Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Union and Regulation (EU) 2016/1037 on protection against subsidised imports from countries not members of the European Union
Date: 2016-11-09
Institutions: Directorate-General for Trade and Economic Security, European Commission
Subjects: World Trade Organisation, anti-dumping legislation, anti-subsidy proceeding, countervailing charge, dumping, import (EU), originating product, third country

EN 

   EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 9.11.2016  COM(2016) 721 final 2016/0351 (COD)   Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Union and Regulation (EU) 2016/1037 on protection against subsidised imports from countries not members of the European Union {SWD(2016) 370 final} {SWD(2016) 371 final} {SWD(2016) 372 final}  
 
 
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 

1. 

CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL  

The  proposal  covers  targeted  amendments  to  Regulation  (EU)  2016/1036  on  protection 
against  dumped  imports  from  countries  that  are  not  members  of  the  European  Union  (the 
Basic  Anti-Dumping  Regulation)  and  to  Regulation  (EU)  2016/1037    on  protection  against 
subsidised  imports  from  countries  that  are  not  members  of  the  European  Union  (the  Basic 
Anti-Subsidy Regulation) 

1.1. 

Amendments to the Basic Anti-Dumping Regulation 

1.1.1.  Determination of normal value in the presence of market distortions 

Articles  2(1)  to  2(7)  of  the  Basic  Anti-Dumping  Regulation  stipulate  the  basis  on  which 
normal value shall be determined. The circumstances prevailing in certain countries that are 
Members of the WTO and the experience gathered from the case-law make it appropriate to 
amend the methodology used to determine the normal value and the dumping margin for the 
countries concerned, in particular those currently subject to the provisions of Article 2(7)(b) 
and (c).  

As a result, the Commission proposes to amend Article 2(7) and to introduce a new provision, 
namely Article 2(6)a for WTO member countries.  

(a) 

 Normal value for WTO Members 

For  WTO  members,  the  normal  value  is  normally  determined  on  the  basis  of  the  domestic 
prices of the like product or on the basis of a constructed normal value.  

There are circumstances however in which the domestic prices and costs would not provide a 
reasonable  basis  to  determine  the  normal  value.  This  could  be  the  case,  for  instance,  when 
prices  or  costs  are  not  the  result  of  free  market  forces  because  they  are  affected  by 
government intervention. Relevant considerations in this respect include, for instance, the fact 
that the market in question is to a significant extent served by enterprises which operate under 
the  ownership,  control  or  policy  supervision  or  guidance  of  the  authorities  of  the  exporting 
country;  the  state  presence  in  firms  allowing  the  state  to  interfere  with  respect  to  prices  or 
costs;  the  existence  of  public  policies  or  measures  discriminating  in  favour  of  domestic 
suppliers  or  otherwise  influencing  free  market  forces;  and  the  access  to  finance  granted  by 
institutions implementing public policy objectives.  

In such circumstances, it would be inappropriate to use domestic prices and costs to determine 
the value at which the like product should be normally sold ("the normal value") and a new 
provision (Article 2(6)a) stipulates that the normal value would instead be constructed on the 
basis  of  costs  of  production  and  sale  reflecting  undistorted  prices  or  benchmarks.  For  this 
purpose, the sources that may be used would include undistorted international prices, costs, or 
benchmarks,  or  corresponding  costs  of  production  and  sale  in  an  appropriate  representative 
country with a similar level of economic development as the exporting country.  

This  methodology  would  allow  the  Commission  to  establish  and  measure  the  actual 
magnitude of dumping being practised in normal market conditions absent distortions. 

For the sake of transparency and efficiency, the Commission services intend to issue public 
reports  describing  the  specific  situation  concerning  the  market  circumstances  in  any  given 
country or sector. Of importance, the EU industry would be in a position to rely on and refer 
to  the  information  contained  in  these  reports  when  alleging  in  a  complaint  or  a  request  for 
review that the domestic prices and costs in the exporting country are unsuitable to determine 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
the normal value. Such reports and the evidence on which it is based would also be placed on 
the  file  of  any  investigation  relating  to  that  country  or  sector  so  that  all  interested  parties 
would be in a position to express their views and comments. 

(b)  Normal value for non-WTO members  

For those countries which are, at the date of initiation, not Members of the WTO and listed in 
Annex I  of  Regulation (EU) 2015/755  of 29 April  2015 on common rules  for imports  from 
certain  third  countries,  the  normal  value  will  be  determined  on  the  basis  of  the  analogue 
country methodology as provided by Article 2(7) as amended.  

1.1.2.  Transition from the current system to the new one 

The  proposal  introduces  specific  disciplines  ensuring  that  the  entry  into  force  of  the  new 
system  would  be  made  in  an  orderly  and  transparent  manner  and  would  not  create  legal 
uncertainty for ongoing cases or unduly affect existing measures. 

Thus, the proposal makes clear that the new system would only apply to cases initiated upon 
entry into force of the amended provisions. Any given ongoing anti-dumping investigation at 
the time of entry into force would remain governed by the current disciplines.  

As  far  as  existing  measures  are  concerned,  the  Commission  considers  that  the  sheer 
introduction  of  the  new  disciplines  does  not  constitute  sufficient  reasons  to  review  such 
measures within the meaning of Article 11(3) of the Basic Anti-Dumping Regulation. Indeed, 
reviews of existing measures should only be conducted if and when the factual circumstances 
of the exporters concerned, as opposed to the legal disciplines to which they are subject, have 
changed to an extent that the current level of measures is shown to no longer be appropriate. 
Furthermore, if a review is initiated as a result of an objective change in the circumstances of 
an exporter, the review could still be conducted on the basis of the current methodology if the 
specific  circumstances  that  led  to  the  application  of  the  current  methodology,  including  the 
methodology  based  on  Articles  2(7)(a)  and  2(7)(b),  have  not  changed.  If  the  factual 
circumstances justifying the application of a given methodology have not changed, the normal 
value and dumping  margin will be established on the basis of the same methodology as the 
one  that  led  to  the  imposition  of  the  measure  subject  to  review.  This  is  clarified  in  Article 
11(9)  of  the  Basic  anti-dumping  regulation  and  is  necessary  to  avoid  a  situation  where 
essentially  the  same  circumstances  would  lead  overtime  to  the  application  of  two  different 
methodologies. 

Furthermore,  the  proposal  provides  that,  in  the  case  of  a  transition  from  a  normal  value 
calculated  pursuant  to  Articles  2(7)(a)  or  2(7)(b)  to  a  normal  value  calculated  pursuant  to 
paragraphs  1  to  6a  of  Article  2,  the  reasonable  period  of  time  provided  for  in  the  first  sub-
paragraph of Article 11(3) of the Basic Anti-Dumping Regulation shall be deemed to elapse 
on the date on which the first expiry review following such transition is initiated.    

The  same  approach  should  apply  with  respect  to  newcomer  reviews  conducted  pursuant  to 
Article 11(4) of the Basic Anti-Dumping Regulation. 

1.2. 

Amendment to the Basic Anti-Subsidy Regulation 

The  Commission  considers  also  it  is  essential  that  the  Basic  anti-subsidy  regulation  can 
deploy  its  full  effectiveness.  In  that  respect,  experience  shows  that  the  actual  magnitude  of 
subsidisation is not always evident at the time of initiation. Oftentimes, investigated exporters 
are found to benefit from subsidies whose existence could not have been reasonably known 
before carrying out the investigation. Yet, those subsidies clearly provide an unfair benefit the 
exporters concerned, which allows them to sell at injurious prices to the EU market.  

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
It  is  therefore  essential  that  such  subsidies  be  adequately  captured  in  the  final  analysis  and 
level of duty imposed.  

For that purpose and for reasons of due process and transparency, the proposal clarifies that, 
when  such  subsidies  are  found  in  the  course  of  any  given  investigation  or  review,  the 
Commission  will  offer  additional  consultations  to  the  country  of  origin  and/or  export 
concerned with regard to such subsidies identified in the course of the investigation. In these 
situations, the Commission will send to the country of origin and/or export a summary of the 
main elements concerning these other subsidies to ensure meaningful consultations. 

2. 

RESULTS  OF  CONSULTATIONS  WITH  THE  INTERESTED  PARTIES  AND 
IMPACT ASSESSMENTS 

2.1. 

Consultation of interested parties 

Interested  parties  concerned  by  this  proposal  have  had  the  opportunity  to  participate  in  the 
Public consultation carried out from February to April 2016. A summary of the results of the 
public  consultation  was  published  as  part  of  the  Impact  Assessment  together  with  this 
legislative proposal. The Impact Assessment can be found on DG Trade's website. 

2.2. 

Collection and use of expertise 

An independent study into the impact of a number of options to address the way normal value 
is calculated in the case of imports from non-market economy countries was finalised in May 
2016  and  was  published  on  DG  Trade’s  website  in  parallel  to  the  release  of  the  legislative 
proposal. 

2.3. 

Impact Assessment 

Taking  into  account  the  results  of  the  public  consultation,  the  independent  study  and  the 
Commission's  extensive  practice  in  the  use  of  the  instruments  an  impact  assessment  was 
carried  out  in  Spring  2016.  The  impact  assessment  analysed  various  options.  The  Impact 
Assessment Board considered the report in June 2016 and gave a favourable opinion subject 
to some revisions to the report. The report has since been revised and finalised. The preferred 
solutions form the basis for this proposal.  

3. 

LEGAL ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSAL 

3.1. 

Legal basis 

The  legal  basis  for  this  proposal  is  Article  207(2)  of  the  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the 
European Union, in accordance to which the European Parliament and the Council, acting by 
means  of  regulations  in  accordance  with  the  ordinary  legislative  procedure,  shall  adopt  the 
measures defining the framework for implementing the common commercial policy.  

This proposal amends Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 and Regulation (EU) 2016/1037.  

3.2. 

Subsidiarity Principle 

Pursuant  to  Article  3(1)(e)  of  the  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the  European  Union,  the 
proposal falls under exclusive competence of the Union. The subsidiarity principle therefore 
does not apply. 

3.3. 

Proportionality Principle 

The proposal complies with the proportionality principle. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
3.4. 

Choice of instruments 

Proposed instrument: Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council. 

Other means would not be adequate for the following reason: a Regulation must be amended 
by a Regulation. 

4. 

BUDGETARY IMPLICATION  

Not applicable. 

5. 

OPTIONAL ELEMENTS  

Not applicable. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
2016/0351 (COD) 

Proposal for a 

REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL 

amending Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 on protection against dumped imports from 
countries not members of the European Union and Regulation (EU) 2016/1037 on 
protection against subsidised imports from countries not members of the European 
Union 

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, 

Having  regard  to  the  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the  European  Union,  and  in  particular 
Article 207(2) thereof,  

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission, 

After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national parliaments, 

Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, 

Whereas: 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

1 

2 

By  Regulation  (EU)  2016/10361  the  Council  and  the  European  Parliament  adopted 
common  rules  for  protection  against  dumped  imports  from  countries  that  are  not 
members of the Union. 

Articles 2(7)(a) and 2(7)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 stipulate the basis on which 
normal value should be determined in the case of imports from non-market economy 
countries. In view of developments with respect to certain countries that are Members 
of  the  WTO,  it  is  appropriate  that,  for  those  countries,  normal  value  should  be 
determined  on  the  basis  of  paragraphs  1  to  6a    of  Article  2  of  Regulation  (EU) 
2016/1036, with effect from the date on which this Regulation enters into force, and 
subject to the provisions of this Regulation. In the case of countries which are, at the 
date of initiation, not Members of the WTO and listed in Annex I of Regulation (EU) 
2015/7552, norma1 value should be determined on the basis of paragraph 7 of Article 
2  of  Regulation  (EU)  2016/1036,  as  amended  by  this  Regulation.    This  Regulation 
should  be  without  prejudice  to  establishing  whether  or  not  any  WTO  Member  is  a 
market economy.  

In  the  light  of  experience  gained  in  past  proceedings,  it  is  appropriate  to  clarify  the 
circumstances  in  which  significant  distortions  affecting  to  a  considerable  extent  free 
market forces may be deemed to exist. In particular, it is appropriate to clarify that this 
situation may be deemed to exist, inter alia, when reported prices or costs, including 
the  costs  of  raw  materials,  are  not  the  result  of  free  market  forces  because  they  are 

Regulation  (EU)  2016/1036  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  8  June  2016  on 
protection  against  dumped  imports  from  countries  not  members  of  the  European  Union  (OJ  L  176, 
30.6.2016, p. 21). 
Regulation (EU) 2015/755 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2015 on common 
rules for imports from certain third countries (OJ L 123, 19.5.2015, p. 33). 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
affected  by  government  intervention.  It  is  further  appropriate  to  clarify  that  in 
considering whether or not such a situation exists regard may be had, inter alia, to the 
potential  impact  of  the  following:  the  market  in  question  is  to  a  significant  extent 
served by enterprises which operate under the ownership, control or policy supervision 
or  guidance  of  the  authorities  of  the  exporting  country;  state  presence  in  firms 
allowing  the  state  to  interfere  with  respect  to  prices  or  costs;  public  policies  or 
measures discriminating in favour of domestic suppliers or otherwise influencing free 
market  forces;  and  access  to  finance  granted  by  institutions  implementing  public 
policy  objectives.  It  is  further  appropriate  to  provide  that  the  Commission  services 
may  issue  a  report  describing  the  specific  situation  concerning  these  criteria  in  a 
certain  country  or  a  certain  sector;  that  such  report  and  the  evidence  on  which  it  is 
based may be placed on the file of any investigation relating to that country or sector; 
and  that  interested  parties  should  have  ample  opportunity  to  comment  on  the  report 
and  the  evidence  on  which  it  is  based  in  each  investigation  in  which  such  report  or 
evidence is used. 

It is further appropriate to recall that costs should normally be calculated on the basis 
of records kept by the exporter or producer under investigation. However, where there 
are  significant  distortions  in  the  exporting  country  with  the  consequence  that  costs 
reflected in the records of the party concerned are artificially low, such costs may be 
adjusted  or  established  on  any  reasonable  basis,  including  information  from  other 
representative  markets  or  from  international  prices  or  benchmarks.    In  the  light  of 
experience gained in past proceedings, it is appropriate to further clarify  that, for the 
purposes of applying the provisions introduced by this regulation, due account should 
be taken of all relevant evidence, including relevant assessment reports regarding the 
circumstances  prevailing  on  the  domestic  market  of  the  exporting  producers  and  the 
evidence on which they are based, which has been placed on the file, and upon which 
interested parties have had an opportunity to comment. 

It  is  further  appropriate  to  recall  that,  with  respect  to  the  methodology  used  in  the 
original  investigation  and  to  be  used  in  the  review  investigation,  Article  11(9)  of 
Regulation  (EU)  2016/1036  applies.  In  this  context,  it  is  appropriate  to  clarify  that, 
when examining whether there is an indication that circumstances have changed, due 
account should be taken of all relevant evidence, including relevant assessment reports 
regarding  the  circumstances  prevailing  on  the  domestic  market  of  the  exporting 
producers  and  the  evidence  on  which  they  are  based,  which  has  been  placed  on  the 
file, and upon which interested parties have had an opportunity to comment. 

Absent  any  other  specific  transitional  rules  regulating  the  matter,  it  is  appropriate  to 
provide  for  the  application  of  this  Regulation  to  all  decisions  on  the  initiation  of 
proceedings,  and  to  all  proceedings,  including  original  investigations  and  review 
investigations, initiated, on or after the date on which this Regulation enters into force, 
subject  to  Article  11(9)  of  Regulation  (EU)  2016/1036.  Furthermore,  by  way  of 
specific  transitional  rule,  and  having  regard  to  the  absence  of  any  other  specific 
transitional rule regulating the matter, it is appropriate to provide that, in the case of a 
transition  from  a  normal  value calculated  pursuant to  Articles  2(7)(a)  or  2(7)(b)  to a 
normal  value  calculated  pursuant  to  paragraphs  1  to  6a  of  Article  2,  the  reasonable 
period  of  time  provided  for  in  the  first  sub-paragraph  of  Article  11(3)  of  Regulation 
(EU)  2016/1036  should  be  deemed  to  elapse  on  the  date  on  which  the  first  expiry 
review  following  such  transition  is  initiated.  With  a  view  to  reducing  the  risk  of 
circumvention  of  the  provisions  of  this  Regulation,  the  same  approach  should  apply 
with  respect  to  reviews  conducted  pursuant  to  Article  11(4)  of  Regulation  (EU) 

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
(7) 

2016/1036.  It  is  also  appropriate  to  recall  that  a  transition  from  a  normal  value 
calculated pursuant to Articles 2(7)(a) or 2(7)(b) to a normal value calculated pursuant 
to  paragraphs  1  to  6a  of  Article  2  would  not  in  itself  constitute  sufficient  evidence 
within the meaning of Article 11(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036. Such transitional 
rules should complete a lacuna that would otherwise risk to generate legal uncertainty, 
should provide a  reasonable opportunity for interested parties  to  adapt themselves  to 
the  expiry  of  the  old  rules  and  the  entry  into  force  of  the  new  rules,  and  should 
facilitate  the  efficient,  orderly  and  equitable  administration  of  Regulation  (EU) 
2016/1036. 
By  Regulation  (EU)  2016/10373,  the  Council  and  the  European  Parliament  adopted 
common  rules  for  protection  against  subsidised  imports  from  countries  that  are  not 
members of the European Union. Experience has shown that the actual magnitude of 
subsidisation  is  usually  discovered  during  the  relevant  investigation.  In  particular,  it 
happens  frequently  that  investigated  exporters  are  found  to  benefit  from  subsidies 
whose  existence  could  not  have  been  reasonably  known  before  carrying  out  the 
investigation.  It  is  appropriate  to  clarify  that,  when  such  subsidies  are  found  in  the 
course  of  any  given investigation  or  review,  the  Commission  should  offer  additional 
consultations  to  the  country  of  origin  and/or  export  concerned  with  regard  to  such 
subsidies  identified  in  the  course  of  the  investigation.  In  the  absence  of  specific 
transitional rules regulating the matter, it is appropriate to provide for the application 
of  this  Regulation  to  all  decisions  on  the  initiation  of  proceedings,  and  to  all 
proceedings,  including  original investigations and  review  investigations,  initiated,  on 
or after the date on which this Regulation enters into force. 

(8) 

Regulation  (EU)  2016/1036  and  Regulation  (EU)  2016/1037  should  therefore  be 
amended accordingly, 

HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 

Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 is amended as follows: 

(1) 

In Article 2 the following paragraph 6a is inserted: 

Article 1 

(a) In case it is determined, when applying this provision or any other relevant 
'6a. 
provision of this Regulation, that it is not appropriate to use domestic prices and costs 
in  the  exporting  country  due  to  the  existence  of  significant  distortions,  the  normal 
value  shall  be  constructed  on  the  basis  of  costs  of  production  and  sale  reflecting 
undistorted  prices  or  benchmarks.  For  this  purpose,  the  sources  that  may  be  used 
include undistorted international prices, costs, or benchmarks, or corresponding costs 
of production and sale in an appropriate representative country with a similar level of 
economic  development  as  the  exporting  country,  provided  the  relevant  cost  data  are 
readily available. The constructed normal value shall include a reasonable amount for 
administrative, selling and general costs and for profits. 

(b)  Significant  distortions  for  the  product  concerned  within  the  meaning  of  point  (a) 
may be deemed to exist, inter alia, when reported prices or costs, including the costs 
of  raw  materials,  are  not  the  result  of  free  market  forces  as  they  are  affected  by 

3 

Regulation  (EU)  2016/1037  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  8  June  2016  on 
protection against subsidised imports from  countries not members of the European Union (OJ L 176, 
30.6.2016, p. 55). 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
                                                 
government  intervention.  In  considering  whether  or  not  significant  distortions  exist 
regard may be had, inter alia, to the potential impact of the following: the market in 
question  is  to  a  significant  extent  served  by  enterprises  which  operate  under  the 
ownership, control or policy supervision or guidance of the authorities of the exporting 
country; state presence in firms allowing the state to interfere with respect to prices or 
costs;  public  policies  or  measures  discriminating  in  favour  of  domestic  suppliers  or 
otherwise influencing free market forces; and access to finance granted by institutions 
implementing public policy objectives. 

(c)  When  appropriate,  the  Commission  services  may  issue  a  report  describing  the 
specific  situation  concerning  the  criteria  listed  in  point  (b)  in  a  certain  country  or  a 
certain sector. Such report and the evidence on which it is based may be placed on the 
file of any investigation relating to that country or sector. Interested parties shall have 
ample opportunity to supplement, comment or rely on the report and the evidence on 
which it is based in each investigation in which such report or evidence is used. The 
determinations made shall take into account all of the relevant evidence on the file. 

(d)  The  Union  industry  may  rely  on  the  report  referred  to  in  point  (c)  for  the 
calculation of normal value when filing a complaint in accordance with Article 5 or a 
request for a review in accordance with Article 11. 

(e) The parties to the investigation shall be informed shortly after initiation about the 
relevant sources that the Commission intends to use for the purpose of point (a) and 
shall be given 10 days to comment. For this purpose, interested parties shall be given 
access to the file, including any evidence on which the investigating authority relies, 
without prejudice to Article 19.' 

(2) 

In Article 2, paragraph 7 is replaced by the following: 

'In the case of imports from countries which are, at the date of initiation, not members 
of the WTO and listed in Annex I of Regulation (EU) 2015/755, normal value shall be 
determined on the basis of the price or  constructed value in a market economy third 
country, or the price from such a third country to other countries, including the Union, 
or  where  those  are  not  possible,  on  any  other  reasonable  basis,  including  the  price 
actually paid or payable in the Union for the like product, duly adjusted if necessary to 
include a reasonable profit margin. 

An appropriate market economy third country shall be selected in a not unreasonable 
manner,  due  account  being  taken  of  any  reliable  information  made  available  at  the 
time  of  selection.  Account  shall  also  be  taken  of  time-limits;  where  appropriate,  a 
market economy third country which is subject to the same investigation shall be used. 

The  parties  to  the  investigation  shall  be  informed  shortly  after  its  initiation  of  the 
market economy third country envisaged and shall be given 10 days to comment.' 

(3) 

In Article 11(3), first subparagraph, the following is added : 

'In  the  case  of  a  transition  from  a  normal  value  calculated  pursuant  to  the  former 
Articles 2(7)(a) or 2(7)(b) to a normal value calculated pursuant to paragraphs 1 to 6a 
of  Article  2,  the  reasonable  period  of  time  shall  be  deemed  to  elapse  on the  date  on 
which the first expiry review following such transition is initiated.' 

(4) 

In Article 11(4), the following subparagraph is added: 

'In  the  case  of  a  transition  from  a  normal  value  calculated  pursuant  to  the  former 
Articles 2(7)(a) or 2(7)(b) to a normal value calculated pursuant to paragraphs 1 to 6a 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
 
of  Article  2,  any  review  pursuant  to  this  paragraph  shall  be  deferred  to  the  date  on 
which the first expiry review following such transition is initiated.' 

(5) 

In Article 11(9), the following is added: 

'In  relation  to  the  circumstances  relevant  for  the  determination  of  the  normal  value 
pursuant  to  Article  2,  due  account  shall  be  taken  of  all  relevant  evidence,  including 
relevant  assessment  reports  regarding  the  circumstances  prevailing  on  the  domestic 
market  of  the  exporting producers and  the  evidence  on  which  they  are  based,  which 
has been placed on the file, and upon which interested parties have had an opportunity 
to comment.' 

Article 2 

In  Article 10(7) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1037, the following subparagraph is added: 

'The  Commission  shall  also  offer  consultations  to  the  country  of  origin  and/or  export 
concerned with regard to other subsidies identified in the course of the investigation. In these 
situations, the Commission shall send to the country of origin and/or export a summary of the 
main  elements  concerning  other  subsidies,  in  particular  those  referred  to  in  point  (c)  of 
paragraph  2  of  this  article.  If  the  additional  subsidies  are  not  covered  by  the  notice  of 
initiation, the notice of initiation shall be amended and the amended version be published in 
the Official Journal of the European Union, inviting all interested parties to comment.' 

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

Article 3 

This  Regulation  shall  apply  to  all  decisions  on  the  initiation  of  proceedings,  and  to  all 
proceedings, including original investigations and review investigations, initiated, on or after 
the date on which this Regulation enters into force. 

Article 4 

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

Done at Brussels, 

For the European Parliament 
The President 

For the Council 
The President 

EN 

10 

   EN