with  South  Africa,  Mexico, 
Chili, etc.) to introduce special safeguard clauses, which apply to cases, which arise 
between the partners. These clauses normally entail rights and obligations additional 
to  those  arising  under  WTO  safeguard  rules  (in  particular  special  notification  and 
consultation  procedures).  In  this  regard,  the  Commission  carefully  monitors  any 
cases,  which  are  initiated  by  partners  with  which  it  has  a  preferential  trade 
agreement. 

At  the  start  of  2010  there  were  no  safeguard  measures  in  place  or  investigations 
ongoing. During 2010 1 safeguard investigation was initiated – Annex L.  

Safeguard investigation on Wireless wide area network (WWAN) modems 

EN 

54 

   EN 

 
On  the  basis  of  a  request  received  from  the  Belgian  Government  pursuant  to  the 
Safeguard  Regulations,  the  Commission  initiated  a  safeguard  investigation  against 
WWAN  modems  in  June  2010.  In  its  request,  Belgium  informed  the  Commission 
that  trends  in  imports  of  WWAN  modems  appeared  to  call  for  safeguard  measures 
and supported the request with evidence.   

The evidence provided showed that imports into the Union of the product concerned 
were increasing rapidly both in absolute terms, and relative to Union production and 
consumption,  and,  in  particular,  that  imports  increased  by  more  than  4  100 
percentage points from 2006 to 2009.   The request also alleged that the volumes and 
conditions  of  the  imports  concerned  had,  among  other  consequences,  a  negative 
impact  on  the  prices  of  the  like  product  in  the  EU  and  on  the  market  share  held 
resulting  in  serious  injury  to  the  single  Union  producer  located  in  Belgium,  with 
some production in other Member States.   

The  Commission  commenced  the  investigation  in  order  to  determine  whether,  as  a 
result of unforeseen developments, WWAN  modems were imported into the Union 
in such greatly increased quantities and/or on such terms or conditions as to cause, or 
threaten to cause, serious injury to the Union producer as alleged in the complaint.    
At  the  same  time  the  safeguard  investigation  was  initiated,  the  Commission  also 
initiated  an  anti-dumping  investigation  into  the  same  product  originating  in  the 
People's  Republic  of  China  on  the  basis  of  a  complaint  lodged  by  the  sole  EU 
producer  of  the  product  concerned.      In  September  2010  the  Commission  also 
initiated  an  anti-subsidy  investigation  concerning  imports  of  the  same  product  also 
originating in the PRC also based on a complaint lodged by the sole Union producer.  
These three investigations continued during 2010.  

10. 

ENFORCEMENT OF ANTI-DUMPING/COUNTERVAILING MEASURES 

Globalisation  of  trade  led  to  greater  possibilities  for  circumventing  or  otherwise 
reducing the effectiveness of anti-dumping and countervailing measures. To address 
this problem, throughout 2010 the TDI services continued their follow-up activities 
aimed  at  ensuring  that  measures  were  effectively  enforced.  In  the  framework  of  an 
integrated  approach  measures  were  considered  in  all  their  forms  -  duties  and 
undertakings – and synergy was sought between the TDI services and enforcement-
oriented services (OLAF, DG Taxud and customs authorities in Member States).  

10.1. 

Follow-up of measures 

The  follow-up  activities  concerning  measures  in  force  are  centred  on  four  main 
areas:  (1)  to  pre-empt  fraud,  by  defining  risk-related  areas,  alerting  customs 
authorities and assessing the feedback from customs and economic operators; (2) to 
monitor trade flows and market developments; (3) to improve the effectiveness with 
the  appropriate  instruments  (new  investigation,  interim  review,  newcomer  review, 
contact  with  national  administrations)  and  (4)  to  react  to  irregular  practices  by 
enhancing  the  co-operation  with  enforcement-related  services  (OLAF  and  national 
customs) and by initiating anti-absorption or anti-circumvention investigations. 

EN 

55 

   EN 

 
10.2.  Monitoring of undertakings 

Monitoring of undertakings is part of the enforcement activities, since undertakings 
are  a  form  of  anti-dumping  or  countervailing  measure.  They  are  accepted  by  the 
Commission if it is satisfied that they can effectively eliminate the injurious effects 
of dumping or subsidisation. To achieve this goal, exporters normally pledge to raise 
their prices. The necessary price increase stems from the findings of the investigation 
and directly depends on the level of dumping or subsidisation found, or on the injury 
elimination level, whichever is the lower. 

In  order  to  allow  the  Commission  to  monitor  whether  or  not  the  undertakings  are 
being respected, the parties concerned have to submit regular sales reports, normally 
every quarter. They also have to provide the Commission with any other information 
that  is  considered  necessary,  and  to  allow  verification  of  such  data  and  any  other 
relevant information at their premises, even at short notice.  

At  the  beginning  of  2010,  there  were  undertakings  in  force  accepted  from  42 
companies, covering 10 products originating in 8 different countries. 

During 2010, the following changes to the portfolio of undertakings took place: 

Three offers for an undertaking have been accepted: 

– 

The  offers  of  three  new  Chinese  exporting  producers  to  join  a  joint  liability 
undertaking were accepted (castings from the People's Republic of China) 

Undertakings of 23 companies came to an end: 

– 

– 

although only one company  was found to breach its undertaking (Joint liability 
undertaking concerning castings originating in the People's Republic of China), 
the  Commission  had  to  withdraw  the  acceptance  of  the  entire  joint  liability 
undertaking concerning 22 exporters, including those of the three new Chinese 
exporting producers accepted earlier in 2010. The anti-dumping duties became 
payable; 

the  undertaking  of  one  company  expired  since  the  measures  concerning  this 
country  expired  (  grain  oriented  flat-rolled  products  of  silicon  electrical  steel 
(GOES) from the United States of America) 

This  brings  the  total  number  of  undertakings  in  force  at  the  end  of  2010  to  22, 
covering 8 products originating in 7 different countries. Details concerning the above 
can be found in Annex M and an overview of all undertakings in force can be found 
in Annex Q. 

As  undertakings  have  to  provide  the  same  remedial  effect  as  the  alternative  duties 
would  do,  the  examination,  adaptation  and  drafting  of  undertaking  offers  has  to  be 
based on a double assessment of risk and effectiveness. This has led to situations in 
which undertakings were not considered to be acceptable, notably where the trading 
patterns of the company allow too much scope for cross-compensation (i.e. the price 
increase charged for products subject to the undertaking being compensated through 
the granting of rebates on products not subject to the undertaking, if sold to the same 
customer  in  the  Union),  where  the  product  concerned  was  not  suitable  for  a  price 

EN 

56 

   EN 

 
undertaking  (i.e.  high  price  fluctuations  of  the  product  concerned  which  cannot  be 
explained by the fluctuation in the price of the raw material and thus does not allow 
to  index  the  minimum  import  prices;  evolvement  of  product  types  in  design  and 
finishing),  where  the  method  offered  to  determine  the  minimum  import  prices  was 
considered inappropriate or where the a new exporting producer did not offer to join 
an existing joint liability undertaking for the product concerned. 

11. 

REFUNDS  

Articles  11(8)  and  21(1)  of  the  basic  Regulations  allow  importers  to  request  the 
reimbursement  of  the  relevant  collected  duties  where  it  is  shown  that  the 
dumping/subsidy margin, on the basis of which duties were paid, has been eliminated 
or reduced to a level below that of the duty in force. 

During  2010,  29  new  refund  requests  were  submitted.  At  the  end  of  2010,  15 
investigations  were  ongoing,  covering  27  requests.  In  2010,  28  Commission 
Decisions were adopted: 23 granting partial refund and 5 rejecting the refund request. 
12 requests were withdrawn. 

12. 

JUDICIAL REVIEW: DECISIONS GIVEN BY THE COURT OF JUSTICE / COURT OF FIRST 
INSTANCE 

12.1.  Overview of the judicial reviews in 2010 

In  2010,  the  Court  of  Justice  (COJ)  and  the  General  Court  (Court)  rendered  13 
judgments in total relating to the areas of anti-dumping or anti-subsidy.  

12.2.  Cases pending 

A list of the anti-dumping/anti-subsidy cases before the CFI and the Court of Justice 
still pending at the end of 2010 is given in Annex S (34 before the GC and 9 before 
the COJ). 

12.3.  New cases 

13 new cases were lodged in 2010 (compared to 17 in 2009, 16 in 2008, 10 in 2007 
and 19 in 2006). 8 of these were lodged before the GC and 5 before the COJ. 

12.4. 

Judgments rendered and orders issued by the General Court 

8 judgments relating to the anti-dumping or anti-subsidy areas were rendered by the 
GC.  5  of  these  judgements  relate  to  2006  Regulation  imposing  definitive  anti-
dumping duties on imports of certain footwear with uppers of leather originating in 
China and Vietnam.  Details of some of the cases are set out below. 

EN 

57 

   EN 

 
12.4.1  Certain footwear with uppers of leather originating in, inter alia, China – T-401/06 
–  Brosmann  Footwear  (HK)  Ltd  and  others  v.  Council  of  the  European  Union  – 
Judgment of 4 March 2010 (OJ C 113  of 01.05.2011, p.37) 

The  applicants,  Brosmann  Footwear  (HK)  Ltd,  Seasonable  Footwear  (Zhongshan) 
Ltd,  Lung  Pao  Footwear  (Guangzhou)  Ltd  and  Risen  Footwear  (HK)  Co.,  Ltd,  are 
footwear-producing and exporting companies established in China. They sought the 
annulment of Regulation (EC) No 1472/2006, which imposed an anti-dumping duty 
on imports of certain footwear with uppers of leather originating in, inter alia, China, 
in so far as it concerns the applicants. 

In  support  of  their  action,  the  applicants  raised  eight  pleas  in  law  concerning  in 
particular  MET  determination,  sampling,  standing  of  the  Community  industry, 
product  scope,  represnativity  of  injury  data,  profit  used  in  the  underselling 
calculation and causality assessment. All their pleas have been rejected by the GC.  

The most important findings of the court can be summarised as follows: 

The  Commission  is  not  obliged  to  examine  MET/IT  claims  from  non-sampled 
companies, including those to whom an individual dumping margin is not applied.  

The fact that all exporting producers concerned were invited to submit MET/IT claim 
cannot  be  considered  as  a  precise,  unconditional  and  consistent  assurance  that 
MET/IT  claim  would  be  examined.  Therefore,  no  legitimate  expectations  were 
created by sending MET/IT claim forms to all exporting producers concerned. 

The Court rejected the applicant's claim that their rights of defence were breached by 
not-revealing the identity of complainants. The name of each EU producer included 
in the sample is irrelevant for the purposes of assessing the representativeness of the 
sample. It should be noted that in the case at hand the applicants were given access to 
data  relating  to  the  production  of  each  company  in  the  sample  and  to  the  non-
confidential version of the replies to the injury questionnaire. 

The Court also rejected applicant's claim alleging an inadequate statement of reasons, 
pointing  out  the  statement  of  the  reasons  on  which  regulations  are  based  is  not 
required  to  specify  the  often  very  numerous  and  complex  matters  of  fact  and  law 
dealt with in the regulations, provided that they fall within the general scheme of the 
body  of  measures  of  which  they  form  part.  It  is  sufficient  for  the  reasoning  of  the 
institutions in the regulations to appear clearly and unequivocally. 

For  the  purpose  of  injury  calculation,  the  institutions  may  take  into  account  data 
relating to products, which are broadly similar to the product concerned, even though 
those products are not included in the definition of the product concerned. The profit 
margin that the Community industry has attained for those products may be regarded 
as  a  valid  indication  of  the  profit  margin  that  Community  producers  would  have 
attained on sales of the product concerned in the absence of dumped imports. 

The applicants appealed against the judgement and the appeal case is pending before 
the Court of Justice. 

EN 

58 

   EN 

 
12.4.2  Certain  footwear  with  uppers  of  leather  originating  in,  inter  alia,  China  Joined 
Cases  T-407/06  and  T-408/06,  Zhejiang  Aokang  Shoes  Co.,  Ltd,  established  in 
Yongjia  (China),  applicant  in  Case  T-407/06,  Wenzhou  Taima  Shoes  Co.,  Ltd, 
established  in  Wenzhou  (China),  applicant  in  Case  T-408/06,v.  Council  of  the 
European Union – Judgment of 4 March 2010 (OJ C 113  of 01.05.2011, p. 37) 

The  applicants  in  both  of  these  joint  cases  are  non-sampled  Chinese  exporting 
producers of footwear, who sought the annulment of Regulation (EC) No 1472/2006, 
which imposed an anti-dumping duty on imports of seamless certain footwear with 
uppers of leather originating in, inter alia, China, in their regard. 

The Court rejected all seven pleas raised by the applicants in support of their actions. 
Since  some  of  these  pleas  are  very  similar  to  those  raised  in  case  Brosmann  (see 
above), only the most important and case specific pleas are explained in detail below. 

The  applicants  claimed  that  sampling  technique  provided  for  in  Article  17  of  the 
basic regulation cannot be used for MET/ IT determination. The court rejected this 
plea and confirmed that the Commission was right to find that the number of claims 
was manifestly too high to be examined without compromising the completion of the 
investigation in good time. It should be noted that in the present case, 141 MET/IT 
claims from Chinese exporting producers were submitted to the Commission. Even if 
it  had  been  possible  to  examine  them  solely  on  a  documentary  basis  without  the 
necessity  of  verifying  that  data  by  on-site  verification  visits  at  the  producers  or 
exporters concerned, the Court considered the use of sampling was warranted.  

The Court also rejected the applicant's plea that their rights of defence were breached 
because  the  Commission  allegedly  departed  from  its  practice  followed  in  some 
earlier  investigations,  that  is  to  examine  all  MET/IT  claims  and  calculate  the 
dumping  margin  of  companies  not  included  in  the  sample  which  had  been  granted 
MET  or  IT  as  the  weighted  average  margin  of  operators  in  the  sample  which  had 
been granted MET or IT. The Court concluded that the institutions did not err in law 
by not examining the MET/IT claims from the non-sampled traders and by applying 
to those traders the average dumping margin of the sampled companies. 

The  applicants  further  maintained  that  the  institutions  breached  their  rights  of 
defence and failed to state reasons by (1) not informing them timely that they did not 
intend to assess their MET/IT claims and by (2) not communicating the information 
on which it based the calculations made in the additional final disclose document and 
(3) by granting the applicants a period of less than 10 days to comment. The Court 
rejected all these claims although it established that the Commission breached Article 
20(5) of the basic regulation by granting the applicants only 5 days to comment on 
the additional disclosure. The Court referred to previous case law according to which 
in order for such breach to lead to an annulment, it would be necessary to establish 
that  the  granting  of  a  period  shorter  than  that  prescribed  was  actually  capable  of 
affecting the applicant's rights of defence in the procedure in question which was not 
the case in the contested proceeding. 

Lastly,  the  applicants  argued  that  the  determination  of  injury  was  not  based  on  a 
sufficient period, because the increase in imports took place only in the last quarter 
of the investigation period that is after the lapse of the quota regime on footwear. The 
Court  reiterated  that  it  is  necessary  to  carry  out  the  investigation  on  the  basis  of 

EN 

59 

   EN 

 
information which is as recent as possible. Therefore, where the institutions find that 
imports  of  a  product  which  has  until  then  been  subject  to  quantitative  restrictions 
increase after those restrictions have lapsed, they may take that increase into account 
for  the  purposes  of  their  assessment  of  the  injury  sustained  by  the  Community 
industry.   

The Court rejected all pleas and dismissed the actions in their entirety.      

One  of  the  applicants,  Zhejiang  Aokang  Shoes  Co.,  Ltd,  appealed  against  the 
judgement and the appeal case is pending before the Court of Justice. 

12.4.3  Certain footwear with uppers of leather originating in, inter alia, China – T-409/06 
–  Sun  Sang  Kong  Yuen  Shoes  Factory  (Hui  Yang)  Corp.  Ltd,  v.  Council  of  the 
European Union – Judgment of 4 March 2010 (OJ C 113  of 01.05.2011, p.) 

The applicant, Sun Sang Kong Yuen Shoes Factory (Hui Yang) Corp. Ltd, sought the 
annulment of Regulation (EC) No 1472/2006, which imposed an anti-dumping duty 
on  imports  of  seamless  certain  footwear  with  uppers  of  leather  originating  in,  inter 
alia, China, in his regard. In support of its action, the applicant puts forward six pleas 
in law. The main findings are set out below. 

The  applicant  argued  that  the  Commission  incorrectly  applied  Article  18(1)  of  the 
basic  regulation in particular by  not basing dumping margin calculation on its own 
transaction  list.  The  Commission  found  that  the  transaction  list  submitted  by  the 
applicant  during  on-spot  investigation  was  unreliable.  Subsequently,  the  applicant 
submitted an updated list which was however rejected by the Commission for being 
late. The Court confirmed that even if the institutions are entitled to take into account 
information  submitted  to  them  after  the  time-limit  which  they  have  set,  the 
Commission was entitled to refuse to take account of that list, since it could not be 
verified without a second visit. The claim was therefore rejected. 

In another plea, the applicant claimed that the Product Control Numbers (PCNs) used 
for  calculation  of  normal  values  in  this  case  were  too  vague  and  that  they  were 
grouping under a single PCN very different footwear as regards their characteristics 
and prices. The Court held that PCNs are established on the basis of the individual 
characteristics  of  each  sub-category  of  items  coming  within  the  definition  of  the 
product concerned and not on the basis of the price of each of those items. Thus, the 
fact that one PCN covers products within a wide range of prices does not establish, in 
itself, that the criteria chosen for implementing that system are not well founded. 

The Court rejected all pleas and dismissed the actions in their entirety.      

12.4.4  Certain footwear with uppers of leather originating in, inter alia, China – T-410/06 
– Foshan City Nanhai Golden Step Industrial Co., Ltd, v. Council of the European 
Union – Judgment of 4 March 2010 (OJ C 113  of 01.05.2011, p. 39) 

The  applicant,  Foshan  City    Nanhai  Golden  Step,  sought  the  annulment  of 
Regulation (EC) No 1472/2006, which imposed an anti-dumping duty on imports of 
seamless certain footwear with uppers of leather originating in, inter alia, China, in 
his regard. The applicant was one of Chinese producers covered by the investigation 
selected to be in the sample. At the stage of the provisional regulation, the applicant 

EN 

60 

   EN 

 
had  been  refused  MET  on  the  ground  that  it  was  not  free  to  determine  its  sales 
quantities without significant State interference. However, subsequently it submitted 
evidence demonstrating that that was not so and was consequently granted MET.  

In support of its action, the applicant raises four pleas in law, alleging, mainly breach 
of  its  rights  of  defence  and  failure  to  state  reasons  as  well  as  manifest  error  in  the 
calculation of its individual injury margin. The main issues are set out below. 

One of applicant's claims was that the Commission infringed its rights of defence by 
failing to inform it that it intended to use the SG&A expenses and profit margin of 
traders  in  different  sectors  (i.e.  chemical  and  engineering  sectors)  and  by  failing  to 
state  sufficiently  its  reasons  for  rejecting  to  use  the  method  suggested  by  the 
applicant.  The  Court  held  that  there  has  been  no  breach  of  the  applicant's  right  of 
defence  because  it  is  evident  from  the  file  that  the  applicant  knew  that  the  data  in 
question came from sectors other than the footwear sector at the time when it made 
the claim in the investigation.     

The Court thus rejected all four pleas and dismissed the action in its entirety.  

12.4.5  Steel ropes and cables originating, inter alia, in Indi, Case T-119/06, Usha Martin 
Ltd v. Council of the European Union – Judgment of 9 September 2010 (OJ C 288  of 
23.10.2010, p. 30) 

The  applicant,  an  Indian  exporting  producer  of  steel  wire  ropes  with  a  related 
company  in  Dubai,  sought  the  annulment  of  a  Decision  by  which  the  Commission 
withdrew  an  undertaking  (UT)  after  having  established  that  the  applicant  breached 
the undertaking on three occasions as follows: 

(i)  the  applicant  did  not  include  significant  volumes  of  exports  of  the  product 
concerned  not  covered  by  the  undertaking  had  not  been  included  in  the  quarterly 
reports; 

(ii) product had been sold to related importers and  

(iii) some of the product concerned had been sold from UAE and  declared as having 
UAE origin although they were in fact Indian. 

The application for the annulment was based on two pleas:   

Breach  of  proportionality  principle  (withdrawal  of  UT  due  to  'non  material 

• 
breaches') 

•  Wrong determination of origin by the Commission.  

The Court recalled the previous case law according to which the Commission enjoys 
broad  discretion  in  the  field  of  undertakings  and  their  withdrawal  in  the  case  of 
breaches.  The  Court  confirmed  that  that  any  breach  of  undertaking,  in  itself,  is 
sufficient  to  trigger  the  withdrawal.  Consequently,  the  Commission  was  entitled, 
without infringing the principle of proportionality, to withdraw its acceptance of the 
undertaking.  

EN 

61 

   EN 

 
The principle of proportionality applies to the question whether the amount of anti-
dumping  duty  imposed  is  appropriate,  whereas  it  does  not  apply  to  the  question  of 
the imposition of those duties. In the present case, the consequence of withdrawal of 
acceptance of the undertaking is the imposition of definitive anti-dumping duties on 
the  applicant’s  imports  in  question.  Consequently,  the  Court  concluded  that  the 
withdrawal of acceptance of an undertaking cannot, as such, be called into question 
by reference to the principle of proportionality.  

The  Court  rejected  the  first  plea  and  considered  the  second  plea  ineffective,  thus 
dismissing the action in its entirety.  

The applicant appealed against the judgement and the appeal case is pending before 
the Court of Justice. 

12.5. 

Judgments rendered by the Court of Justice 

In 2010, the COJ rendered 5 judgments relating to the anti-dumping or anti-subsidy 
areas.  2  of  these  5  judgements  were  rendered  in  cases  regarding  an  appeal  against 
judgements  of  the  GS.  The  3  remaining  judgements  concern  a  reference  for 
preliminary  rulings  requested  by  national  courts  in  customs  and  anti-dumping  duty 
related matters.  

13. 

ACTIVITIES IN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION (WTO) 

13.1.  Dispute settlement in the field of anti-dumping, anti-subsidy and safeguards 

13.1.1.  Overview of the WTO dispute settlement procedure 

The WTO provides for a rigorous procedure for the settlement of disputes between 
WTO Members concerning the application of the WTO agreements. The procedure 
is  divided  into  two  main  stages.  The  first  stage,  at  the  level  of  the  WTO  Members 
concerned, consists of a bilateral consultation. Upon failure of the consultation, the 
second  stage  can  be  opened  by  requesting  the  WTO  Dispute  Settlement  Body  to 
establish a panel. WTO Members, other than the complaining  and  defending party, 
with an interest in a given case, can intervene as "third parties" before the panel. The 
panel issues a report, which can be appealed before the Appellate Body (AB) (each 
appeal being heard by three members of a permanent seven-member body set up by 
the Dispute Settlement Understanding). Both the panel report  and the report by the 
Appellate Body are adopted by the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) unless the latter 
rejects the report by unanimity. 

The  findings  of  a  panel  or  Appellate  Body  report  have  to  be  implemented  by  the 
WTO Member whose measures have been found to be inconsistent with the relevant 
WTO  Agreements.  If  the  complaining  WTO  Member  is  not  satisfied  with  the  way 
the  reports  are  implemented,  it  can  ask  for  the  establishment  of  a  so-called 
“implementation  panel”.  Here  too,  appeal  against  the  findings  of  the  panel  is 
possible. 

It  should  be  noted  that the  anti-dumping,  anti-subsidy  and  safeguards  measures  are 
among the most popular subject matters in WTO dispute settlement.  

EN 

62 

   EN 

 
13.1.2.  Dispute settlement procedures against the Union 

China- Certain Footwear 

On  4  February  2010,  China  requested  consultations  with  the  European  Union 
concerning EU anti-dumping measures on certain leather footwear from China which 
were imposed by Council Regulation (EC) No 1472/2006 (definitive regulation) and 
Council  Implementing  Regulation  (EU)  No.  1294/2009  of  22  December  2009 
(following  an  expiry  review).    In  particular,  China  is  challenging  as  WTO-
inconsistent, inter alia, the Basic regulation, which provides that, in case of imports 
from  NME  countries,  the  anti-dumping  duty  shall  be  specified  for  the  supplying 
country  concerned  and  not  for  each  individual  supplier.    According  to  China, 
applicable WTO rules require that an individual margin and duty be determined and 
specified for each known exporter and producer and not for the supplying country as 
a whole.  China states that the Basic regulation provides that an individual duty will 
only be specified for exporters that demonstrate that they fulfil the criteria set forth in 
its  Market  Economy  Treatment  and  Individual  Treatment  rules.  For  China,  the 
criteria to obtain an individual duty are unreasonable, not objective and a violation of 
MFN. 

Consultations  were  held  on  31  March  2010.  Subsequently,  on  8  April  2010,  China 
requested the establishment of a panel. The panel was established on 18 May 2010 
and its members were elected on 5 July 2010.  

China - certain iron or steel fasteners 

By  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  91/2009,  the  Council  imposed  anti-dumping 
measures  on  imports  of  certain  iron  or  steel  fasteners  originating  in  the  People's 
Republic of China. In July 2009, China submitted a request for consultations with the 
European Union on the above Regulation. Consultations were held on 14 September 
2009. China then requested the establishment of a panel. The panel was established 
on  23  October  2009  and  its  members  were  elected  on  9  December  2009.  On  3 
December 2010, the panel report was circulated to Members.  

The panel found that in the great majority of the issues examined, the EU has acted 
in full compliance with WTO rules. However, the Panel found that Article 9(5) of the 
Basic  Regulation  was  inconsistent  with  Articles  6.10,  9.2  and  18.4  of  the  AD 
Agreement, Article I:1 of the GATT 1994 and Article XVI:4 of the WTO Agreement 
because,  with  respect  to  producers  from  non-market  economy  countries,  the 
individual  treatment  test  embodied  in  this  provision  conditioned  the  calculation  of 
individual dumping margins and the imposition of individual duties on the fulfilment 
of certain criteria.     

The Panel also found that the application of Article 9(5) of the Basic Regulation in 
the  fasteners  investigation  was  inconsistent  with  AD  Agreement  Articles  6.10  and 
9.2.  The Panel also found that the EU investigating authorities acted inconsistently 
with  AD  Agreement  Articles  3.1  and  3.2  with  respect  to  the  consideration  of  the 
volume of dumped imports; AD Agreement Articles 3.1 and 3.5 with respect to the 
causation analysis; AD Agreement Articles 6.4 and 6.2 with respect to aspects of the 
normal  value  determination;  AD  Agreement  Article  6.5.1  with  respect  to  non-
confidential versions of questionnaire responses of two European producers and AD 

EN 

63 

   EN 

 
Agreement  Article  6.5  with  respect  to  confidential  treatment  of  information  in  the 
questionnaire  response  of  an  Indian  producer;  and  AD  Agreement  Article  6.5  with 
respect  to  the  confidential  treatment of the  Eurostat  data on total EU production of 
fasteners. 

The  Panel  rejected  China's  claims  with  respect  to  the  standing  determination; 
definition  of  domestic 
industry;  product  under  consideration;  dumping 
determination;  price  undercutting  determination;  treatment  of  imports  from  non-
sampled  producers;  consideration  of  the  consequent  impact  of  dumped  imports  on 
the  domestic  industry;  non-disclosure  of  the  identity  of  the  complainants  and  the 
supporters of the complaint; confidential treatment of the Eurostat data on total EU 
production  of  fasteners;  procedural  aspects  of  the  domestic  industry  definition;  and 
the amount of time provided for responses to requests for information. 

The  Panel  found  that  China's  claims  concerning  the  definition  of  like  product; 
alleged  non-disclosure  of  aspects  of  the  normal  value  determination;  and  the 
procedural  aspects  of  the  domestic  industry  definition  were  not  within  its  terms  of 
reference and declined to make findings on these claims.  Further, it applied judicial 
economy with respect to some of China's claims regarding the Basic Regulation and 
the Definitive Regulation. 

The  Panel  recommended  that  the  DSB  request  the  European  Union  to  bring  its 
measures into conformity with its obligations under the WTO Agreement. The Panel 
declined to make a suggestion on how the DSB recommendations and rulings may be 
implemented by the European Union.  

Both  the  European  Union  and  China  appealed  to  the  AB  certain  issues  of  law 
covered in the panel report and certain legal interpretations developed by the Panel. 
The proceeding before the AB was still pending in 2010. 

13.2.  Other WTO activities 

In 2010, H.E. Mr. Dennis Francis (Trinidad and Tobago) was appointed Chair of the 
DDA Negotiating Group on rules. Under his Chairmanship, the Group met regularly, 
including  in  Plurilateral  format,  to  discuss  the  bracketed  and  unbracketed  issues  of 
the  Chair's  text  of  December  2008.  Furthermore,  several  new  textual  proposals 
covering  various  aspects  of  the  Subsidies  and  Countervailing  Measures  Agreement 
were  submitted,  including  by  India  and  China.  However,  no  progress  could  be 
achieved in the anti-dumping and horizontal subsidies areas.  

In  fisheries,  the  group  conducted  intensive  discussions  on  all  aspects  of  possible 
disciplines. While this allowed the views of Members to be clarified on key issues, it 
did  not  help  positions  to  converge  but  rather  confirmed  the  deep  division  among 
Members (developing and developed countries alike) as well as the complexity and 
sensitivity of the situation of developing countries. 

In parallel to these activities, participation by the Commission services in the regular 
work of the Anti-dumping, Subsidies and Countervailing and Safeguards Committees 
continued. The Committees met twice in regular sessions to review notifications and 
raise issues of special interest. 

EN 

64 

   EN 

 
14. 

CONCLUSION 

Overall the level of activity in 2010 over 2009 dropped slightly when based on the 
initiation  of  new  cases  –  18  as  compared  to  21.      However  the  number  of  anti-
dumping cases remained stable at 15 while the number of anti-subsidy cases initiated 
halved  compared  to  2009,  down  from  6  to  3.  There  was  a  slight  decrease  in  the 
number  of  cases  terminated  without  the  imposition  of  measures  down  1  to  10  in 
2010.  2010 also saw the number of reviews initiated drop from 34 in 2009 to 31 in 
2010.  2010 did see the initiation of a safeguard case, the first such case in a number 
of years.  

During 2010 particular focus was paid to the needs of SMEs in the context of trade 
defence investigations and the problems they face.  In this context the study, which 
had  been  commissioned  during  2009,  was  completed  in  December  2010  and  it 
identified  the  issues  which  need  to  be  addressed  for  SMEs  in  the  context  of  TDIs.  
The  study  laid  down  specific  proposals  on  how  the  Commission  and  the  Member 
States could better assist SMEs in all areas of such investigations and these will be 
followed  up  in  2011.      Furthermore  an  evaluation  study  of  the  European  Union's 
trade  defence  instruments  was  commissioned  in  2010  which  should  be  completed 
during 2011.  These studies are designed to complement the work already underway 
in  improving  TDI  investigations  e.g.  improved  transparency  in  TDI  investigations, 
initiatives which had begun in 2009. 

The TDI services also continued their information role through organising seminars 
aimed at third country officials and held a number of bilateral contacts with industry.   

EN 

65 

   EN 

 
ANNEXES : SUMMARY 
ANNEX A 

LIST OF ANNEXES 

ANNEX B 

ANNEX C 

ANNEX D 

ANNEX E 

ANNEX F 

ANNEX G 

ANNEX H 
ANNEX I 

ANNEX J 

ANNEX K 

ANNEX L 

ANNEX M 
ANNEX N 
ANNEX O 

ANNEX P 

New investigations initiated during the period 1 January - 31 December 2010 
A.  Anti-dumping investigations 
B.  Anti-subsidy investigations 
New investigations initiated  
A.  by product sector during the period 2006 – 2010 (31 December) 
B.  by country of export during the period 2006 – 2010 (31 December) 
New investigations concluded by the imposition of provisional duties during the 
period 1 January - 31 December 2010 
A.  Anti-dumping investigations 
B.  Anti-subsidy investigations 
New investigations concluded by the imposition of definitive duties during the period 
1 January - 31 December 2010 
A.  Anti-dumping investigations 
B.  Anti-subsidy investigations 
New investigations terminated without imposition of measures during the period 
1 January - 31 December 2010 
A.  Anti-dumping investigations 
B.  Anti-subsidy investigations 
Expiry reviews initiated or concluded during the period 1 January – 31 December 
2010 
Interim reviews initiated or concluded during the period 1 January – 31 December 
2010 
Other reviews concluded during the period 1 January - 31 December 2010 
New exporter reviews initiated or concluded during the period 1 January – 31 
December 2010  
A.  Anti-dumping investigations 
B.  Anti-subsidy investigations 
Anti-absorption investigations initiated or concluded during the period 1 January - 31 
December 2010 
Anti-circumvention investigations initiated or concluded during the period 1 January 
- 31 December 2010 
Safeguard investigations initiated or concluded during the period 1 January - 31 
December 2010 
Undertakings accepted or repealed during the period 1 January – 31 December 2010 
Measures which expired during the period 1 January - 31 December 2010 
Definitive anti-dumping measures in force on 31 December 2010  
A.  Ranked by product 
B.  Ranked by country 
Definitive anti-subsidy measures in force on 31 December 2010 
A.  Ranked by product 
B.  Ranked by country 

EN 

66 

   EN 

 
ANNEX Q 

ANNEX R 

ANNEX S 

Undertakings in force on 31 December 2010  
A.  Ranked by product 
B.  Ranked by country 
Anti-dumping & anti-subsidy investigations pending on 31 December 2010 : 
A.  New investigations (ranked by product) 
B.  Review investigations (ranked by product) 
C.  Ranked by country (new & review investigations) 
Court cases  
A. Court cases pending before the Court of Justice and the General Court on 31 

December 2010 

B.  Judgments, orders and other decisions rendered by the Court of Justice and the 

General Court on 31 December 2010 

ANNEX T 

Safeguard and surveillance measures in force on 31 December 2010 

EN 

67 

   EN 

 
 
ANNEX A 

New investigations initiated 

during the period 1 January – 31 December 2010 

A. 

Anti-dumping investigations (chronological by date of publication) 

Product 

Zeolite A powder 

Melamine 

Coated fine paper 

Stainless steel bars 

Country of origin  OJ Reference 
Bosnia & Herzegovina 

C 40 
17.02.2010, p. 5 

P.R. China 

P.R. China 

India 

Open mesh fabrics of glass fibres 

P.R. China 

Ring binder mechanisms 

Ceramic tiles 

Thailand 

P.R. China 

Wireless wide area networking modems 

P.R. China 

Tris (2-chloro-1-methylethyl) phosphate 

P.R. China 

Fatty alcohols and their blends 

India 
Indonesia 
Malaysia 

Seamless pipes and tubes of stainless steel 

P.R. China 

Vinyl acetate 

U.S.A. 

Graphite electrode systems 

P.R. China 

B. 

Anti-subsidy investigations (chronological by date of publication) 

Product 

Stainless steel bars (AS) 

Country of origin 
India 

Coated fine paper (AS) 

P.R. China 

C 40 
17.02.2010, p. 10 

C 41 
18.02.2010, p. 6 

C 87 A 
1.04.2010, p. 1 

C 131 
20.05.2010, p. 6 

C 131 
20.05.2010, p. 13 

C 160 
19.06.2010, p. 20 

C 171 
30.06.2010, p. 9 

C 201 
23.07.2010, p. 5 

C 219 
13.08.2010, p. 12 

C 265 
30.09.2010, p. 10 

C 327 
04.12.2010, p. 23 

C 343 
17.12.2010, p. 24 

OJ Reference 
C 87 
1.04.2010, p. 17 

C 99 
17.04.2010, p. 30 

EN 

68 

   EN

 
 
Wireless wide area networking modems (AS)  P.R. China 

C 249 
16.09.2010, p. 7 

EN 

69 

   EN

 
ANNEX B 

A) 

New investigations initiated by product sector during the period 2006 – 2010 
(31 December)  

Product 

Chemical and allied 
Textiles and allied 
Wood and paper 
Electronics 
Other mechanical engineering 
Iron and Steel 
Others metal 
Other 

Of which 

anti-dumping 
anti-subsidy 

2006 
13 
2 
- 
5 
2 
- 
9 
5 

36 
35 
1 

2007 
2 
- 
- 
- 
- 
6 
- 
1 

9 
9 
0 

2008 
2 
- 
- 
- 
- 
6 
- 
1 

20 
18 
2 

2009 
9 
3 
- 
1 
- 
4 
1 
3 

21 
15 
6 

2010 
7 
- 
2 
2 
1 
3 
- 
3 

18 
15 
3 

EN 

70 

   EN

 
 
 
B) 

New  investigations  initiated  by  country  of  export  during  the  period  2006  –
2010 (31 December) 

Country of origin 
Armenia 
Australia 
Belarus 
Bosnia & Herzegovina 
Brazil 
China (People's Republic of) 
Croatia 
Egypt 
Guatemala 
Hong Kong 
India 
Indonesia 
Iran 
Japan 
Kazakhstan 
Korea (Rep. of) 
F.Y.R.O.M. 
Malaysia 
Moldova (Rep. of) 
Norway 
Pakistan 
Philippines 
Russia 
South Africa 
Taiwan 
Thailand 
Turkey 
Ukraine 
UAE 
USA 
Vietnam 

2006 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
12 
- 
1 
- 
- 
2 
- 
- 
1 
2 
1 
1 
2 
- 
- 
- 
- 
2 
1 
3 
2 
1 
3 
- 
2 
- 
36 

2007 
- 
- 
1 
1 
- 
6 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
1 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
9 

2008 
1 
- 
1 
- 
1 
6 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
1 
- 
- 
1 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
1 
1 
2 
1 
- 
4 
- 
20 

2009 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
7 
- 
- 
- 
- 
2 
- 
2 
- 
- 
1 
- 
2 
- 
- 
2 
- 
- 
- 
1 
2 
- 
- 
2 
- 
- 
21 

2010 
- 
- 
- 
1 
- 
10 
- 
- 
- 
- 
3 
1 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
1 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
1 
- 
- 
- 
1 
- 
18 

EN 

71 

   EN

 
 
 
ANNEX C 

New investigations concluded by the imposition of provisional duties 

during the period 1 January – 31 December 2010 

A. 

Anti-dumping investigations (chronological by date of publication) 

Product 

Country of 
origin 

Sodium gluconate 

P.R. China 

Aluminium wheels 

P.R. China 

Polyethylene terephthalate 
(PET) 

Iran 
UAE 

High tenacity yarn of 
polyesters 

P.R. China 

Continuous filament glass fibre 
products 

P.R. China 

Melamine 

P.R. China 

Zeolite A powder 

Bosnia & 
Herzegovina 

Coated fine paper 

P.R. China 

Regulation N°  OJ Reference 

Commission Reg. 
(EU) No 377/2010 
03.05.2010 
Commission Reg. 
(EU) No 404/2010 
10.05.2010 
Commission Reg. 
(EU) No 472/2010 
31.05.2010 
Commission Reg. 
(EU) No 478/2010 
01.06.2010 
Commission Reg. 
(EU) No 812/2010 
15.09.2010 
Commission Reg. 
(EU) No 1035/2010 
15.11.2010 
Commission Reg. 
(EU) No 1036/2010 
15.11.2010 
Commission Reg. 
(EU) No 1042/2010 
16.11.2010 

L 111 
04.05.2010 
p. 5 
L 117 
11.05.2010 
p. 64 
L 134 
01.06.2010 
p. 4 
L 135 
02.06.2010 
p. 3 
L 243 
16.09.2010 
p. 40 
L 298 
16.11.2010 
p. 10 
L 298 
16.11.2010 
p. 27 
L 299 
17.11.2010 
p. 7 

B. 

Anti-subsidy investigations (chronological by date of publication) 

Product 

Country of 
origin 

Regulation N°  OJ Reference 

Polyethylene terephthalate 
(PET) (AS) 

Stainless steel bars (AS) 

Iran 
Pakistan 
UAE 

India 

Commission Reg. 
(EU) No 473/2010 
31.05.2010 

L 134 
01.06.2010 
p. 25 

Commission Reg. 

L 343 

EN 

72 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
(EU) No 1261/2010 
22.12.2010 

29.12.2010 
p. 57 

EN 

73 

   EN

 
ANNEX D 

New investigations concluded by the imposition of definitive duties 

during the period 1 January – 31 December 2010 

A. 

Anti-dumping investigations (chronological by date of publication) 

Product 

Country of 
origin 

Cargo scanning systems 

P.R. China 

Molybdenum wires 

P.R. China 

Aluminium road wheels 

P.R. China 

Sodium gluconate 

P.R. China 

High tenacity yarn of 
polyesters 

Ironing board (Since 
Hardware) 

P.R. China 

P.R. China 

Regulation N°  OJ Reference 

Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 510/2010 
14.06.2010 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 511/2010 
14.06.2010 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 964/2010 
25.10.2010 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 965/2010 
25.10.2010 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 1105/2010 
29.11.2010 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 1243/2010 
20.12.2010 

L 150 
16.06.2010 
p. 1 
L 150 
16.06.2010 
p. 17 
L 282 
28.10.2010 
p. 1 
L 282 
28.10.2010 
p. 24 
L 315 
01.12.2010 
p. 1 
L 338 
22.12.2010 
p. 22 

B. 

Anti-subsidy investigations (chronological by date of publication) 

Product 

Polyethylene terephthalate 
(PET) (AS) 

Country of 
origin 

Iran 
Pakistan 
UAE 

Regulation N°  OJ Reference 

Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 857/2010 
27.09.2010 

L 254 
29.09.2010 
p. 10 

EN 

74 

   EN

 
 
 
ANNEX E 

New investigations terminated without the imposition of measures 

during the period 1 January – 31 December 2010 

A. 

Anti-dumping investigations (chronological by date of publication) 

Product 

Country of 
origin 

Ring binder mechanisms 

Thailand 

Stainless steel fasteners 

Polyethylene terephthalate 
(PET) 

India 
Malaysia 

Iran 
Pakistan 
United Arab 
Emirates 

Decision N° 

OJ Reference 

Commission Decision 
No 2010/116/EU 
24.02.2010 
Commission Decision 
No 2010/392/EU 
14.07.2010 
Commission Decision 
No 2010/577/EU 
28.09.2010 

L 48 
25.02.2010 
p. 17 
L 180 
15.07.2010 
p. 26 
L 254 
29.09.2010 
p. 40 

High tenacity yarn of 
polyesters 

Korea (Rep. of) 
Taiwan 

Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 1105/2010 
29.11.2010 

L 315 
01.12.2010 
p. 1 

B. 

Anti-subsidy investigations (chronological by date of publication) 

Product 

Stainless steel fasteners (AS) 

Country of 
origin 

India 
Malaysia 

Decision N° 

OJ Reference 

Commission Decision 
No 2010/393/EU 
14.07.2010 

L 180 
15.07.2010 
p. 28 

EN 

75 

   EN

 
 
ANNEX F 

Expiry reviews initiated or concluded 

during the period 1 January – 31 December 2010 

(chronological by date of publication) 

Product 

Polyester staple fibres 

Initiated 

Country of origin 

P.R. China 

Furfuraldehyde 

P.R. China 

Antibiotics (broad spectrum) (AS) 

India 

Bicycles 

P.R. China 

Barium carbonate 

P.R. China 

Hand pallet trucks and their essential parts 

P.R. China 

Castings 

P.R. China 

Trichloroisocyanuric acid 

P.R. China 

Magnesia bricks 

P.R. China 

Steel ropes and cables 

Stainless steel fasteners and parts thereof 

P.R. China 
South Africa 
Ukraine 

P.R. China 
Taiwan 

OJ Reference 
C 64 
16.03.2010 
p. 10 

C 107 
27.04.2010 
p. 10 

C 123 
12.05.2010 
p. 11 

C 188 
13.07.2010 
p. 5 

C 192 
16.07.2010 
p. 4 

C 196 
20.07.2010 
p. 15 

C 203 
27.07.2010 
p. 2 

C 270 
06.10.2010 
p. 7 

C 272 
08.10.2010 
p. 5 

C 309 
13.11.2010 
p. 6 

C 315 
19.11.2010 
p. 7 

Concluded : confirmation of duty 

Product 

Country of origin  Regulation/ Decision  OJ Reference 

EN 

76 

   EN

 
 
Ethanolamines 

USA 

Ring binder mechanisms 

P.R. China 

Silicon 

P.R. China 

Sodium cyclamate 

P.R. China 
Indonesia 

Ammonium nitrate 

Ukraine 

Polyethylene terephthalate 
(PET) 

P.R. China 

Graphite electrode systems 

India 

Graphite electrode systems 
(AS) 

India 

Synthetic fibre ropes 

India 

No 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 54/2010 
19.01.2010 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 157/2010 
22.02.2010 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 467/2010 
25.05.2010 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 492/2010 
03.06.2010 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 512/2010 
14.06.2010 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 1030/2010 
17.11.2010 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 1186/2010 
13.12.2010 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 1185/2010 
13.12.2010 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 1242/2010 
20.12.2010 

L 17 
22.01.2010 
p. 1 
L 49 
26.02.2010 
p. 1 
L 131 
29.05.2010 
p. 1 
L 140 
08.06.2010 
p. 2 
L 150 
16.06.2010 
p. 24 
L 300 
17.11.2010 
p. 1 
L 332 
16.12.2010 
p. 17 
L 332 
16.12.2010 
p. 1 
L 338 
22.12.2010 
p. 10 

Concluded : termination and repeal of the measures 

Product 

Country of origin  Regulation/ Decision 

OJ Reference 

Glyphosate 

P.R. China 

No 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 1187/2010 
13.12.2010 

L 332 
16.12.2010 
p. 31 

ANNEX G 

Interim reviews initiated or concluded 

during the period 1 January – 31 December 2010 

(chronological by date of publication) 

Product 
PET (polyethylene terephthalate) 
film 

Initiated 
Country of origin 

India 

PET (polyethylene terephthalate) 
film (AS) 

India 

OJ Reference 
C 8 
14.01.2010 
p. 27 

C 8 
14.01.2010 

EN 

77 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
PET (polyethylene terephthalate)  Korea (Rep. of) 

PET (polyethylene terephthalate) 
film 

India 

PET (polyethylene terephthalate) 

India 

PET (polyethylene terephthalate) 
(AS) 

India 

Plastic sacks and bags 

P.R. China 

Ferro-silicon 

Russia 

PET (polyethylene terephthalate) 
film 

India 

Coumarin 

P.R. China 

Potassium chloride 

Belarus 
Russia 

p. 29 

C 47 
25.02.2010 
p. 24 

C 131 
12.05.2010 
p. 3 

C 151 
10.06.2010 
p. 15 

C 151 
10.06.2010 
p. 17 

C 253 
21.09.2010 
p. 2 

C 290 
27.10.2010 
p. 15 

C 294 
29.10.2010 
p. 10 

C 299 
05.11.2010 
p. 4 

C 323 
30.11.2010 
p. 24 

Concluded : confirmation/amendment of duty 
Country of origin  Regulation/ Decision 

Product 

OJ Reference 

Ironing boards 

P.R. China 

Silicon 

P.R. China 

Ironing boards 

Ukraine 

PET (polyethylene terephthalate) 
film (AS) 

India 

Trichloroisocyanuric acid 

P.R. China 

No 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 270/2010 
29.03.2010 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 467/2010 
25.05.2010 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 580/2010 
29.06.2010 

Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 579/2010 
29.06.2010 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 855/2010 
27.09.2010 

L 84 
31.03.2010 
p. 13 
L 131 
29.05.2010 
p. 1 
L 168 
02.07.2010 
p. 12 

L 168 
02.07.2010 
p. 1 
L 254 
29.09.2010 
p. 1 

EN 

78 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Concluded by termination of review/confirmation of duty 

Product 

Country of origin  Regulation/ Decision 

OJ Reference 

Tungsten electrodes 

P.R. China 

Ammonium nitrate 

Russia 

PET (polyethylene terephthalate) 
film 

India 

PET (polyethylene terephthalate) 
film (AS) 

India 

No 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 151/2010 
22.02.2010 

Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 856/2010 
27.09.2010 

Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 1064/2010 
17.11.2010 

Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 1064/2010 
17.11.2010 

L 48 
25.02.2010 
p. 1 

L 254 
29.09.2010 
p. 5 

L 304 
20.11.2010 
p. 2 

L 304 
20.11.2010 
p. 2 

Concluded : termination of measures 

Product 

Country of origin  Regulation/ Decision 

OJ Reference 

None 

- 

No 
- 

- 

ANNEX H 

Other reviews initiated or concluded 

during the period 1 January – 31 December 2010 

(chronological by date of publication) 

Initiated 

Product 

Country of origin  Regulation/ Decision 

OJ Reference 

None 

- 

No 
- 

- 

Concluded : confirmation/amendment of duty 
Country of origin  Regulation/ Decision 

Product 

OJ Reference 

Glyphosate23 

P.R. China 

Polyester filament fabrics 
(finished)24 

P.R. China 

23 Extension of duties suspension 
24 New Exporting Producers' Treatment 

No 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 126/2010 
11.02.2010 

Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 364/2010 
26.04.2010 

L 40 
13.02.2010 
p. 1 

L 107 
29.04.2010 
p. 6 

EN 

79 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Ironing boards25 

P.R. China 

Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 805/2010 
13.09.2010 

L 242 
15.09.2010 
p. 1 

25 Re-imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports by Foshan Shunde Yongijan Housewares  
   and Hardware Co. Ltd 

EN 

80 

   EN

 
                                                 
ANNEX I 

New exporter reviews initiated or concluded 

during the period 1 January – 31 December 2010 

(chronological by date of publication) 

A. 

Anti-dumping investigations 

Product 

Country of origin  Regulation/Decision 

OJ Reference 

Initiated 

PET (polyethylene terephthalate) 
film 

Israel 

Magnesia bricks 

P.R. China 

No 
Commission Reg. 
(EU) No 6/2010 
05.01.2010 
Commission Reg. 
(EU) No 850/2010 
27.09.2010 

L 2 
06.01.2010 
p. 5 
L 253 
28.09.2010 
p. 42 

Concluded : imposition/amendment of duty 

Product 

Country of origin 

Ironing boards 

P.R. China 

Furfuryl alcohol 

P.R. China 

Tube or pipe fittings of iron or 
steel 

P.R. China 

PET (polyethylene 
terephthalate) film 

Israel 

Regulation/ 
Decision No 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 77/2010 
19.01.2010 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 195/2010 
01.03.2010 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 363/2010 
26.04.2010 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 806/2010 
13.09.2010 

OJ Reference 

L 24 
28.01.2010 
p. 1 
L 60 
10.03.2010 
p. 1 
L 107 
29.04.2010 
p. 1 
L 242 
15.09.2010 
p. 6 

EN 

81 

   EN

 
 
 
 
Concluded : termination of the review / confirmation of duty 
Product 

Country of origin  Regulation/ Decision 

OJ Reference 

None 

- 

No 
- 

- 

B. 

Anti-subsidy investigations ("accelerated" investigations) 

Product 

Country of origin  Regulation/Decision 

OJ Reference 

Initiated 

PET (polyethylene terephthalate) 
film (AS) 

Israel 

No (if applicable) 
Commission Reg. 
(EU) No 6/2010 
05.01.2010 

L 2 
06.01.2010 
p. 5 

Product 

Concluded : imposition/amendment of duty 
Country of origin Regulation/ Decision 

OJ Reference 

PET (polyethylene terephthalate) 
film (AS) 

Israel 

No 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 806/2010 
13.09.2010 

L 242 
15.09.2010 
p. 6 

Product 

Concluded : termination 
Country of origin  Regulation/ Decision 

OJ Reference 

None 

- 

No 
- 

- 

EN 

82 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX J 

Anti-absorption investigations initiated or concluded 

during the period 1 January – 31 December 2010 

(chronological by date of publication) 

Product 

None 

- 

Initiated 
Country of origin 

OJ Reference 
- 

Concluded with increase of duty 

Product 

Country of origin  Regulation/ Decision 

OJ Reference 

None 

- 

No 
- 

- 

Concluded without increase of duty / termination 

Product 

None 

Country of 
origin 

- 

Regulation/ 
Decision No 
- 

OJ Reference 

- 

EN 

83 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX K 

Anti-circumvention investigations initiated or concluded 

during the period 1 January – 31 December 2010 

(chronological by date of publication) 

Initiated 

Product 

Country of origin  Regulation/ Decision 

OJ Reference 

Biodiesel 

Biodiesel (AS) 

USA (Canada, 
Singapore) 

USA (Canada, 
Singapore) 

Plastic sacs and bags 

P.R. China 

Fasteners, iron or steel 

P.R. China 
(Malaysia) 

No 
Commission Reg. 
(EU) No 720/2010 
11.08.2010 
Commission Reg. 
(EU) No 721/2010 
11.08.2010 
Commission Reg. 
(EU) No 748/2010 
19.08.2010 
Commission Reg. 
(EU) No 966/2010 
27.10.2010 

L 211 
12.08.2010 
p. 1 
L 211 
12.08.2010 
p. 6 
L 219 
20.08.2010 
p. 1 
L 282 
28.10.2010 
p. 29 

Concluded with extension of duty 

Product 

Steel ropes and cables 

Country of 
consignment 

Korea (Rep. of) 

Regulation No 

OJ Reference 

Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 400/2010 
26.04.2010 

L 117 
11.05.2010 
p. 1 

Concluded without extension of duty / termination 

Product 

Country of 
consignment 

Steel ropes and cables 

Malaysia 

Regulation No 

OJ Reference 

Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 400/2010 
26.04.2010 

L 117 
11.05.2010 
p. 1 

Exemptions granted and/or rejected 

Product 

None 

Country of 
consignment 

- 

Regulation No 

OJ Reference 

- 

- 

EN 

84 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX L 

Safeguard investigations initiated and concluded 

during the period 1 January – 31 December 2010  

(chronological by date of publication) 

New investigations initiated 

Product 
Wireless wide area networking 
modems 

Country of origin 

P.R. China 

OJ Reference 
C 171 
30.06.2010, p. 9 

New investigations terminated without imposition of measures 
Product 

Country of origin  Regulation/ Decision 

OJ Reference 

None 

- 

No 
- 

- 

Product 

Country of origin  Regulation/ Decision 

OJ Reference 

Issue of licences 

None 

- 

No 
- 

- 

Safeguard measures which expired 

Product 

Country of origin 

None 

- 

Date of expiry 
- 

EN 

85 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX M 

Undertakings accepted or repealed 

during the period 1 January – 31 December 2010 

(chronological by date of publication) 

Undertakings accepted 

Product 

Castings 

Country of 
origin 

P.R. China 

Regulation N°  OJ Reference 

Commission Dec. 
No 2010/177/EU 
23.03.2010 

L 77 
24.03.2010 
p. 55 

Undertakings withdrawn or repealed 

Product 

Castings 

Country of 
origin 

P.R. China 

Regulation N°  OJ Reference 

Commission Dec. 
No 2010/389/EU 
13.07.2010 

L 179 
14.07.2010 
p. 8 

Undertakings which expired/lapsed 

Product 

Grain oriented flat-rolled 
products of silicon-electrical 
steel (small + big) 

Country of 
origin 

USA 

Original measure(s) 
& OJ Reference 
Commission Dec. 
No 2005/622/EC 

(OJ L 223, 27.08.2005,      

p. 42) 

OJ Reference 

C 230 
26.08.2010 
p. 21 

EN 

86 

   EN

 
 
 
ANNEX N 

Measures which expired / lapsed 

during the period 1 January – 31 December 2010 

(chronological by date of publication) 

A. 

Anti-dumping investigations (chronological by date of publication) 

Product 

Country of 
origin 

Polyester staple fibres 

Korea (Rep. of) 

Polyester staple fibres 

Saudi Arabia 

Compressors 

P.R. China 

Magnesium oxide (caustic 
magnesite) 

P.R. China 

Bicycles 

Vietnam 

Grain oriented flat-rolled 
products of silicon-electrical 
steel (small + big) 

USA 

Original measure 
&  
OJ Reference 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 2852/2000 
(OJ L332, 28.12.2000, 
p. 17) 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 412/2009 
(OJ L125, 21.05.2009, 
p. 1) 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 428/2005 
(OJ L71, 17.03.2005,   
p. 1) 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 412/2009 
(OJ L125, 21.05.2009, 
p. 1) 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 261/2008 
(OJ L 81, 20.03.2008,  
p. 1) 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 778/2005 
(OJ L 131, 25.05.2005, 
p. 1) 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1095/2005 
(OJ L 183, 14.07.2005, 
p. 1) 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1371/2005 
(OJ L 223, 27.08.2005,    
p. 1) 

Publication 

C 55 
05.03.2010 
p. 12 

C 61 
12.03.2010 
p. 5 

C 73 
23.03.2010 
p. 39 

C 135 
26.05.2010 
p. 22 

C 188 
13.07.2010 
p. 10 

C 230 
26.08.2010 
p. 21 

EN 

87 

   EN

 
Polyester filament fabrics 
(finished) 

P.R. China 

Trichloroisocyanuric acid 

USA 

Steel ropes and cables 

India 

Stainless steel fasteners and parts 
thereof 

Indonesia 
Thailand 
Vietnam 

Granular polytetrafluoroethylene 
(PTFE) 

P.R. China 
Russia 

Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1487/2005 
(OJ L 240, 16.09.2005, 
p. 1) 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EU) No 364/2010 
(OJ L107, 29.04.2010, 
p. 6) 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1631/2005 
(OJ L 261, 07.10.2005,    
p. 1) 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1858/2005 
(OJ L 299, 16.11.2005, 
p. 1) 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 283/2009 
(OJ L94, 8.04.2009, p. 
5) 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1890/2005 
(OJ L 302, 19.11.2005, 
p. 1) 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 768/2009 
(OJ L221, 25.08.2009, 
p. 1) 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1987/2005 
(OJ L 320, 08.12.2005, 
p. 1) 

C 248 
15.09.2010 
p. 7 

C 271 
07.10.2010 
p. 28 

C 311 
16.11.2010 
p. 16 

C 314 
18.11.2010 
p. 8 

C 330 
08.12.2010 
p. 12 

B. 

Anti-subsidy investigations (chronological by date of publication) 

Product 

Country of 
origin 

None 

- 

Original measure 
&  
OJ Reference 
- 

Publication 

- 

EN 

88 

   EN

 
 
 
 
ANNEX O 

Definitive anti-dumping measures in force on 31 December 2010 

A. Ranked by product (alphabetical) 

Product 
Ammonium nitrate  

Origin 

Russia 

Measure 
Duties 

Undertakings 

Ukraine 

Duties 
(2 years) 

Undertakings 

Aluminium foil 

Armenia 
Brazil 
P.R. China 

Duties 

Undertakings 

Regulation N° 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 658/2002 
15.04.2002 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 945/2005 
21.06.2005 
and maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 661/2008 
08.07.2008 
corrected by 
L 339, 22.12.2009,  
p. 59 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 989/2009 
19.10.2009 

Commission Dec. 
No 2008/577/EC 
04.07.2008 
corrected by 
L 339, 22.12.2009,  
p. 59 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 442/2007 
19.04.2007  
and maintained by 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 512/2010 
14.06.2010 

Commission Dec. 
No 2008/577/EC 
04.07.2008 
corrected by 
L 339, 22.12.2009,  
p. 59 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 925/2009 
24.09.2009 

Commission Dec. 
No 2009/736/EC 
05.10.2009 

Publication 
L 102 
18.04.2002 
p. 1 

L 160 
23.06.2005 
p. 1 

L 185 
12.07.2008 
p. 1 

L 278 
23.10.2009 
p. 1 

L 185 
12.07.2007 
p. 43 

L 106 
24.04.2007 
p. 1 

L 150 
18.06.2010 
p. 24 

L 185 
12.07.2007 
p. 43 

L 262 
06.10.2009 
p. 1 

L 262 
06.10.2009 
p. 50 

EN 

89 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Aluminium road wheels 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Barium carbonate 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Bicycles 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Bicycle parts (extension to 
bicycles) 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Biodiesel 

USA 

Duties 

Candles, tapers and the like 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Castings 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 964/2010 
25.10.2010 

Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1175/2005 
18.07.2005 
corrected by 
L 181, 04.07.2006,  
p. 111 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1524/2000 
10.07.2000 
and extended to 
bicycle parts by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 71/97 
10.01.97 
as last amended by 
Council Reg.  
(EC) No 1095/2005 
12.07.2005 
and maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 171/2008 
25.02.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 71/97 
10.01.97 
as last amended by 
Council Reg.  
(EC) No 1095/2005 
12.07.2005 
and maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 171/2008 
25.02.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 599/2009 
07.07.2009 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 393/2009 
11.05.2009 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1212/2005 
25.07.2005 
corrected by L 26, 
30.01.2009, p. 6 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 426/2008 
14.05.2008 

L 282 
28.10.2010 
p. 1 

L 189 
21.07.2005 
p. 15 

L 175 
14.07.2000 
p. 39 

L 16 
18.01.97 
p. 1 

L 183 
14.07.2005 
p. 1 

L 55 
28.02.2008 
p. 1 
L 16 
18.01.97 
p. 1 

L 183 
14.07.05 
p. 1 

L 55 
28.02.08 
p. 1 
L 179 
10.07.2009 
p. 26 
L 119 
14.05.2009 
p. 1 
L 199 
29.07.2005 
p. 1 

L 129 
17.05.2008 
p. 1 

Undertakings 

Commission Dec. 

L 77 

EN 

90 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Cargo scanning systems 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Citric acid 

P.R. China 

Duties 
Undertakings 

Citrus fruits 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Chamois leather 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Coke of coal in pieces with a 
diameter of more than 80 mm 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Coumarin 

Duties 

P.R. China 
India (ext.) 
Thailand (ext.) 
Indonesia (ext.) 
Malaysia (ext.) 

India 

Undertaking 

Dicyandiamide 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Dihydromyrcenol 

India 

Duties 

No 2010/177/EU 
23.03.2010 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 510/2010 
14.06.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1193/2008 
01.12.2008 
Commission Reg. 
(EC) No 1355/2008 
18.12.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1338/2006 
08.09.2006 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 239/2008 
17.03.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 769/2002 
07.05.2002 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1854/2003 
20.10.2003 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
imports consigned 
from India and 
Thailand by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 2272/2004 
22.12.2004 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
imports consigned 
from Indonesia and 
Malaysia by  
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1650/2006 
07.11.2006 
and maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 654/2008 
29.04.2008 

Commission Dec. 
No 2005/3/EC 
03.01.2005 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1331/2007 
13.11.2007 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 63/2008 
21.01.2008 

24.03.2010 
p. 55 
L 150 
16.06.2010 
p. 1 
L 323 
03.12.2008 
p. 1 
L 350 
30.12.2008 
p. 35 
L 251 
14.09.2006 
p. 1 
L 75 
18.03.2008 
p. 22 
L 123 
09.05.2002 
p. 1 

L 272 
23.10.2003 
p. 1 

L 396 
31.12.2004 
p. 18 

L 311 
10.11.2006 
p. 1 

L 183 
11.07.2008 
p. 1 

L 1 
04.01.2005 
p. 15 
L 296 
15.11.2007 
p. 1 
L 23 
26.01.2008 
p. 1 

EN 

91 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ethanolamines 

USA 

Fasteners, iron or steel 

P.R. China 

Ferro-silicon 

Footwear with uppers of 
leather 

P.R. China 
Egypt 
Kazakhstan 
F.Y.R.O.M. 
Russia 
P.R. China 
Macau (SAR) (ext.)
Vietnam 

Duties  
(2 years) 

Duties 

Duties 

Duties 
(15 months) 

Furfuraldehyde 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Furfuryl alcohol 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Graphite electrode systems 

India 

Duties 

Hand pallet trucks and their 
essential parts 

P.R. China 
Thailand (ext) 

Duties 

Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 54/2010 
19.01.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 91/2009 
26.01.2009 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 172/2008 
25.02.2008 

Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1472/2006 
05.10.2006 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
imports consigned 
from Macau (SAR) by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 388/2008 
29.04.2008 
and maintained by 
Council Impl.Reg. 
(EU) No 1294/2009 
22.12.2009 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 639/2005 
25.04.2005 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1905/2003 
27.10.2003 
and maintained by 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 1202/2009 
07.12.2009 
as last amended by 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 195/2010 
01.03.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1629/2004 
13.09.2004 
as last amended by 
Council Reg.  
(EC) No 1354/2008 
18.12.2008 
and maintained by 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 1186/2010 
13.12.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1174/2005 
18.07.2005 
as last amended by 

L 17 
22.01.2010 
p. 1 
L 29 
31.01.2009 
p. 1 
L 55 
28.02.2008 
p. 6 

L 275 
06.10.2006 
p. 1 

L 117 
01.05.2008 
p. 1 

L 352 
30.12.2009 
p. 1 
L 107 
28.04.2005 
p. 1 
L 283 
31.10.2003 
p. 1 

L 323 
10.12.2009 
p. 48 

L 60 
10.03.2010 
p. 1 
L 295 
18.09.2004 
p. 10 

L 350 
30.12.2008 
p. 24 

L 332 
16.12.2010 
p. 17 
L 189 
21.07.2005 
p. 1 

EN 

92 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
High tenacity yarn of 
polyesters 

Ironing boards 

P.R. China 

Duties 

P.R. China 
Ukraine 

Duties 

P.R. China (Since 
Hardware) 

Duties 

Lever arch mechanisms 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Lighters (non-refillable and 
refillable) 

P.R. China 
Taiwan 

Duties 

Magnesia (deadburned) 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Magnesia bricks 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Council Reg.  
(EC) No 684/2008 
17.07.2008 
and extended to such 
imports consigned 
from Thailand  
by Council Reg. 
(EC) No 499/2009 
11.06.2009 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 1105/2010 
29.11.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 452/2007 
23.04.2007 
corrected in PL by 
L 353, 31.12.2009,  
p. 70 
as last amended by 
Council Impl. Reg.  
(EU) No 77/2010 
19.01.2010 
and  
Council Impl. Reg.  
(EU) No 270/2010 
29.03.2010 
and 
Council Impl. Reg.  
(EU) No 580/2010 
29.06.2010 
and 
Council Impl. Reg.  
(EU) No 1241/2010 
20.12.2010 

Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 1243/2010 
20.12.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1136/2006 
24.07.2006 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1458/2007 
12.12.2007 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 716/2006 
05.05.2006 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1659/2005 
06.10.2005 
as last amended by 
Council Reg.  
(EC) No 906/2008 
15.09.2008, 

L 192 
19.07.2008 
p. 1 

L 151 
16.06.2009 
p. 1 
L 315 
01.12.2010 
p. 1 
L 109 
26.04.2007 
p. 12 

L 24 
28.01.2010 
p. 1 

L 84 
31.03.2010 
p. 13 

L 168 
02.07.2010 
p. 12 

L 338 
22.12.2010 
p. 8 
L 338 
22.12.2010 
p. 22 
L 205 
27.07.2006 
p. 1 
L 326 
12.12.2007 
p. 1 
L 125 
12.05.2006 
p. 1 
L 267 
12.10.2005 
p. 1 

L 251 
19.09.2008 
p. 1 

EN 

93 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Manganese dioxides 

South Africa 

Duties 

Molybdenum wires 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Monosodium glutamate 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Okoumé plywood 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Peroxosulphates 

Plastic sacks and bags 

P.R. China 
Taiwan 
USA 
P.R. China 
Thailand 

Duties 

Duties 

PET (polyethylene 
terephthalate) 

India 
Indonesia 
Korea (Rep. of) 
Malaysia 
Taiwan 
Thailand 

India 
Indonesia 
P.R. China 

Duties 

Undertakings 

Duties 

as last amended by 
Council Reg.  
(EC) No 825/2009 
07.09.2009 
and by Council Reg.  
(EC) No 826/2009 
07.09.2009 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 221/2008 
10.03.2008 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 511/2010 
14.06.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1187/2008 
27.11.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1942/2004 
02.11.2004 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1184/2007 
09.10.2007 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1425/2006 
25.09.2006 
corrected by 
L 49, 18.02.2007,  
p. 36 and by 
L 233, 05.09.2007,  
p. 7 
as last amended by 
Council Regulation 
(EC) No 249/2008 
17.03.2008 
and 
Council Regulation 
(EC) No 189/2009 
09.03.2009 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 192/2007 
22.02.2007 
corrected by 
L 215, 18.08.2007, p. 
27 

L 240 
11.09.2009 
p. 1 
L 240 
11.09.2009 
p. 7 
L 69 
13.03.2008 
p. 1 
L 150 
16.06.2010 
p. 17 
L 322 
02.12.2008 
p. 1 
L 336 
12.11.2004 
p. 4 
L 265 
11.10.2007 
p. 1 
L 270 
29.09.2006 
p. 4 

L 76 
19.03.2008 
p. 8 

L 67 
12.03.2009 
p. 5 
L 59 
27.02.2007 
p. 1 

Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1467/2004 
13.08.2004 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 2167/2005 
20.12.2005 

L 271 
19.08.2004 
p. 1 

L 345 
28.12.2005 
p. 11 

EN 

94 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PET (polyethylene 
terephthalate) film 

India 
Brazil (ext.) 
Israel (ext.) 

Duties 

Polyester staple fibres 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Potassium chloride 

Belarus 
Russia  

Duties 

Russia 

Undertakings 

Powdered activated carbon 
(PAC) 

P.R. China 

Duties 

PSC wires and strands 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Refrigerators (side-by-side) 

Korea (Rep. of) 

Duties 

and maintained by 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 1030/2010 
17.11.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1292/2007 
30.10.2007 
and extended to 
imports consigned 
from Brazil and from 
Israel by the same 
Regulation 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 15/2009 
08.01.2009 
and 
Council Impl. Reg 
(EU) No 806/2010 
13.09.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 428/2005 
10.03.2005 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1333/2005 
09.08.2005 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1050/2006 
11.07.2006 

Commission Dec. 
No 2005/802/EC 
17.10.2005 
as last amended by 
Commission Dec. 
No 2006/557/EC 
08.08.2006 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1011/2002 
10.06.2002 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 931/2003 
26.05.2003 
and maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 649/2008 
08.07.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 383/2009 
05.05.2009 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1289/2006 

L 300 
17.11.2010 
p. 1 
L 288 
06.11.2007 
p. 1 

L 6 
10.01.2009 
p. 1 

L 242 
15.09.2010 
p. 6 
L 71 
17.03.2005 
p. 1 

L 211 
13.08.2005 
p. 1 
L 191 
12.07.2006 
p. 1 

L 302 
19.11.2005 
p. 79 

L 218 
09.08.2006 
p. 22 
L 155 
14.06.2002 
p. 1 

L 133 
29.05.2003 
p. 36 

L 181 
10.07.2008 
p. 1 
L 118 
13.05.2009 
p. 1 
L 236 
31.08.2006 

EN 

95 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ring binder mechanisms 

P.R. China 
Vietnam (ext.) 
Laos (ext.) 

Duties 

Saddles 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Seamless pipes and tubes of 
iron or steel 

Croatia  
Russia 
Ukraine 

Duties 

Seamless pipes and tubes of 
iron or steel 

Silico-manganese 

P.R. China 

Duties 

P.R. China 
Kazakhstan 

Duties 

Silicon carbide 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Silicon 

P.R. China 
Korea (Rep. of) 
(ext.) 

Duties 

25.08.2006 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 2074/2004 
29.11.2004 
extended to imports 
from Vietnam 
by Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1208/2004 
28.06.2004 
and extended to 
imports from Laos  
by Council Reg. 
(EC) No 33/2006 
09.01.2006 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 818/2008 
13.08.2008 
and maintained by 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 157/2010 
22.02.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 691/2007 
18.06.2007 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 954/2006 
27.06.2006 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 812/2008 
11.08.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 926/2009 
24.09.2009 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1420/2007 
04.12.2007 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 865/2008 
27.08.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1264/2006 
21.08.2006 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 398/2004 
02.03.2004 
extended to imports of 
silicon consigned 
from the Republic of 
Korea by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 42/2007 

p. 11 
L 359 
04.12.2004 
p. 11 

L 232 
01.07.2004 
p. 1 

L 7 
12.01.2006 
p. 1 

L 221 
19.08.2008 
p. 1 

L 49 
26.02.2010 
p. 1 
L 160 
21.06.2007 
p. 1 
L 175 
29.06.2006 
p. 4 

L 220 
15.08.2008 
p. 1 
L 262 
06.10.2009 
p. 19 
L 317 
05.12.2007 
p. 5 

L 232 
25.08.2006 
p. 1 
L 66 
04.03.2004 
p. 15 

L 13 
19.01.2007 

EN 

96 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Sodium cyclamate 

P.R. China 
Indonesia 

Duties 

Sodium gluconate 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Stainless steel fasteners and 
parts thereof 

P.R. China 
Taiwan 

Steel ropes and cables 

P.R. China  
South Africa 
Ukraine 
Moldova (Rep. of) 
(ext.) 
Morocco (ext.) 
Korea (Rep. of) 

Duties 

Duties 

Russia 

Duties  

Strawberries (frozen) 

P.R. China 

Duties 

15.01.2007 
and maintained by 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 467/2010 
25.05.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 435/2004 
08.03.2004 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 965/2010 
25.10.2010 

Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1890/2005 
14.11.2005 
corrected by L 256, 
02.10.2007, p. 31 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1858/2005 
08.11.2005 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1459/2007 
10.12.2007 
extended as concerns 
Ukraine to such 
imports consigned 
from Moldova (Rep. 
of) by Council Reg. 
(EC) No 760/2004 
22.04.2004 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
such imports 
consigned from 
Morocco by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1886/2004 
25.10.2004 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
such imports 
consigned from Korea 
(Rep. of) by Council 
Impl. Reg. (EU) No 
400/2010 
26.04.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1279/2007 
30.10.2007 
corrected by L 96, 
15.04.2009, p. 39 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 407/2007 

p. 1 

L 131 
29.05.2010 
p. 1 
L 72 
11.03.2004 
p. 1 
L 282 
28.10.2010 
p. 24 

L 302 
19.11.2005 
p. 1 

L 299 
16.11.2005 
p. 1 

L 326 
12.12.2007 
p. 18 

L 120 
24.04.2004 
p. 1 

L 328 
30.10.2004 
p. 1 

L 117 
11.05.2010 
p. 1 

L 285 
31.10.2007 
p. 1 

L 100 
17.04.2007 

EN 

97 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Sulphanilic acid 

P.R. China 
India 

Duties 

India 

Undertakings 

Sweet corn (prepared or 
preserved, in kernels) 

Thailand 

Duties 

Synthetic fibre ropes 

India 

Duties 
(3 years) 

Tartaric acid 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Trichloroisocyanuric acid 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Tube and pipe fitting, of iron 
or steel 

Duties 

P.R. China 
Thailand 
Taiwan (ext.) 
Indonesia (ext.) 
Sri Lanka (ext.) 
Philippines (ext.) 

16.04.2007 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1339/2002 
22.07.2002 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 123/2006 
23.01.2006 
and maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1000/2008 
13.10.2008 

Commission Dec. 
No 2006/37/EC 
05.12.2005 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 682/3007 
18.06.2007 
corrected by 
L 252 of 27.09.2007, 
p. 7 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 954/2008 
25.09.2008 
and by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 847/2009 
15.09.2009 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1736/2004 
08.10.2004 
and maintained by 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 1242/2010 
20.12.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 130/2006 
23.01.2006 
as last amended by  
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 150/2008 
18.02.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1631/2005 
03.10.2005 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 964/2003 
02.06.2003  
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1496/2004 
18.08.2004 

p. 1 
L 196 
25.07.2002 
p. 11 

L 22 
26.01.2006 
p. 5 

L 275 
16.10.2008 
p. 1 

L 22 
26.01.2006 
p. 52 
L 159 
20.06.2007 
p. 14 

L 260 
30.09.2008 
p. 1 

L 246 
18.09.2009 
p. 1 
L 311 
08.10.2004 
p. 1 

L 338 
22.12.2010 
p. 10 
L 23 
27.01.2006 
p. 1 

L 48 
22.02.2008 
p. 1 
L 261 
07.10.2005 
p. 1 
L 139 
06.06.2003 
p. 1 

L 275 
25.08.2004 
p. 1 

EN 

98 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
imports consigned 
from Indonesia by 
Council Reg.  
(EC) 2052/2004 
22.11.2004 
and to imports 
consigned from Sri 
Lanka by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 2053/2004 
22.11.2004 
and to imports 
consigned from the 
Philippines by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 655/2006 
27.04.2006 
and  
maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 803/2009 
27.08.2009 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1514/2002 
19.08.2002 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 778/2003 
06.05.2003 
and maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1001/2008 
13.10.2008 
as last amended by 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 363/2010 
26.04.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 2268/2004 
22.12.2004 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1275/2005 
25.07.2005 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 260/2007 
09.03.2007 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1911/2006 
19.12.2006 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 

L 355 
01.12.2004 
p. 4 

L 355 
01.12.2004 
p. 9 

L 116 
29.04.2006 
p. 1 

L 233 
04.09.2009 
p. 1 

L 228 
24.08.2002 
p. 1 

L 114 
08.05.2003 
p. 1 

L 275 
16.10.2008 
p. 18 

L 107 
29.04.2010 
p. 1 
L 395 
31.12.2004 
p. 56 

L 202 
03.08.2005 
p. 1 
L 72 
13.03.2007 
p. 1 
L 365 
21.12.2006 
p. 26 

L 213 

Korea (Rep. of) 
Malaysia  

Duties 

Tungsten carbide and fused 
tungsten carbide 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Tungsten electrodes 

P.R. China 

Duties 

Urea and ammonium nitrate 
solutions 

Algeria 
Belarus  
Russia 
Ukraine 

Duties 

EN 

99 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Algeria 

Undertakings 

Russia 

Welded tubes and pipes, of 
iron or non-alloy steel 

Thailand 
Ukraine 

Duties 

Welded tubes and pipes, of 
iron or non-alloy steel 

Wire rod 

Belarus 
P.R. China 
Russia 
P.R. China 

Duties 

Duties 

B. Ranked by country (alphabetical) 

Origin 

Algeria 

Product 
Urea and ammonium nitrate 
solutions 

Measure 
Duties 

Armenia 

Aluminium foil 

Duties 

Undertakings 

Belarus 

Potassium chloride 

Urea and ammonium nitrate 
solutions 

Undertakings 

Duties 

Duties 

(EC) No 789/2008 
24.07.2008 
and  
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 1251/2009 
18.12.2009 

Commission Reg. 
(EC) No 617/2000 
16.03.2000 

Commission Decision 
No 2008/649/EC 
03.07.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1697/2002 
23.09.2002 
and maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1256/2008 
19.12.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1256/2008 
16.12.2008 

Council Reg. 
(EC) No 703/2009 
27.07.2009 

Regulation N° 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1911/2006 
19.12.2006 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 789/2008 
24.07.2008 

Commission Reg. 
(EC) No 617/2000 
16.03.2000 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 925/2009 
24.09.2009 

Commission Dec. 
No 2009/736/EC 
05.10.2009 

Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1050/2006 
11.07.2006 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1911/2006 
19.12.2006 

08.08.2008 
p. 14 

L 338 
19.12.2009 
p. 5 

L 75 
24.03.2000 
p. 3 

L 213 
08.08.2008 
p. 39 
L 259 
27.09.2002 
p. 8 

L 343 
19.12.2008 
p. 1 
L 343 
19.12.2008 
p. 1 

L 203 
05.08.2009 
p. 1 

Publication 
L 365 
21.12.2006 
p. 26 

L 213 
08.08.2008 
p. 14 

L 75 
24.03.2000 
p. 3 
L 262 
06.10.2009 
p. 1 

L 262 
06.10.2009 
p. 50 
L 191 
12.07.2006 
p. 1 
L 365 
21.12.2006 
p. 26 

EN 

100 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Welded tubes and pipes, of 
iron or non-alloy steel 

Brazil 

Aluminium foil 

Duties 

Duties 

Undertakings 

PET (polyethylene 
terephthalate) film (ext.) 

Duties (ext.) 

P.R. China 

Aluminium foil 

Duties 

Undertakings 

Aluminium road wheels 

Duties 

Barium carbonate 

Duties 

Bicycles 

Duties 

as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 789/2008 
24.07.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1256/2008 
16.12.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 925/2009 
24.09.2009 
Commission 
Decision 
No 2009/736/EC 
05.10.2009 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1292/2007 
30.10.2007 
and extended to 
imports consigned 
from Brazil and from 
Israel by the same 
Regulation 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 15/2009 
08.01.2009 
and 
Council Impl. Reg 
(EU) No 806/2010 
13.09.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 925/2009 
24.09.2009 
Commission Dec. 
No 2009/736/EC 
05.10.2009 

Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 964/2010 
25.10.2010 

Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1175/2005 
18.07.2005 
corrected by 
L 181, 04.07.2006,  
p. 111 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1524/2000 
10.07.2000 
and extended to 
bicycle parts by 

L 213 
08.08.2008 
p. 14 
L 343 
19.12.2008 
p. 1 
L 262 
06.10.2009 
p. 1 

L 262 
06.10.2009 
p. 50 

L 288 
06.11.2007 
p. 1 

L 6 
10.01.2009 
p. 1 

L 242 
15.09.2010 
p. 6 
L 262 
06.10.2009 
p. 1 

L 262 
06.10.2009 
p. 50 

L 282 
28.10.2010 
p. 1 

L 189 
21.07.2005 
p. 15 

L 175 
14.07.2000 
p. 39 

EN 

101 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 71/97 
10.01.97 
as last amended by 
Council Reg.  
(EC) No 1095/2005 
12.07.2005 
and maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 171/2008 
25.02.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 71/97 
10.01.97 
as last amended by 
Council Reg.  
(EC) No 1095/2005 
12.07.2005 
and maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 171/2008 
25.02.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 393/2009 
11.05.2009 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1212/2005 
25.07.2005 
corrected by L 26, 
30.01.2009, p. 6 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 426/2008 
14.05.2008 

Commission Dec. 
No 2010/177/EU 
23.03.2010 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 510/2010 
14.06.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1193/2008 
01.12.2008 
Commission Reg. 
(EC) No 1355/2008 
18.12.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1338/2006 
08.09.2006 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 239/2008 
17.03.2008 
Council Reg. 

L 16 
18.01.97 
p. 1 

L 183 
14.07.2005 
p. 1 

L 55 
28.02.2008 
p. 1 
L 16 
18.01.97 
p. 1 

L 119 
14.05.2009 
p. 1 
L 199 
29.07.2005 
p. 1 

L 129 
17.05.2008 
p. 1 

L 77 
24.03.2010 
p. 55 
L 150 
16.06.2010 
p. 1 
L 323 
03.12.2008 
p. 1 
L 350 
30.12.2008 
p. 35 
L 251 
14.09.2006 
p. 1 
L 75 
18.03.2008 
p. 22 
L 123 

Bicycle parts 

Duties 

Candles, tapers and the like 

Duties 

Castings 

Duties 

Undertakings 

Cargo scanning systems 

Duties 

Citric acid 

Citrus fruits 

Chamois leather 

Coke of coal in pieces with a 
diameter of more than 80 mm 

Coumarin 

Duties 
Undertakings 

Duties 

Duties 

Duties 

Duties 

EN 

102 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(EC) No 769/2002 
07.05.2002 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1854/2003 
20.10.2003 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
imports consigned 
from India and 
Thailand by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 2272/2004 
22.12.2004 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
imports consigned 
from Indonesia and 
Malaysia by  
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1650/2006 
07.11.2006 
and maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 654/2008 
29.04.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1331/2007 
13.11.2007 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 91/2009 
26.01.2009 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 172/2008 
25.02.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1472/2006 
05.10.2006 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
imports consigned 
from Macau (SAR) by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 388/2008 
29.04.2008 
and maintained by 
Council Impl.Reg. 
(EU) No 1294/2009 
22.12.2009 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 639/2005 
25.04.2005 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1905/2003 

09.05.2002 
p. 1 

L 272 
23.10.2003 
p. 1 

L 396 
31.12.2004 
p. 18 

L 311 
10.11.2006 
p. 1 

L 183 
11.07.2008 
p. 1 
L 296 
15.11.2007 
p. 1 
L 29 
31.01.2009 
p. 1 
L 55 
28.02.2008 
p. 6 
L 275 
06.10.2006 
p. 1 

L 117 
01.05.2008 
p. 1 

L 352 
30.12.2009 
p. 1 
L 107 
28.04.2005 
p. 1 
L 283 
31.10.2003 

Dicyandiamide 

Duties 

Fasteners, iron or steel 

Duties 

Ferro-silicon 

Duties 

Footwear with uppers of 
leather 

Duties 
(15 months) 

Furfuraldehyde 

Furfuryl alcohol 

Duties 

Duties 

EN 

103 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
27.10.2003 
and maintained by 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 1202/2009 
07.12.2009 
as last amended by 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 195/2010 
01.03.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1174/2005 
18.07.2005 
as last amended by 
Council Reg.  
(EC) No 684/2008 
17.07.2008 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 1105/2010 
29.11.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 452/2007 
23.04.2007 
corrected in PL by 
L 353, 31.12.2009,  
p. 70 
as last amended by 
Council Impl. Reg.  
(EU) No 77/2010 
19.01.2010 
and  
Council Impl. Reg.  
(EU) No 270/2010 
29.03.2010 
and 
Council Impl. Reg.  
(EU) No 580/2010 
29.06.2010 
and 
Council Impl. Reg.  
(EU) No 1241/2010 
20.12.2010 

Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 1243/2010 
20.12.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1136/2006 
24.07.2006 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1458/2007 
12.12.2007 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 716/2006 
05.05.2006 

p. 1 

L 323 
10.12.2009 
p. 48 

L 60 
10.03.2010 
p. 1 
L 189 
21.07.2005 
p. 1 

L 192 
19.07.2005 
p. 1 
L 315 
01.12.2010 
p. 1 
L 109 
26.04.2007 
p. 12 

L 24 
28.01.2010 
p. 1 

L 84 
31.03.2010 
p. 13 

L 168 
02.07.2010 
p. 12 

L 338 
22.12.2010 
p. 8 
L 338 
22.12.2010 
p. 22 
L 205 
27.07.2006 
p. 1 
L 326 
12.12.2007 
p. 1 
L 125 
12.05.2006 
p. 1 

Hand pallet trucks and their 
essential parts 

Duties 

High tenacity yarn of 
polyesters 

Ironing boards 

Duties 

Duties 

Ironing boards (Since 
Hardware) 

Duties 

Lever arch mechanisms 

Duties 

Lighters (non-refillable and 
refillable) 

Duties 

Magnesia (deadburned) 

Duties 

EN 

104 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Magnesia bricks 

Duties 

Molybdenum wires 

Duties 

Monosodium glutamate 

Duties 

Okoumé plywood 

Peroxosulphates 

Duties 

Duties 

Plastic sacks and bags 

Duties 

Polyester staple fibres 

Duties 

PET (polyethylene 
terephthalate) 

Duties 

Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1659/2005 
06.10.2005 
as last amended by 
Council Reg.  
(EC) No 906/2008 
15.09.2008, 
as last amended by 
Council Reg.  
(EC) No 825/2009 
07.09.2009 
and by Council Reg.  
(EC) No 826/2009 
07.09.2009 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 511/2010 
14.06.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1187/2008 
27.11.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1942/2004 
02.11.2004 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1184/2007 
09.10.2007 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1425/2006 
25.09.2006 
corrected by 
L 49, 18.02.2007,  
p. 36 and by 
L 233, 05.09.2007,  
p. 7 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 249/2008 
17.03.2008 
and 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 189/2009 
09.03.2009 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 428/2005 
10.03.2005 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1333/2005 
09.08.2005 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1467/2004 
13.08.2004 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 

L 267 
12.10.2005 
p. 1 

L 251 
19.09.2008 
p. 1 

L 240 
11.09.2009 
p. 1 
L 240 
11.09.2009 
p. 7 
L 150 
16.06.2010 
p. 17 
L 322 
02.12.2008 
p. 1 
L 336 
12.11.2004 
p. 4 
L 265 
11.10.2007 
p. 1 
L 270 
29.09.2006 
p. 4 

L 76 
19.03.2008 
p. 8 

L 67 
12.03.2009 
p. 5 
L 71 
17.03.2005 
p. 1 

L 211 
13.08.2005 
p. 1 
L 271 
19.08.2004 
p. 1 

L 345 

EN 

105 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Powdered activated carbon 
(PAC) 

Duties 

Ring binder mechanisms 

Duties 

PSC wires and strands 

Duties 

Saddles 

Seamless pipes and tubes of 
iron or steel 

Silico-manganese 

Duties 

Duties 

Duties 

28.12.2005 
p. 11 

L 300 
17.11.2010 
p. 1 
L 155 
14.06.2002 
p. 1 

L 133 
29.05.2003 
p. 36 

L 181 
10.07.2008 
p. 1 
L 359 
04.12.2004 
p. 11 

L 232 
01.07.2004 
p. 1 

L 7 
12.01.2006 
p. 1 

L 221 
19.08.2008 
p. 1 

L 49 
26.02.2010 
p. 1 
L 118 
13.05.2009 
p. 1 
L 160 
21.06.2007 
p. 1 
L 262 
06.10.2009 
p. 19 
L 317 
05.12.2007 
p. 5 

(EC) No 2167/2005 
20.12.2005 
and maintained by 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 1030/2010 
17.11.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1011/2002 
10.06.2002 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 931/2003 
26.05.2003 
and maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 649/2008 
08.07.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 2074/2004 
29.11.2004 
extended to imports 
from Vietnam 
by Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1208/2004 
28.06.2004 
and extended to 
imports from Laos  
by Council Reg. 
(EC) No 33/2006 
09.01.2006 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 818/2008 
13.08.2008 
and maintained by 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 157/2010 
22.02.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 383/2009 
05.05.2009 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 691/2007 
18.06.2007 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 926/2009 
24.09.2009 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1420/2007 
04.12.2007 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 865/2008 
27.08.2008 

EN 

106 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Silicon carbide 

Silicon 

Duties 

Duties 

Sodium cyclamate 

Duties 

Sodium gluconate 

Duties 

Stainless steel fasteners and 
parts thereof 

Duties 

Steel ropes and cables 

Duties 

Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1264/2006 
21.08.2006 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 398/2004 
02.03.2004 
extended to imports of 
silicon consigned 
from the Republic of 
Korea by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 42/2007 
15.01.2007 
and maintained by 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 467/2010 
25.05.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 435/2004 
08.03.2004 
and maintained by 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 492/2010 
03.06.2010 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 965/2010 
25.10.2010 

Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1890/2005 
14.11.2005 
corrected by L 256, 
02.10.2007, p. 31 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1858/2005 
08.11.2005 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1459/2007 
10.12.2007 
extended as concerns 
Ukraine to such 
imports consigned 
from Moldova (Rep. 
of) by Council Reg. 
(EC) No 760/2004 
22.04.2004 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
such imports 
consigned from 
Morocco by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1886/2004 

L 232 
25.08.2006 
p. 1 
L 66 
04.03.2004 
p. 15 

L 13 
19.01.2007 
p. 1 

L 131 
29.05.2010 
p. 1 
L 72 
11.03.2004 
p. 1 

L 140 
08.06.2010 
p. 2 
L 282 
28.10.2010 
p. 24 

L 302 
19.11.2005 
p. 1 

L 299 
16.11.2005 
p. 1 

L 326 
12.12.2007 
p. 18 

L 120 
24.04.2004 
p. 1 

L 328 
30.10.2004 
p. 1 

EN 

107 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Strawberries (frozen) 

Duties 

Sulphanilic acid 

Duties 

Tartaric acid 

Duties 

Trichloroisocyanuric acid 

Duties 

Tube and pipe fitting, of iron 
or steel 

Duties 

25.10.2004 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
such imports 
consigned from Korea 
(Rep. of) by Council 
Impl. Reg. (EU) No 
400/2010 
26.04.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 407/2007 
16.04.2007 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1339/2002 
22.07.2002 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 123/2006 
23.01.2006 
and maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1000/2008 
13.10.2008 

Council Reg. 
(EC) No 130/2006 
23.01.2006 
as last amended by  
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 150/2008 
18.02.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1631/2005 
03.10.2005 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 964/2003 
02.06.2003  
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1496/2004 
18.08.2004 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
imports consigned 
from Indonesia by 
Council Reg.  
(EC) 2052/2004 
22.11.2004 
and to imports 
consigned from Sri 
Lanka by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 2053/2004 
22.11.2004 
and to imports 

L 117 
11.05.2010 
p. 1 

L 100 
17.04.2007 
p. 1 
L 196 
25.07.2002 
p. 11 

L 22 
26.01.2006 
p. 5 

L 275 
16.10.2008 
p. 1 
L 23 
27.01.2006 
p. 1 

L 48 
22.02.2008 
p. 1 
L 261 
07.10.2005 
p. 1 
L 139 
06.06.2003 
p. 1 

L 275 
25.08.2004 
p. 1 

L 355 
01.12.2004 
p. 4 

L 355 
01.12.2004 
p. 9 

EN 

108 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
consigned from the 
Philippines by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 655/2006 
27.04.2006 
and  
maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 803/2009 
27.08.2009 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 2268/2004 
22.12.2004 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1275/2005 
25.07.2005 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 260/2007 
09.03.2007 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1256/2008 
16.12.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 703/2009 
27.07.2009 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 954/2006 
27.06.2006 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 172/2008 
25.02.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 769/2002 
07.05.2002 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1854/2003 
20.10.2003 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
imports consigned 
from India and 
Thailand by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 2272/2004 
22.12.2004 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
imports consigned 
from Indonesia and 
Malaysia by  
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1650/2006 

L 116 
29.04.2006 
p. 1 

L 233 
04.09.2009 
p. 1 

L 395 
31.12.2004 
p. 56 

L 202 
03.08.2005 
p. 1 
L 72 
13.03.2007 
p. 1 
L 343 
19.12.2008 
p. 1 
L 203 
05.08.2009 
p. 1 
L 175 
29.06.2006 
p. 4 
L 55 
28.02.2008 
p. 6 
L 123 
09.05.2002 
p. 1 

L 272 
23.10.2003 
p. 1 

L 396 
31.12.2004 
p. 18 

L 311 
10.11.2006 

   EN

Tungsten carbide and fused 
tungsten carbide 

Duties 

Tungsten electrodes 

Duties 

Welded tubes and pipes, of 
iron or non-alloy steel 

Wire rod 

Croatia 

Seamless pipes and tubes of 
iron or steel 

Egypt 

Ferro-silicon 

Duties 

Duties 

Duties 

Duties 

India 

Coumarin (ext.) 

Duties (ext.) 

EN 

109 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Undertaking 

Dihydromyrcenol 

Duties 

Graphite electrode systems 

Duties 

PET (polyethylene 
terephthalate)  

PET (polyethylene 
terephthalate) film 

Duties 

Undertakings 

Duties 

Sulphanilic acid 

Duties 

07.11.2006 
and maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 654/2008 
29.04.2008 

Commission Dec. 
No 2005/3/EC 
03.01.2005 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 63/2008 
21.01.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1629/2004 
13.09.2004 
as last amended by 
Council Reg.  
(EC) No 1354/2008 
18.12.2008 
and maintained by 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 1186/2010 
13.12.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 192/2007 
22.02.2007 
corrected by 
L 215, 18.08.2007, p. 
27 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1292/2007 
30.10.2007 
and extended to 
imports consigned 
from Brazil and from 
Israel by the same 
Regulation 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 15/2009 
08.01.2009 
and 
Council Impl. Reg 
(EU) No 806/2010 
13.09.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1339/2002 
22.07.2002 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 123/2006 
23.01.2006 
and maintained by 
Council Reg. 

p. 1 

L 183 
11.07.2008 
p. 1 

L 1 
04.01.2005 
p. 15 
L 23 
26.01.2008 
p. 1 
L 295 
18.09.2004 
p. 10 

L 350 
30.12.2008 
p. 24 

L 332 
16.12.2010 
p. 17 
L 59 
27.02.2007 
p. 1 

L 288 
06.11.2007 
p. 1 

L 6 
10.01.2009 
p. 1 

L 242 
15.09.2010 
p. 6 
L 196 
25.07.2002 
p. 11 

L 22 
26.01.2006 
p. 5 

L 275 

EN 

110 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Synthetic fibre ropes 

Undertakings 

Duties 
(3 years) 

Indonesia 

Coumarin (ext.) 

Duties (ext.) 

PET (polyethylene 
terephthalate)  

Duties 

Undertakings 

Sodium cyclamate 

Duties 

(EC) No 1000/2008 
13.10.2008 

16.10.2008 
p. 1 

Commission Dec. 
No 2006/37/EC 
05.12.2005 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1736/2004 
08.10.2004 
and maintained by 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 1242/2010 
20.12.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 769/2002 
07.05.2002 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1854/2003 
20.10.2003 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
imports consigned 
from India and 
Thailand by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 2272/2004 
22.12.2004 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
imports consigned 
from Indonesia and 
Malaysia by  
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1650/2006 
07.11.2006 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 192/2007 
22.02.2007 
corrected by 
L 215, 18.08.2007, p. 
27 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 435/2004 
08.03.2004 
and maintained by 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 492/2010 
03.06.2010 

L 22 
26.01.2006 
p. 52 
L 311 
08.10.2004 
p. 1 

L 338 
22.12.2010 
p. 10 
L 123 
09.05.2002 
p. 1 

L 272 
23.10.2003 
p. 1 

L 396 
31.12.2004 
p. 18 

L 311 
10.11.2006 
p. 1 
L 59 
27.02.2007 
p. 1 

L 72 
11.03.2004 
p. 1 

L 140 
08.06.2010 
p. 2 

EN 

111 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Tube and pipe fitting, of iron 
or steel (ext.) 

Duties (ext.) 

Israel 

PET (polyethylene 
terephthalate) film (ext.) 

Duties (ext.) 

Kazakhstan 

Ferro-silicon 

Silico-manganese 

Duties 

Duties 

Council Reg. 
(EC) No 964/2003 
02.06.2003  
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1496/2004 
18.08.2004 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
imports consigned 
from Indonesia by 
Council Reg.  
(EC) 2052/2004 
22.11.2004 
and to imports 
consigned from Sri 
Lanka by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 2053/2004 
22.11.2004 
and to imports 
consigned from the 
Philippines by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 655/2006 
27.04.2006 
and  
maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 803/2009 
27.08.2009 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1292/2007 
30.10.2007 
and extended to 
imports consigned 
from Brazil and from 
Israel by the same 
Regulation 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 15/2009 
08.01.2009 
and 
Council Impl. Reg 
(EU) No 806/2010 
13.09.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 172/2008 
25.02.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1420/2007 
04.12.2007 

L 139 
06.06.2003 
p. 1 

L 275 
25.08.2004 
p. 1 

L 355 
01.12.2004 
p. 4 

L 355 
01.12.2004 
p. 9 

L 116 
29.04.2006 
p. 1 

L 233 
04.09.2009 
p. 1 

L 288 
06.11.2007 
p. 1 

L 6 
10.01.2009 
p. 1 

L 242 
15.09.2010 
p. 6 
L 55 
28.02.2008 
p. 6 
L 317 
05.12.2007 
p. 5 

EN 

112 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Korea (Rep. of) 

PET (polyethylene 
terephthalate)  

Duties 

Refrigerators (side-by-side) 

Duties 

Silicon (ext.) 

Duties (ext.) 

Steel ropes and cables (ext.) 

Duties (ext.) 

Tube and pipe fittings, of iron 

Duties 

as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 865/2008 
27.08.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 192/2007 
22.02.2007 
corrected by 
L 215, 18.08.2007, p. 
27 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1289/2006 
25.08.2006 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 398/2004 
02.03.2004 
extended to imports of 
silicon consigned 
from the Republic of 
Korea by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 42/2007 
15.01.2007 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1858/2005 
08.11.2005 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1459/2007 
10.12.2007 
extended as concerns 
Ukraine to such 
imports consigned 
from Moldova (Rep. 
of) by Council Reg. 
(EC) No 760/2004 
22.04.2004 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
such imports 
consigned from 
Morocco by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1886/2004 
25.10.2004 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
such imports 
consigned from Korea 
(Rep. of) by Council 
Impl. Reg. (EU) No 
400/2010 
26.04.2010 
Council Reg. 

L 59 
27.02.2007 
p. 1 

L 236 
31.08.2006 
p. 11 
L 66 
04.03.2004 
p. 15 

L 13 
19.01.2007 
p. 1 
L 299 
16.11.2005 
p. 1 

L 326 
12.12.2007 
p. 18 

L 120 
24.04.2004 
p. 1 

L 328 
30.10.2004 
p. 1 

L 117 
11.05.2010 
p. 1 

L 228 

EN 

113 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
or steel 

Laos 

Ring binder mechanisms (ext.) 

Duties (ext.) 

Macau (SAR) 

Footwear with uppers of 
leather (ext.) 

Duties (ext.) 
(15 months) 

F.Y.R.O.M 

Ferro-silicon 

Duties 

Malaysia 

Coumarin (ext.) 

Duties (ext.) 

(EC) No 1514/2002 
19.08.2002 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 778/2003 
06.05.2003 
and maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1001/2008 
13.10.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 2074/2004 
29.11.2004 
extended to imports 
from Vietnam 
by Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1208/2004 
28.06.2004 
and extended to 
imports from Laos  
by Council Reg. 
(EC) No 33/2006 
09.01.2006 
and maintained by 
Council Impl.Reg. 
(EU) No 157/2010 
22.02.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1472/2006 
05.10.2006 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
imports consigned 
from Macau (SAR) by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 388/2008 
29.04.2008 
and maintained by 
Council Impl.Reg. 
(EU) No 1294/2009 
22.12.2009 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 172/2008 
25.02.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 769/2002 
07.05.2002 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1854/2003 
20.10.2003 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
imports consigned 

24.08.2002 
p. 1 

L 114 
08.05.2003 
p. 1 

L 275 
16.10.2008 
p. 18 
L 359 
04.12.2004 
p. 11 

L 232 
01.07.2004 
p. 1 

L 7 
12.01.2006 
p. 1 

L 49 
26.02.2010 
p. 1 
L 275 
06.10.2006 
p. 1 

L 117 
01.05.2008 
p. 1 

L 352 
30.12.2009 
p. 1 
L 55 
28.02.2008 
p. 6 
L 123 
09.05.2002 
p. 1 

L 272 
23.10.2003 
p. 1 

EN 

114 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PET (polyethylene 
terephthalate)  

Duties 

Tube and pipe fittings, of iron 
or steel 

Duties 

Moldova (Rep. of) 

Steel ropes and cables (ext.) 

Duties (ext.) 

from India and 
Thailand by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 2272/2004 
22.12.2004 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
imports consigned 
from Indonesia and 
Malaysia by  
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1650/2006 
07.11.2006 
and maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 654/2008 
29.04.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 192/2007 
22.02.2007 
corrected by 
L 215, 18.08.2007, p. 
27 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1514/2002 
19.08.2002 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 778/2003 
06.05.2003 
and maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1001/2008 
13.10.2008 
as last amended by 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 363/2010 
26.04.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1858/2005 
08.11.2005 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1459/2007 
10.12.2007 
extended as concerns 
Ukraine to such 
imports consigned 
from Moldova (Rep. 
of) by Council Reg. 
(EC) No 760/2004 
22.04.2004 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
such imports 

L 396 
31.12.2004 
p. 18 

L 311 
10.11.2006 
p. 1 

L 183 
11.07.2008 
p. 1 
L 59 
27.02.2007 
p. 1 

L 228 
24.08.2002 
p. 1 

L 114 
08.05.2003 
p. 1 

L 275 
16.10.2008 
p. 18 

L 107 
29.04.2010 
p. 1 
L 299 
16.11.2005 
p. 1 

L 326 
12.12.2007 
p. 18 

L 120 
24.04.2004 
p. 1 

EN 

115 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Morocco 

Steel ropes and cables (ext.) 

Duties (ext.) 

consigned from 
Morocco by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1886/2004 
25.10.2004 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1858/2005 
08.11.2005 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1459/2007 
10.12.2007 
extended as concerns 
Ukraine to such 
imports consigned 
from Moldova (Rep. 
of) by Council Reg. 
(EC) No 760/2004 
22.04.2004 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
such imports 
consigned from 
Morocco by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1886/2004 
25.10.2004 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
such imports 
consigned from Korea 
(Rep. of) by Council 
Impl. Reg. (EU) No 
400/2010 
26.04.2010 

L 328 
30.10.2004 
p. 1 
L 299 
16.11.2005 
p. 1 

L 326 
12.12.2007 
p. 18 

L 120 
24.04.2004 
p. 1 

L 328 
30.10.2004 
p. 1 

L 117 
11.05.2010 
p. 1 

EN 

116 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Philippines 

Tube or pipe fittings, of iron or 
steel (ext.) 

Duties (ext.) 

Russia 

Ammonium nitrate  

Duties 

Undertakings 

Council Reg. 
(EC) No 964/2003 
02.06.2003  
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1496/2004 
18.08.2004 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
imports consigned 
from Indonesia by 
Council Reg.  
(EC) 2052/2004 
22.11.2004 
and to imports 
consigned from Sri 
Lanka by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 2053/2004 
22.11.2004 
and to imports 
consigned from the 
Philippines by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 655/2006 
27.04.2006 
and  
maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 803/2009 
27.08.2009 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 658/2002 
15.04.2002 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 945/2005 
21.06.2005 
and maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 661/2008 
08.07.2008 
corrected by 
L 339, 22.12.2009,  
p. 59 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 989/2009 
19.10.2009 

Commission Dec. 
No 2008/577/EC 
04.07.2008 
corrected by 

L 139 
06.06.2003 
p. 1 

L 275 
25.08.2004 
p. 1 

L 355 
01.12.2004 
p. 4 

L 355 
01.12.2004 
p. 9 

L 116 
29.04.2006 
p. 1 

L 233 
04.09.2009 
p. 1 

L 102 
18.04.2002 
p. 1 

L 160 
23.06.2005 
p. 1 

L 185 
12.07.2008 
p. 1 

L 278 
23.10.2009 
p. 1 

L 185 
12.07.2007 
p. 43 

EN 

117 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ferro-silicon 

Potassium chloride 

Duties 

Duties 

Undertakings 

Seamless pipes and tubes of 
iron or steel 

Duties 

Steel ropes and cables 

Duties 

Urea and ammonium nitrate 
solutions 

Duties 

Undertakings 

Welded tubes and pipes, of 
iron or non-alloy steel 

Duties 

South Africa 

Manganese dioxides 

Duties 

L 339, 22.12.2009,  
p. 59 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 172/2008 
25.02.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1050/2006 
11.07.2006 

Commission Dec. 
No 2005/802/EC 
17.10.2005 
as last amended by 
Commission Dec. 
No 2006/557/EC 
08.08.2006 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 954/2006 
27.06.2006 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 812/2008 
11.08.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1279/2007 
30.10.2007 
corrected by L 96, 
15.04.2009, p. 39 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1911/2006 
19.12.2006 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 789/2008 
24.07.2008 
and 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 1251/2009 
18.12.2009 

Commission Dec. 
No 2008/649/EC 
03.07.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1256/2008 
16.12.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 221/2008 
10.03.2008 

L 55 
28.02.2008 
p. 6 
L 191 
12.07.2006 
p. 1 

L 302 
19.11.2005 
p. 79 

L 218 
09.08.2006 
p. 22 
L 175 
29.06.2006 
p. 4 

L 220 
15.08.2008 
p. 1 
L 285 
31.10.2007 
p. 1 

L 365 
21.12.2006 
p. 26 

L 213 
08.08.2008 
p. 14 

L 338 
19.12.2009 
p. 5 

L 213 
08.08.2008 
p. 39 
L 343 
19.12.2008 
p. 1 
L 69 
13.03.2008 
p. 1 

EN 

118 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Steel ropes and cables 

Duties 

Sri Lanka 

Tube and pipe fitting, of iron 
or steel (ext.) 

Duties (ext.) 

Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1858/2005 
08.11.2005 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1459/2007 
10.12.2007 
extended as concerns 
Ukraine to such 
imports consigned 
from Moldova (Rep. 
of) by Council Reg. 
(EC) No 760/2004 
22.04.2004 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
such imports 
consigned from 
Morocco by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1886/2004 
25.10.2004 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 964/2003 
02.06.2003  
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1496/2004 
18.08.2004 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
imports consigned 
from Indonesia by 
Council Reg.  
(EC) 2052/2004 
22.11.2004 
and to imports 
consigned from Sri 
Lanka by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 2053/2004 
22.11.2004 
and to imports 
consigned from the 
Philippines by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 655/2006 
27.04.2006 
and  
maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 803/2009 
27.08.2009 

L 299 
16.11.2005 
p. 1 

L 326 
12.12.2007 
p. 18 

L 120 
24.04.2004 
p. 1 

L 328 
30.10.2004 
p. 1 
L 139 
06.06.2003 
p. 1 

L 275 
25.08.2004 
p. 1 

L 355 
01.12.2004 
p. 4 

L 355 
01.12.2004 
p. 9 

L 116 
29.04.2006 
p. 1 

L 233 
04.09.2009 
p. 1 

EN 

119 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Taiwan 

Lighters (non-refillable and 
refillable) 

Peroxosulphates 

PET (polyethylene 
terephthalate)  

Duties 

Duties 

Duties 

Stainless steel fasteners and 
parts thereof 

Duties 

Tube and pipe fitting, of iron 
or steel 

Duties 

Thailand 

Coumarin (ext.) 

Duties (ext.) 

Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1458/2007 
12.12.2007 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1184/2007 
09.10.2007 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 192/2007 
22.02.2007 
corrected by L 215, 
18.08.2007, p. 27 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1890/2005 
14.11.2005 
corrected by L 256, 
02.10.2007, p. 31 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 964/2003 
02.06.2003  
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1496/2004 
18.08.2004 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
imports consigned 
from Indonesia by 
Council Reg.  
(EC) 2052/2004 
22.11.2004 
and to imports 
consigned from Sri 
Lanka by  
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 2053/2004 
22.11.2004 
and to imports 
consigned from the 
Philippines by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 655/2006 
27.04.2006 
and maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 803/2009 
27.08.2009 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 769/2002 
07.05.2002 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1854/2003 
20.10.2003 

L 326 
12.12.2007 
p. 1 
L 265 
11.10.2007 
p. 1 
L 59 
27.02.2007 
p. 1 

L 302 
19.11.2005 
p. 1 

L 139 
06.06.2003 
p. 1 

L 275 
25.08.2004 
p. 1 

L 355 
01.12.2004 
p. 4 

L 355 
01.12.2004 
p. 9 

L 116 
29.04.2006 
p. 1 

L 233 
04.09.2009 
p. 1 
L 123 
09.05.2002 
p. 1 

L 272 
23.10.2003 
p. 1 

EN 

120 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
imports consigned 
from India and 
Thailand by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 2272/2004 
22.12.2004 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
imports consigned 
from Indonesia and 
Malaysia by  
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1650/2006 
07.11.2006 
and maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 654/2008 
29.04.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1174/2005 
18.07.2005 
as last amended by 
Council Reg.  
(EC) No 684/2008 
17.07.2008 
extended to such 
imports consigned 
from Thailand  
by Council Reg. 
(EC) No 499/2009 
11.06.2009 

L 396 
31.12.2004 
p. 18 

L 311 
10.11.2006 
p. 1 

L 183 
11.07.2008 
p. 1 
L 189 
21.07.2005 
p. 1 

L 192 
19.07.2008 
p. 1 

L 151 
16.06.2009 
p. 1 

Hand pallet trucks and their 
essential parts (ext.) 

Duties (ext.) 

EN 

121 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Plastic sacks and bags 

Duties 

PET (polyethylene 
terephthalate)  

Duties 

Sweet corn (prepared or 
preserved, in kernels) 

Duties 

Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1425/2006 
25.09.2006 
corrected by 
L 49, 18.02.2007,  
p. 36 and by 
L 233, 05.09.2007,  
p. 7 
as last amended by 
Council Regulation 
(EC) No 249/2008 
17.03.2008 
and 
Council Regulation 
(EC) No 189/2009 
09.03.2009 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 192/2007 
22.02.2007 
corrected by 
L 215, 18.08.2007, p. 
27 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 682/3007 
18.06.2007 
corrected by 
L 252 of 27.09.2007, 
p. 7 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 954/2008 
25.09.2008 
and by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 847/2009 
15.09.2009 

L 270 
29.09.2006 
p. 4 

L 76 
19.03.2008 
p. 8 

L 67 
12.03.2009 
p. 5 
L 59 
27.02.2007 
p. 1 

L 159 
20.06.2007 
p. 14 

L 260 
30.09.2008 
p. 1 

L 246 
18.09.2009 
p. 1 

EN 

122 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Tube and pipe fitting, of iron 
or steel 

Duties 

Welded tubes and pipes, of 
iron or non-alloy steel 

Duties 

Ukraine 

Ammonium nitrate 

Duties 
(2 years) 

Undertakings 

L 139 
06.06.2003 
p. 1 

L 275 
25.08.2004 
p. 1 

L 355 
01.12.2004 
p. 4 

L 355 
01.12.2004 
p. 9 

L 116 
29.04.2006 
p. 1 

L 233 
04.09.2009 
p. 1 

L 259 
27.09.2002 
p. 8 

L 343 
19.12.2008   
p. 1 
L 106 
24.04.2007 
p. 1 

L 150 
18.06.2010 
p. 24 

L 185 
12.07.2007 
p. 43 

Council Reg. 
(EC) No 964/2003 
02.06.2003  
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1496/2004 
18.08.2004 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
imports consigned 
from Indonesia by 
Council Reg.  
(EC) 2052/2004 
22.11.2004 
and to imports 
consigned from Sri 
Lanka by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 2053/2004 
22.11.2004 
and to imports 
consigned from the 
Philippines by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 655/2006 
27.04.2006 
and  
maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 803/2009 
27.08.2009 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1697/2002 
23.09.2002 
and maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1256/2008 
19.12.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 442/2007 
19.04.2007  
and maintained by 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 512/2010 
14.06.2010 

Commission Dec. 
No 2008/577/EC 
04.07.2008 
corrected by 
L 339, 22.12.2009,  
p. 59 

EN 

123 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ironing boards 

Duties 

Seamless pipes and tubes of 
iron or steel 

Duties 

Steel ropes and cables 

Duties 

Urea and ammonium nitrate 
solutions 

Duties 

Council Reg. 
(EC) No 452/2007 
23.04.2007 
corrected in PL by 
L 353, 31.12.2009,  
p. 70 
as last amended by 
Council Impl. Reg.  
(EU) No 77/2010 
19.01.2010 
and  
Council Impl. Reg.  
(EU) No 270/2010 
29.03.2010 
and 
Council Impl. Reg.  
(EU) No 580/2010 
29.06.2010 
and 
Council Impl. Reg.  
(EU) No 1241/2010 
20.12.2010 

Council Reg. 
(EC) No 954/2006 
27.06.2006 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1858/2005 
08.11.2005 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1459/2007 
10.12.2007 
extended as concerns 
Ukraine to such 
imports consigned 
from Moldova (Rep. 
of) by Council Reg. 
(EC) No 760/2004 
22.04.2004 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
such imports 
consigned from 
Morocco by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1886/2004 
25.10.2004 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1911/2006 
19.12.2006 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 

L 109 
26.04.2007 
p. 12 

L 24 
28.01.2010 
p. 1 

L 84 
31.03.2010 
p. 13 

L 168 
02.07.2010 
p. 12 

L 338 
22.12.2010 
p. 8 
L 175 
29.06.2006 
p. 4 
L 299 
16.11.2005 
p. 1 

L 326 
12.12.2007 
p. 18 

L 120 
24.04.2004 
p. 1 

L 328 
30.10.2004 
p. 1 
L 365 
21.12.2006 
p. 26 

L 213 

EN 

124 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Welded tubes and pipes, of 
iron or non-alloy steel 

Duties 

USA 

Biodiesel 

Ethanolamines 

Peroxosulphates 

Duties 

Duties 
(2 years) 

Duties 

Vietnam 

Footwear with uppers of 
leather 

Duties 
(15 months) 

Ring binder mechanisms (ext.)  Duties (ext.) 

(EC) No 789/2008 
24.07.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1697/2002 
23.09.2002 
and maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1256/2008 
16.12.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 599/2009 
07.07.2009 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 54/2010 
19.01.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1184/2007 
09.10.2007 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1472/2006 
05.10.2006 
and extended as 
concerns China to 
imports consigned 
from Macau (SAR) by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 388/2008 
29.04.2008 
and maintained by 
Council Impl.Reg. 
(EU) No 1294/2009 
22.12.2009 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 2074/2004 
29.11.2004 
extended to imports 
from Vietnam 
by Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1208/2004 
28.06.2004 
and extended to 
imports from Laos  
by Council Reg. 
(EC) No 33/2006 
09.01.2006 
and maintained by 
Council Impl.Reg. 
(EU) No 157/2010 
22.02.2010 

08.08.2008 
p. 14 
L 259 
27.09.2002 
p. 8 

L 343 
19.12.2008 
p. 1 
L 179 
10.07.2009 
p. 26 
L 17 
22.01.2010 
p. 1 
L 265 
11.10.2007 
p. 1 
L 275 
06.10.2006 
p. 1 

L 117 
01.05.2008 
p. 1 

L 352 
30.12.2009 
p. 1 
L 359 
04.12.2004 
p. 11 

L 232 
01.07.2004 
p. 1 

L 7 
12.01.2006 
p. 1 

L 49 
26.02.2010 
p. 1 

EN 

125 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX P 

Definitive anti-subsidy measures in force on 31 December 2010 

A. Ranked by product (alphabetical) 

Product 
Antibiotics (broad spectrum) 
(AS) 

Origin 

India 

Measure 
Duties 

Biodiesel (AS) 

Graphite electrode systems 
(AS) 

USA 

India 

Duties 

Duties 

PET (polyethylene 
terephthalate) (AS) 

India 

Duties 

Undertakings 

Duties 

Iran 
Pakistan 
United Arab 
Emirates 

Regulation N° 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 713/2005 
10.05.2005 
as amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1176/2008 
29.11.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 598/2009 
07.07.2009 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1628/2004 
13.09.2004 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1354/2008 
18.12.2008 
and maintained by 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 1185/2010 
13.12.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 193/2007 
22.02.2007 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1286/2008 
16.12.2008 

Council Reg. 
(EC) No 193/2007 
22.02.2007 
corrected by L 215, 
18.08.2007, p. 27 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 857/2010 
27.09.2010 

Publication 
L 121 
13.05.2005 
p. 1 

L 319 
29.11.2008 
p. 1 
L 179 
10.07.2009 
p. 1 
L 295 
18.09.2004 
p. 4 

L 350 
30.12.2008 
p. 24 

L 332 
16.12.2010 
p. 1 
L 59 
27.02.2007 
p. 34 

L 340 
19.12.2008 
p. 1 

L 59 
27.02.2007 
p. 34 

L 254 
29.09.2010 
p. 10 

EN 

126 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PET film (polyethylene 
terephthalate) (AS) 

India 
Brazil (ext.) 
Israel (ext.) 

Duties 

Sulphanilic acid (AS) 

India 

Duties 

Undertakings 

Council Reg. 
(EC) No 367/2006 
27.02.2005 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1124/2007 
28.09.2007 
and extended to 
imports consigned 
from Brazil and from 
Israel by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1976/2004 
15.11.2004 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 101/2006 
20.01.2006 
and 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 15/2009 
08.01.2009 
and 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 579/2010 
29.06.2010 
and 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 806/2010 
15.09.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1338/2002 
22.07.2002 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 123/2006 
23.01.2006 
and maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1010/2008 
13.10.2008 

Commission Dec. 
No 2006/37/EC 
05.12.2005 

L 68 
08.03.2006 
p. 15 

L 255 
29.09.2007 
p. 1 

L 342 
18.11.2004 
p. 8 

L 17 
21.01.2006 
p. 1 

L 6 
10.01.2009 
p. 1 

L 168 
02.07.2010 
p. 1 

L 242 
15.09.2010 
p. 6 
L 196 
25.07.2002 
p. 1 

L 22 
26.01.2006 
p. 5 

L 276 
17.10.2008 
p. 3 

L 22 
26.01.2006 
p. 52 

EN 

127 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
B. Ranked by country (alphabetical) 

Origin 

Brazil 

Product 

PET film (polyethylene 
terephthalate) (AS) (ext.) 

Measure 
Duties (ext.) 

India 

Antibiotics (broad spectrum) 
(AS) 

Duties 

Graphite electrode systems 
(AS) 

Duties 

PET (polyethylene 
terephthalate) (AS) 

Duties 

Regulation N° 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 367/2006 
27.02.2005 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1124/2007 
28.09.2007 
and extended to 
imports consigned 
from Brazil and from 
Israel by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1976/2004 
15.11.2004 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 101/2006 
20.01.2006 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 15/2009 
08.01.2009 
and 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 806/2010 
15.09.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 713/2005 
10.05.2005 
as amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1176/2008 
29.11.2008 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1628/2004 
13.09.2004 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1354/2008 
18.12.2008 
and maintained by 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 1185/2010 
13.12.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 193/2007 
22.02.2007 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1286/2008 
19.12.2008 

Publication 
L 68 
08.03.2006 
p. 15 

L 255 
29.09.2007 
p. 1 

L 342 
18.11.2004 
p. 8 

L 17 
21.01.2006 
p. 1 

L 6 
10.01.2009 
p. 1 

L 242 
15.09.2010 
p. 6 
L 121 
13.05.2005 
p. 1 

L 319 
29.11.2008 
p. 1 
L 295 
18.09.2004 
p. 4 

L 350 
30.12.2008 
p. 24 

L 332 
16.12.2010 
p. 1 
L 59 
27.02.2007 
p. 34 

L 340 
19.12.2008 
p. 1 

EN 

128 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Undertakings 

PET film (polyethylene 
terephthalate) (AS) 

Duties 

Sulphanilic acid (AS) 

Duties 

Undertakings 

Council Reg. 
(EC) No 193/2007 
22.02.2007 
corrected by L 215, 
18.08.2007, p. 27 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 367/2006 
27.02.2005 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1124/2007 
28.09.2007 
and extended to 
imports consigned 
from Brazil and from 
Israel by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1976/2004 
15.11.2004 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 101/2006 
20.01.2006 
and 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 15/2009 
08.01.2009 
and 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 579/2010 
29.06.2010 
and 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 806/2010 
15.09.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1339/2002 
22.07.2002 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 123/2006 
23.01.2006 
and maintained by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1010/2008 
13.10.2008 

Commission Dec. 
No 2006/37/EC 
05.12.2005 

L 59 
27.02.2007 
p. 34 

L 68 
08.03.2006 
p. 15 

L 255 
29.09.2007 
p. 1 

L 342 
18.11.2004 
p. 8 

L 17 
21.01.2006 
p. 1 

L 6 
10.01.2009 
p. 1 

L 168 
02.07.2010 
p. 1 

L 242 
15.09.2010 
p. 6 
L 196 
25.07.2002 
p. 11 

L 22 
26.01.2006 
p. 5 

L 276 
17.10.2008 
p. 3 

L 22 
26.01.2006 
p. 52 

EN 

129 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Israel 

PET film (polyethylene 
terephthalate) (AS) (ext.) 

Duties (ext.) 

Iran 

Pakistan 

PET (polyethylene 
terephthalate) (AS) 

PET (polyethylene 
terephthalate) (AS) 

United Arab 
Emirates 

PET (polyethylene 
terephthalate) (AS) 

USA 

Biodiesel (AS) 

Duties 

Duties 

Duties 

Duties 

Council Reg. 
(EC) No 367/2006 
27.02.2005 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1124/2007 
28.09.2007 
and extended to 
imports consigned 
from Brazil and from 
Israel by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1976/2004 
15.11.2004 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 101/2006 
20.01.2006 
as last amended by 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 15/2009 
08.01.2009 
and 
Council Impl. Reg. 
(EU) No 806/2010 
15.09.2010 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1289/2006 
277.08.2006 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1289/2006 
277.08.2006 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 1289/2006 
277.08.2006 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 598/2009 
07.07.2009 

L 68 
08.03.2006 
p. 15 

L 255 
29.09.2007 
p. 1 

L 342 
18.11.2004 
p. 8 

L 17 
21.01.2006 
p. 1 

L 6 
10.01.2009 
p. 1 

L 242 
15.09.2010 
p. 6 
L 254 
29.09.2010 
p. 10 
L 254 
29.09.2010 
p. 10 
L 254 
29.09.2010 
p. 10 
L 179 
10.07.2009 
p. 1 

EN 

130 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX Q 

Undertakings in force on 31 December 2010 

A. Ranked by product (alphabetical) 

Product 

Aluminium foil 

Origin 

Brazil 

Measure 
Undertakings 

Ammonium nitrate 

Russia 
Ukraine 

Undertakings 

Castings 

P.R. China 

Undertakings 

Citric acid 

P.R. China 

Undertakings 

Coumarin 

India 

Undertakings 

PET (polyethylene 
terephthalate) 

PET (polyethylene 
terephthalate) (AS) 

India 
Indonesia 

Undertakings 

India 

Undertakings 

Potassium chloride 

Russia 

Undertakings 

Sulphanilic acid (AD + AS) 

India 

Undertakings 

Urea and ammonium nitrate 
solutions 

Algeria 

Undertakings 

Russia 

Undertakings 

Regulation N° 
Commission Dec. 
No 2009/736/EC 
05.10.2009 
Commission Dec. 
No 2008/577/EC 
04.07.2008 
corrected by L 339, 
22.12.2009, p. 59 
Commission Dec. 
No 2010/177/EU 
23.03.2010 
Commission Dec. 
No 2008/899/EC 
02.12.2008 
Commission Dec. 
No 2005/3/EC 
03.01.2005 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 192/2007 
22.02.2007 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 193/2007 
22.02.2007 
corrected by L 215, 
18.08.2007, p. 27 
Commission Dec. 
No 2005/802/EC 
17.10.2005 
as last amended by 
Commission Dec. 
No 2006/557/EC 
08.08.2006 
Commission Dec. 
No 2006/37/EC 
05.12.2006 
Commission Reg. 
(EC) No 617/2000 
16.03.2000 
Commission Dec. 
No 2008/649/EC 
03.07.2008 

Publication 
L 262 
06.10.2009   
p. 50 
L 185 
12.07.2008   
p. 43 

L 77 
24.03.2010 
p. 55 
L 323 
03.12.2008 
p. 62 
L 1 
04.01.2005 
p. 15 
L 59 
27.02.2007 
p. 1 
L 59 
27.02.2007 
p. 34 

L 302 
19.11.2005 
p. 79 

L 218 
09.08.2006 
p. 22 
L 22 
26.01.2006 
p. 52 
L 75 
24.03.2000 
p. 3 
L 213 
08.08.2008   
p. 39 

B. Ranked by country (alphabetical) 

EN 

131 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
Origin 

Algeria 

Product 
Urea and ammonium nitrate 
solutions 

Measure 
Undertakings 

Brazil 

Aluminium foil 

Undertakings 

P.R. China 

Castings 

Undertakings 

Citric acid 

Undertakings 

India 

Coumarin 

Undertakings 

PET (polyethylene 
terephthalate) 

PET (polyethylene 
terephthalate) (AS) 

Undertakings 

Undertakings 

Sulphanilic acid (AD + AS) 

Undertakings 

Indonesia 

PET (polyethylene 
terephthalate) 

Undertakings 

Russia 

Ammonium nitrate 

Undertakings 

Potassium chloride 

Undertakings 

Urea and ammonium nitrate 
solutions 

Undertakings 

Ukraine 

Ammonium nitrate 

Undertakings 

Regulation N° 
Commission Reg. 
(EC) No 617/2000 
16.03.2000 
Commission Dec. 
No 2009/736/EC 
05.10.2009 
Commission Dec. 
No 2010/177/EU 
23.03.2010 
Commission Dec. 
No 2008/899/EC 
02.12.2008 
Commission Dec. 
No 2005/3/EC 
03.01.2005 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 192/2007 
22.02.2007 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 193/2007 
22.02.2007 
corrected by L 215, 
18.08.2007, p. 27 
Commission Dec. 
No 2006/37/EC 
05.12.2006 
Council Reg. 
(EC) No 192/2007 
22.02.2007 
Commission Dec. 
No 2008/577/EC 
04.07.2008 
corrected by L 339, 
22.12.2009, p. 59 
Commission Dec. 
No 2005/802/EC 
17.10.2005 
as last amended by 
Commission Dec. 
No 2006/557/EC 
08.08.2006 
Commission Dec. 
No 2008/649/EC 
03.07.2008 
Commission Dec. 
No 2008/577/EC 
04.07.2008 
corrected by L 339, 
22.12.2009, p. 59 

Publication 
L 75 
24.03.2000 
p. 3 
L 262 
06.10.2009   
p. 50 
L 77 
24.03.2010 
p. 55 
L 323 
03.12.2008 
p. 62 
L 1 
04.01.2005 
p. 15 
L 59 
27.02.2007 
p. 1 
L 59 
27.02.2007 
p. 34 

L 22 
26.01.2006 
p. 52 
L 59 
27.02.2007 
p. 1 
L 185 
12.07.2008   
p. 43 

L 302 
19.11.2005 
p. 79 

L 218 
09.08.2006 
p. 22 
L 213 
08.08.20008 
p. 39 
L 185 
12.07.2008   
p. 43 

EN 

ANNEX R 

132 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Anti-dumping & anti-subsidy investigations pending 

on 31 December 2010 

A. New investigations (ranked by product - in alphabetical order)  

Product 

Ceramic tiles 

AD/AS 
AD.560  P.R. China 

Origin 

Type 

Publication 

Initiation  C 160 

Coated fine paper 

AD.552  P.R. China 

Initiation 

19.06.2010, p. 20 
C 41 
18.02.2010, p. 6 

Coated fine paper (AS) 

AS.557 

P.R. China 

Initiation  C 99 

Prov. Duty 

L 299 
17.11.2010, p. 7 

Continuous filament glass fibre products 

AD.549  P.R. China 

Initiation 

17.04.2010, p. 30 
C 307 
17.12.2009, p. 39 

Fatty alcohols and their blends 

AD.563 

Prov. Duty 

L 243 
16.09.2010, p. 40 

Initiation  C 219 

13.08.2010, p. 12 

India 
Indonesia 
Malaysia 

Graphite electrode systems 

AD.567  P.R. China 

Initiation  C 343 

Melamine 

AD.554  P.R. China 

Initiation 

17.12.2010, p. 24 
C 40 
17.02.2010, p. 10 

Prov. Duty 

L 298 
16.11.2010, p. 10 

Open mesh fabrics of glass fibres 

AD.558  P.R. China 

Initiation  C 131 

Purified terephthalic acid and its salts 

AD.550  Thailand 

Initiation  C 313 

Purified terephthalic acid and its salts (AS)  AS.551  Thailand 

Initiation  C 313 

Ring binder mechanisms 

AD.559  Thailand 

Initiation  C 131 

20.05.2010, p. 13 

Seamless pipes and tbes of stainless 
steel 
Stainless steel bars 

AD.565  P.R. China 

Initiation  C 265 

30.09.2010, p. 10 

AD.555 

India 

Initiation  C 87 A 

22.12.2009, p. 22 

22.12.2009, p. 17 

20.05.2010, p. 6 

Stainless steel bars (AS) 

AS.556 

India 

Initiation 

1.04.2010, p. 1 
C 87 
1.04.2010, p. 17 

Tris (2-chloro-1-methylethyl) phosphate 

AD.562  P.R. China 

Initiation  C 201 

23.07.2010, p. 5 

Vinyl acetate 

AD.566  U.S.A. 

Initiation  C 327 

04.12.2010, p. 23 

Wireless wide area networking modems 

AD.561  P.R. China 

Initiation  C 171 

Prov. Duty 

L 343 
29.12.2010, p. 57 

EN 

133 

30.06.2010, p. 9 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Wireless wide area networking modems 
(AS) 
Zeolite A powder 

AS.564 

P.R. China 

Initiation  C 249 

AD.553  Bosnia & 

Initiation 

Herzegovina 

16.09.2010, p. 7 
C 40 
17.02.2010, p. 5 

Prov. Duty 

L 298 
16.11.2010, p. 27 

B. Review investigations (ranked by product - in alphabetical order) 

Product 

Antibiotics (broad spectrum) 
(AS) 
Barium carbonate 

R. No 

Origin 

R.499 

India 

Type of review 
Expiry review 

R.502 

P.R. China 

Expiry review 

Biodiesel 

Biodiesel (AS) 

Castings 

Coumarin 

R.506 

R.507 

R.505 

Canada 
Singapore 
Canada 
Singapore 
P.R. China 

R.516 

P.R. China 

Fasteners, iron or steel 

R.515 

P.R. China 

Ferro-silicon 

R.514 

Russia 

Furfuraldehyde 

R.498 

P.R. China 

Circumvention 
review 
Circumvention 
review 
Expiry review 

Partial interim 
review 
Circumvention 
review 
Partial interim 
review 
Expiry review 

Publication 

C 123 
12.05.2010, p. 11 
C 192 
16.07.2010, p. 4 
L 211 
12.08.2010, p. 1 
L 211 
12.08.2010, p. 6 
C 203 
27.07.2010, p. 2 
C 299 
05.11.2010, p. 4 
L 282 
28.10.2010, p. 29 
C 290 
27.10.2010, p. 15 
C 107 
27.04.2010, p. 10 
C 196 
20.07.2010, p. 15 

Hand pallet trucks and their 
essential parts 
Magnesia bricks 

R.504 

P.R. China 

Expiry review 

R.509 

P.R. China 

Newcomer review  L 253 

Magnesia bricks 

R.511 

P.R. China 

Expiry review 

Okoumé plywood 

R.489 

P.R. China 

Expiry review 

Okoumé plywood 

R.489 

P.R. China 

Plastic sacs and bags 

R.508 

P.R. China 

Plastic sacs and bags 

R.510 

P.R. China 

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET)  R.496 

Korea (Rep. of) 

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET)   R.500 

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) 
(AS) 
Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) 
film 
Polyethylene terephthalate (PET)  R.491 

R.501 

R.355a 

EN 

India 

India 

India 

India 

134 

Partial interim 
review 
Circumvention 
review 
Partial interim 
review 
Partial interim 
review 
Partial interim 
review 
Partial interim 
review 
Partial interim 
review 
Partial interim 

28.09.2010, p. 42 
C 272 
08.10.2010, p. 5 
C 270 
11.11.2009, p. 24 
C 270 
11.11.2009, p. 24 
L 219 
20.08.2010, p. 1 
C 253 
21.09.2010, p. 2 
C 47 
25.02.2010, p. 24 
C 151 
10.06.2010, p. 15 
C 151 
10.06.2010, p. 17 
C 131 
20.05.2010, p. 3 
C 291 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
film 
Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) 
film 
Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) 
film 
Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) 
film (AS) 
Polyester staple fibres 

R.494 

India 

R.513 

India 

R.495 

India 

R.497 

P.R. China 

Potassium chloride 

Steel ropes and cables 

R.520 

R.517 

Stainless steel fasteners and parts 
thereof 
Trichloroisocyanuric acid 

R.518 

R.512 

Belarus 
Russia 
P.R. China 
South Africa 
Ukraine 
P.R. China 
Taiwan 
P.R. China 

review 
Partial interim 
review 
Partial interim 
review 
Partial interim 
review 
Expiry review 

Partial interim 
review 
Expiry review 

Expiry review 

Expiry review 

Tungsten carbide and fused 
tungsten carbide 

R.493 

P.R. China 

Expiry review 

C. Ranked by country (new and review investigations) (alphabetical) 

01.12.2009, p. 28 
C 8 
14.01.2010, p. 27 
C 294 
29.10.2010, p. 10 
C 8 
14.01.2010, p. 29 
C 64 
16.03.2010, p. 10 
C 323 
30.11.2010, p. 24 
C 309 
13.11.2010, p. 6 

C 315 
19.11.2010, p. 7 
C 270 
06.10.2010, p. 7 
C 322 
30.12.2009, p. 23 

Origin 

Product 

Belarus 

Potassium chloride 

Bosnia & 
Herzegovina 

Zeolite A powder 

Canada 

Biodiesel 

Type 
Partial interim 
review 
New investigation 

Prov. Duty 

Publication 

C 323 
30.11.2010, p. 24 
C 40 
17.02.2010, p. 5 

L 298 
16.11.2010, p. 27 

New investigation  L 211 

12.08.2010, p. 1 

Biodiesel (AS) 

New investigation  L 211 

P.R. China 

Barium carbonate 

Castings 

Ceramic tiles 

Coated fine paper 

Expiry review 

Expiry review 

New investigation 

New investigation 

Prov. Duty 

Coated fine paper (AS) 

New investigation 

Continuous filament glass fibre products 

New investigation 

Prov. Duty 

12.08.2010, p. 6 
C 192 
16.07.2010, p. 4 
C 203 
27.07.2010, p. 2 
C 160 
19.06.2010, p. 20 
C 41 
18.02.2010, p. 6 

L 299 
17.11.2010, p. 7 
C 99 
17.04.2010, p. 30 
C 307 
17.12.2009, p. 39 

L 243 
16.09.2010, p. 40 

EN 

135 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Coumarin 

Fasteners, iron or steel 

Furfuraldehyde 

Partial interim 
review 
Circumvention 
review 
Expiry review 

C 299 
05.11.2010, p. 4 
L 282 
28.10.2010, p. 29 
C 107 
27.04.2010, p. 10 

Graphite electrode systems 

New investigation  C 343 

Hand pallet trucks and their essential parts 

Expiry review 

17.12.2010, p. 24 
C 196 
20.07.2010, p. 15 

Newcomer review  L 253 

Magnesia bricks 

Magnesia bricks 

Melamine 

Okoumé plywood 

Okoumé plywood 

Open mesh fabrics of glass fibres 

Plastic sacs and bags 

Plastic sacs and bags 

Polyester staple fibres 

Expiry review 

New investigation 

Prov. Duty 

Expiry review 

Partial interim 
review 
New investigation 

Circumvention 
review 
Partial interim 
review 
Expiry review 

Seamless pipes and tubes of stainless steel 

New investigation 

Steel ropes and cables 

Expiry review 

Stainless steel fasteners and parts thereof 

Expiry review 

Tris (2-chloro-1-methylethyl) phosphate 

New investigation 

Trichloroisocyanuric acid 

Tungsten carbide and fused tungsten 
carbide 
Wireless wide area networking modems 

Wireless wide area networking modems 
(AS) 
Antibiotics (broad spectrum) (AS) 

Expiry review 

Expiry review 

New investigation  C 171 

30.06.2010, p. 9 

New investigation  C 249 

Expiry review 

16.09.2010, p. 7 
C 123 
12.05.2010, p. 11 

Fatty alcohols and their blends 

New investigation  C 219 

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET)  

Partial interim 
review 

13.08.2010, p. 12 
C 151 
10.06.2010, p. 15 

136 

   EN

28.09.2010, p. 42 
C 272 
08.10.2010, p. 5 
C 40 
17.02.2010, p. 10 

L 298 
16.11.2010, p. 10 
C 270 
11.11.2009, p. 24 
C 270 
11.11.2009, p. 24 
C 131 
20.05.2010, p. 6 
L 219 
20.08.2010, p. 1 
C 253 
21.09.2010, p. 2 
C 64 
16.03.2010, p. 10 
C 265 
30.09.2010, p. 10 
C 309 
13.11.2010, p. 6 
C 315 
19.11.2010, p. 7 
C 201 
23.07.2010, p. 5 
C 270 
06.10.2010, p. 7 
C 322 
30.12.2009, p. 23 

India 

EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) (AS) 

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film 

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film 

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film 

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film 

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film (AS) 

Partial interim 
review 
Partial interim 
review 
Partial interim 
review 
Partial interim 
review 
Partial interim 
review 
Partial interim 
review 

C 151 
10.06.2010, p. 17 
C 131 
20.05.2010, p. 3 
C 291 
01.12.2009, p. 28 
C 8 
14.01.2010, p. 27 
C 294 
29.10.2010, p. 10 
C 8 
14.01.2010, p. 29 

Stainless steel bars 

New investigation  C 87 A 

Stainless steel bars (AS) 

New investigation 

1.04.2010, p. 1 
C 87 
1.04.2010, p. 17 

Indonesia 

Fatty alcohols and their blends 

New investigation  C 219 

Korea (Rep. of) 

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) 

Partial interim 
review 

13.08.2010, p. 12 
C 47 
25.02.2010, p. 24 

Malaysia 

Fatty alcohols and their blends 

New investigation  C 219 

Prov. Duty 

L 343 
29.12.2010, p. 57 

Russia 

Ferro-silicon 

Potassium chloride 

Singapore 

Biodiesel 

Partial interim 
review 
Partial interim 
review 

13.08.2010, p. 12 
C 290 
27.10.2010, p. 15 
C 323 
30.11.2010, p. 24 

New investigation  L 211 

12.08.2010, p. 1 

Biodiesel (AS) 

New investigation  L 211 

South Africa 

Steel ropes and cables 

Expiry review 

Taiwan 

Stainless steel fasteners and parts thereof 

Expiry review 

Thailand 

Purified terephthalic acid and its salts 

New investigation 

Purified terephthalic acid and its salts (AS) 

New investigation 

Ring binder mechanism 

New investigation 

Ukraine 

Steel ropes and cables 

Expiry review 

12.08.2010, p. 6 
C 309 
13.11.2010, p. 6 
C 315 
19.11.2010, p. 7 
C 313 
22.12.2009, p. 17 
C 313 
22.12.2009, p. 22 
C 131 
20.05.2010, p. 13 
C 309 
13.11.2010, p. 6 

U.S.A. 

Vinyl acetate 

New investigation  C 327 

04.12.2010, p. 23 

EN 

137 

   EN

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX S 

Court cases  

A. 

Court cases pending before the Court of Justice of the European Union and the 
General Court on 31 December 2010: 

Case C-191/09 P 

Case C-200/09 P 

Case C-337/09 P 

Case C-511/09 P 

Case C-247/10 P 

Case C-249/10 P 

Case C-338/10 

Case C-552/10P 

Court of Justice 

Council (v. Interpipe Niko. Tube & Interpipe NTRP) (appeal 
against judgement in case T-249/06)  
Commission (v. Interpipe Niko. Tube & Interpipe NTRP) 
(appeal against judgement in case T-249/06)  
Council (v. Zheijiang Chemical) (appeal against judgement in 
case T-498/04)  

Dongguan Nanzha Leco Stationery Mfg. (v. Council) (appeal 
against judgement in case T-296/06)  

Zhejiang Aokang Shoes Ltd. (v. Council) (appeal against 
judgment in case T-407/06) 
Brossman Footwear (HK) and others (v. Council) (appeal 
against judgment in case T-401/06) 
GLS Grünwald Logistik Service GmbH (Reference for a 
preliminary ruling) 
Usha Martin Ltd. (v. Council and Commission) (appeal against 
judgement in case T-119/06) 

Case C-533/10 

CIVAD S.A. (Reference for a preliminary ruling) 

Case T-199/04 

Case T-113/06 

Case T-115/06 

Case T-84/07 

Case T-167/07 

Case T-274/07 

General Court 

Gul Ahmed Textile Mills Ltd. v. Council 

Fjord Seafood Norway AS et al v. Council 

Fiskeri og Havbruksnaeringens et al v. Council 

Eurochem v. Council 

Far Eastern Textile Ltd. v. Council 

Zhejiang Harmonic Hardware Products v. Council 

Case T-469/07  

Philips Lighting Poland SA and Philips Lighting BV v Council 

Case T-459/07 

Case T-107/08 

Case T-190/08 

Case T-192/08 

Case T-234/08 

Hangzhou Duralamp Electronics Co,. Ltd v Council 

TNC Kazchrome and ENRC Marketing AG v Council and 
Commission 

Chelyabinskij electrometalurgicheskij kombinat and 
Kuznetskie Ferrosplavy v. Council and Commission 

TNK Kazchrome and ENRC Marketing v. Council 

EuroChem Mineral and Chemical Company OAO (EuroChem 
MCC) v. Council 

EN 

138 

   EN 

 
Case T-235/08 

Case T-259/08 

Case T-459/08 

Case T-536/08 

Case T-537/08 

Case T-122/09 

Case T-150/09 

Case T-162/09 

Case T-170/09 

Case T-172/09 

Case T-210/09 

Case T-423/09 

Case T-512/09 

Case T-528/09 

Case T-118/10 

Case T-134/10 

Case T-153/10 

Case T-158/10 

Case T-191/10 

Case T-269/10 

Case T-297/10 

Acron OAO and Dorogobuzh OAO v. Council 

Global Digital Disc GmbH & Co. KG v. Commission  

EuroChem Mineral and Chemical Company OAO (EuroChem 
MCC) v. Council 

Huvis v. Council 

Cixi Jiangnan Chemical Fiber and others v. Council 

Zhejiang Xinshiji Foods and Hubei Xinshiji Foods v. Council  

Ningbo Yonghong Fasteners v. Council 

Würth and Fasteners (Shenyang) v. Council  

Shanghai Biaowu High-Tensile Fastener and Shanghai Prime 
Machinery v. Council  

Gem-Year and Jinn-Well Auto-Parts (Zhejiang) v. Council  

Formenti Seleco SpA v. Commission 

Dashiqiao Sanqiang Refractory Materials v. Council  

Rusal Armenal v. Council 

Hubei Xinyegang v. Council 

Acron OAO v. Council 

FESI v. Council 

Schneider Espana de Informatica SA v. Commission 

The Dow Chemical Company v. Council 

Greenwood Houseware (Zhuhai) Ltd and Others v. Council 

LIS GmbH Licht Impex Service GmbH v. Commission 

DBV – Deutscher Brennstoffvertrieb Würzburg GmbH v. 
Commission 

Case T-555/10 

JBF RAK v. Council  

B. 

Judgments, orders or other decisions rendered by the Court of Justice of the 
European Union or by the General Court in 2010. 

Case C-373/08 

Case C-419/08 P 

Case C-498/09 P 

Court of Justice 
Hoesch Metals and Alloys GmbH 

Trubowest Handel and Makarov (v. Council and Commission) 
(appeal against judgement in case T-429/04) 
Thomson Sales Europe (v. Commission) (appeal against 
judgement in case T-225/07) 

EN 

139 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
Case C-371/09 

Case C-382/09 

Isaac International (Reference for a preliminary ruling)  

Stils Met (Reference for a preliminary ruling)  

Case T-401/06 

Case T-407/06 

Case T-408/06 

Case T-409/06 

Case T-410/06 

Case T-119/06 

Case T-314/06 

Case T-369/08 

Case T-191/09 

General Court 

Brossman Footwear (HK) and others v. Council 

Zhejiang Aokang Shoes Ltd. v. Council 

Wenzhou Taima Shoes Co. Ltd. v. Council 

Sun Sang Kong Yuen Shoes Factory v. Council 

Foshan City Nanhai Golden Step Industrial Co. Ltd. v. Council 

Usha Martin Ltd. v. Council and Commission 

Whirlpool v. Commission 

EWRIA and others vs. Commission 

HIT Trading and Berkman Forwarding v. Commission  

EN 

140 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX T 

Safeguard and surveillance measures in force on 31 December 2010 

A. Safeguard measures 

List of safeguard measures in force 

Product 

Country of origin  Regulation/ Decision 

OJ Reference 

None 

- 

B. Surveillance measures 

No 
- 

- 

List of surveillance measures in force 

Product 

Country of origin  Regulation/ Decision 

OJ Reference 

Footwear products 
(surveillance) 

P.R. China 

Steel products (surveillance) 

Erga omnes 

No 
Commission Reg. 
(EC) No 117/2005 
26.01.2005 

Commission Reg. 
(EC) No 469/2005 
23.03.2005 

L 24 
27.01.2005 
p. 8 

L 78 
24.03.2005 
p. 12 

EN 

141 

   EN