Proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION amending Regulation (EC) No 192/2007 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of polyethylene terephthalate originating, inter alia, in Taiwan following a "new exporter" review pursuant to Article 11(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009
Date: 2013-03-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Taiwan, anti-dumping measure, import (EU), originating product, plastics

EUROPEAN 
COMMISSION 

Brussels, 4.3.2013  
COM(2013) 112 final 

2013/0067 (NLE) 

Proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION 

amending Regulation (EC) No 192/2007 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on 
imports of polyethylene terephthalate originating, inter alia, in Taiwan following a "new 
exporter" review pursuant to Article 11(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 

1. 

CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL 

Grounds for and objectives of the proposal 

This  proposal  concerns  the  application  of  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  1225/2009  of  30 
November  2009  on  protection  against  dumped  imports  from  countries  not  members  of  the 
European  Community  (‘the  basic  Regulation’),  in  the  'new  exporter'  review  of  Council 
Regulation  (EC)  No  192/20071  imposing  a  definitive  anti-dumping  duty  on  imports  of 
polyethylene terephthalate originating, inter alia, in Taiwan. 

General context 

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

Existing provisions in the area of the proposal 
By  Regulation  (EC)  No  2604/20002  the  Council  imposed  a  definitive  anti-dumping  duty  on 
imports of certain polyethylene terephthalate (PET) originating in India, Indonesia, Malaysia, 
the Republic of Korea, Taiwan and Thailand (the countries concerned) pursuant to Article 5 
of the basic Regulation. 

Following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation, the Council, by 
Regulation  (EC)  No  192/2007,  decided  that  the  above  mentioned  measures  should  be 
maintained. 
By notice, published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 24 February 20123, the 
Commission initiated an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation of the 
above measures. This investigation is still on-going. 

Consistency with other policies and objectives of the Union 

Not applicable. 

2. 

CONSULTATION  OF 
ASSESSMENT 

Consultation of interested parties 

INTERESTED 

PARTIES  AND 

IMPACT 

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

Collection and use of expertise 

There was no need for external expertise. 

Impact assessment 

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

1 
2 
3 

OL L59, 27.02.2007, p. 59 
OJ L 301, 30.11.2000, p. 21.  
OJ C55, 24.02.2012, p.4. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

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

3. 

LEGAL ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSAL 

Summary of the proposed action 

On 17 July 2012 the Commission announced, by a regulation published in the Official Journal 
of the European Union, the initiation of a 'new exporter' review of Council Regulation (EC) 
No 192/2007 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of polyethylene 
terephthalate originating, inter alia, in Taiwan, repealing the duty with regard to imports from 
one exporter in this country and making these imports subject to registration. 

The review was initiated following a request lodged by Lealea Enterprise Co., Ltd. ("the 
applicant"), an exporting producer in Taiwan ("the country concerned") of certain 
polyethylene terephthalate. 

The investigation did not find dumping for the transactions of the applicant made in the 
review investigation period. 

Therefore, it is suggested that the Council adopts the attached proposal for a Regulation in 
order to repeal the existing measures for the applicant, which should be published in the 
Official Journal of the European Union by 17 April 2013 at the latest. 

Upon entry into force of the proposed regulation, the registration of imports imposed by 
Regulation (EU) No 653/2012 should cease without any retroactive levying of the anti-
dumping duties.  

Legal basis 

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

Subsidiarity principle 

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

Proportionality principle 

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

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

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

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
Choice of instruments 

Proposed instruments: regulation. 

Other means would not be adequate for the following reason: 

The basic Regulation does not provide for alternative options. 

4. 

BUDGETARY IMPLICATION  

The proposal has no implication for the Union budget. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

2013/0067 (NLE) 

Proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION 

amending Regulation (EC) No 192/2007 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on 
imports of polyethylene terephthalate originating, inter alia, in Taiwan following a "new 
exporter" review pursuant to Article 11(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, 

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

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of 30 November 2009 on protection 
against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community4 (‘the basic 
Regulation’) and in particular Article 11(4) thereof, 

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

Whereas: 

A.  MEASURES IN FORCE 

By  Regulation  (EC)  No  2604/20005  the  Council  imposed  a  definitive  anti-dumping 
duty  on  imports  of  certain  polyethylene  terephthalate  originating  in  India,  Indonesia, 
Malaysia,  the  Republic  of  Korea,  Taiwan  and  Thailand  pursuant  to  Article  5  of  the 
basic Regulation. 

Following  an  expiry  review  pursuant  to  Article  11(2)  of  the  basic  Regulation,  the 
Council,  by  Regulation  (EC)  No  192/20076,  decided  that  the  above  mentioned 
measures should be maintained.  

By  notice,  published  in  the  Official  Journal  of  the  European  Union  on  24  February 
20127, the Commission initiated another expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of the 
basic Regulation of the above measures. This investigation is on-going in parallel and 
will be concluded in a separate legal act. 

B. 

CURRENT PROCEDURE 

REQUEST FOR A REVIEW 

The Commission has received a request to initiate a ‘new exporter’ review pursuant to 
Article  11(4)  of  the  basic  Regulation.  The  request  was  lodged  by  Lealea  Enterprise 
Co., Ltd ('the applicant'), an exporting producer in Taiwan ('the country concerned'). 

The applicant claimed that it did not export the product concerned to the Union during 
the period of investigation, i.e. the period from 1 October 1998 to 30 September 1999 
('the original investigation period'). 

OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 51 
OJ L 301, 30.11.2000, p. 21 
OL L59, 27.02.2007, p. 59 
OJ C55, 24.02.2012, p. 4 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

1. 

(4) 

(5) 

4 
5 
6 
7 

EN 

5 

   EN 

                                                 
(6) 

(7) 

2. 

(8) 

(9) 

Furthermore,  the  applicant  claimed  that  it  was  not  related  to  any  of  the  exporting 
producers  of  the  product  concerned  which  are  subject  to  the  above-mentioned  anti- 
dumping measures. 

The applicant further claimed that it had begun exporting the product concerned to the 
Union after the end of the original investigation period. 

INITIATION OF A NEW EXPORTER REVIEW 

The  Commission  examined  the  prima  facie  evidence  submitted  by  the  applicant  and 
considered it sufficient to justify the initiation of a review in accordance with Article 
11(4) of the basic Regulation. After consultation of the Advisory Committee and after 
the  Union  industry  concerned  had  been  given  the  opportunity  to  comment,  the 
Commission initiated, by Regulation (EU) No 653/20128, a review of Regulation (EC) 
No 192/2007 with regard to the applicant. 

Pursuant  to  Regulation  (EU)  No  653/2012,  the  anti-dumping  duty  of  certain 
polyethylene  terephthalate  imposed  by  Regulation  (EC)  No  192/2007  was  repealed 
with  regard to  imports of  the  product concerned produced and sold for  export to  the 
Union  by  the  applicant.  Simultaneously,  pursuant  to  Article  14(5)  of  the  basic 
Regulation, customs authorities were directed to take appropriate steps to register such 
imports. 

3. 

PRODUCT CONCERNED 

(10)  The product concerned is polyethylene terephthalate ('PET') having a viscosity number 
of 78 ml/g or higher, according to ISO (International Organization for Standardization) 
standard 1628-5, originating in Taiwan, currently falling within CN code 3907 60 20 
('the product concerned'). 

4. 

PARTIES CONCERNED 

(11)  The  Commission  officially  advised  the  Union  industry,  the  applicant  and  the 
representatives  of  the  exporting  country  of  the  initiation  of  the  review.  Interested 
parties  were  given  the  opportunity  to  make  their  views  known  in  writing  and  to  be 
heard. 

(12)  The  Commission  sent  an  anti-dumping  questionnaire  to  the  applicant  and  its  related 

companies and received a reply within the deadline set for that purpose. 

(13)  The  Commission  sought  to  verify  all  the  information  it  deemed  necessary  for  the 
determination  of  the  new  exporter  status  and  dumping  and  verification  visits  were 
carried out at the premises of the applicant in Taiwan. 

5. 

REVIEW INVESTIGATION PERIOD 

(14)  The review investigation period of dumping covered the period from 1 January 2011 

to 30 June 2012 (‘the review investigation period’ or ‘RIP’). 

C. 

RESULTS OF THE INVESTIGATION 

1. 

'NEW EXPORTER' QUALIFICATION 

(15)  The investigation confirmed that the company had not exported the product concerned 
during  the  original  period  of  investigation  and  that  it  had  started  to  export  it  to  the 
Union after this period. 

8 

OJ L188, 18.7.2012, p. 8 

EN 

6 

   EN 

                                                 
(16)  While  quantities  exported  were  limited,  they  were  nevertheless  found  sufficient  to 
establish a reliable dumping margin. They followed a pattern in terms of shipment size 
and  turnover  per  client  which  was  comparable  to  the  behaviour  of  the  applicant  on 
third country markets. 

(17)  As  concerns  the  other  conditions  for  the  recognition  of  a  new  exporter  status,  the 
company was able to demonstrate that it did not have any links, direct or indirect, with 
any  of  the  Taiwanese  exporting  producers  subject  to  the  anti-dumping  measures  in 
force with regard to the product concerned. 

(18)  Accordingly, it is confirmed that the company should be considered a ‘new exporter’ 
in accordance with Article 11(4) of the basic Regulation and thus an individual margin 
should be determined for it. 

2. 

DUMPING 

Normal value 

(19)  The applicant produces the product concerned and sells it domestically and on export 

markets. The applicant sells directly to all markets. 

(20) 

In  accordance  with  Article  2(2)  of  the  basic  Regulation,  domestic  sales  were 
considered representative when the total domestic sales volume was at least 5% of the 
total export sales volume to the Union. The Commission established that the applicant 
exported a single product type to the Union and that the same product type was sold 
domestically by the applicant in overall representative volumes.  

(21)  An  examination  was  also  made  by  the  Commission  as  to  whether  the  sales  of  the 
product concerned sold domestically in representative quantities could be regarded as 
having been made in the ordinary course of trade pursuant to Article 2(4) of the basic 
Regulation. This was done by establishing the proportion of profitable domestic sales 
to  independent  customers.  As  it  was  found  that  there  were  sufficient  sales  in  the 
ordinary course of trade, normal value was based on the actual domestic price.  

Export price 

(22)  The product concerned was exported directly to independent customers in the Union. 
Therefore, the export price was established in accordance with Article 2(8) of the basic 
Regulation, i.e. on the basis of export prices actually paid or payable. 

Comparison 

(23)  The normal value and the export prices were compared on an ex-works basis. 

(24)  For the purpose of ensuring a fair comparison between normal value and export price, 
due  allowance  in  the  form  of  adjustments  was  made  for  differences  affecting  price 
comparability in accordance  with  Article 2(10) of the basic Regulation. Adjustments 
for insurance, handling, loading and ancillary expenses and credit costs were granted 
in  all  cases  where  they  were  found  to  be  reasonable,  accurate  and  supported  by 
verified evidence. 

Dumping margin 

(25) 

In  accordance  with  Article  2(11)  of  the  basic  Regulation,  the  dumping  margin  was 
established  on  the  basis  of  a  comparison  of  a  weighted  average  normal  value  with  a 
weighted  average  of  prices  of  all  exports  transactions  to  the  Union.  As  there  were  a 
limited number of exports to the Union, the individual export prices to the Union were 

EN 

7 

   EN 

also  compared  to  the  weighted  average  normal  value  of  the  months  in  which  each 
export occurred.  

(26) 

In both cases these comparisons showed the existence of a de minimis dumping for the 
applicant that exported to the Union in the RIP. 

D. 

AMENDMENT OF MEASURES BEING REVIEWED 

(27)  The dumping margin with regard to the applicant, established for the RIP, was at de 
minimis level. It is therefore proposed that a duty of 0 EUR/tonne which is based on 
the de minimis dumping margin be imposed and that Regulation (EC) No 192/2007 be 
accordingly amended.  

E. 

REGISTRATION 

(28) 

In the light of the above findings, the registration of imports imposed by Regulation 
(EU) No 653/2012 should cease without any retroactive levying of the anti-dumping 
duties. 

F. 

DISCLOSURE AND DURATION OF THE MEASURES 

(29)  The parties concerned were informed of the essential facts and considerations on the 
basis  of  which  it  was  intended  to  impose  an  anti-dumping  duty  of  0  EUR/tonne  on 
imports of the product concerned from the applicant and to amend Regulation (EC) No 
192/2007 accordingly. Their comments were considered and taken into account, where 
appropriate.  

(30)  This  review  does  not  affect  the  date  on  which  the  measures  imposed  by  Regulation 
(EC) No 192/2007 will expire pursuant to Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation, 

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 

1. 

In Article 1(2) of Regulation (EC) No 192/2007, the following shall be inserted into 
the table under producers in Taiwan: 

Article 1 

Country 

Company 

Anti-dumping  duty 
(EUR/tonne) 

TARIC additional 
code 

Taiwan 

Lealea  Enterprise 
Co., Ltd 

0 

A996 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
2. 

3. 

The customs authorities are hereby directed to cease the registration of imports of the 
product concerned originating in Taiwan produced by Lealea Enterprise Co., Ltd. 

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

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

Article 2 

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

Done at Brussels,  

For the Council 
The President 

EN 

9 

   EN