Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

*|*

# 52012SC0346

**COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Accompanying the document REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 30th Annual Report from the Commission to the European Parliament on the EU's Anti-Dumping, Anti-Subsidy and Safeguard activities (2011) /\* SWD/2012/0346 final \*/**

  

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive summary. 5

1........... Overview of the
legislation. 7

1.1........ Anti-dumping and
anti-subsidy. 7

1.1.1..... The international framework. 7

1.1.2..... The EU legislation. 7

1.2........ Safeguards. 8

1.2.1..... The international framework. 8

1.2.2..... The EU legislation. 8

1.3........ Anti-subsidy and unfair
pricing instrument for airline services. 9

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

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

2.1.1..... What is dumping and what are
countervailable subsidies - the material conditions for the imposition of
duties?  9

2.1.2..... Procedure. 10

2.1.3..... Review of measures. 12

2.1.4..... Judicial reviews. 12

2.2........ Safeguards. 12

2.2.1..... What are safeguard measures?. 12

2.2.2..... Procedure. 13

3........... TDI Modernisation. 14

4........... Country-wide market
economy status (MES) 15

4.1........ China. 16

4.2........ Vietnam.. 16

4.3........ Armenia. 16

4.4........ Kazakhstan. 16

4.5........ Mongolia. 17

4.6........ Belarus. 17

5........... Information and
Communication activities / Bilateral contacts. 17

5.1........ Small and medium sized
enterprises (SMEs) 17

5.2........ Bilateral contacts/information
activities – industry and third countries. 17

6........... The Hearing Officer 18

7........... General overview of
anti-dumping and anti-subsidy investigations and measures. 20

7.1........ New investigations. 20

7.2........ Review investigations. 21

8........... Overview of activities
in 2011. 22

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

8.1.1..... Initiations. 22

8.1.2..... Provisional measures. 23

8.1.3..... Definitive measures. 24

8.1.4..... Details on individual cases. 25

8.1.5..... Investigations terminated
without measures. 32

8.1.6..... Details on some individual
cases. 33

8.2........ Review investigations. 34

8.2.1..... Expiry reviews. 34

8.2.2..... Interim reviews. 41

8.2.3..... “Other” reviews. 44

8.2.4..... New exporter reviews. 45

8.2.5..... Absorption investigations. 45

8.2.6..... Circumvention investigations. 45

8.3........ Safeguard investigations. 47

9........... Enforcement of
anti-dumping/countervailing measures. 47

9.1........ Follow-up of measures. 47

9.2........ Monitoring of
undertakings. 48

10......... Refunds. 48

11......... Judicial review:
decisions given by the Court of Justice / Court of First Instance. 48

11.1...... Overview of the judicial
reviews in 2011. 48

11.2...... Cases pending. 48

11.3...... New cases. 48

11.4...... Judgments rendered by the
General Court 48

11.4.1... Certain polyethylene
terephthalate originating in India, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Republic of Korea,
Thailand and Taiwan – T-167/07 – Far Eastern New Century Corp. v Council of the
European Union – Judgment of 13 April 2011 (OJ 160, 28.5.2011, p. 15) 48

11.4.2... Cotton-type bed linen
originating in Pakistan – T-199/04 – Gul Ahmed Textile Mills v Council of the
European Union – Judgment of 27 September 2011 (OJ C 331, 12.11.2011, p. 15) 50

11.4.3... Ironing boards originating in
the People’s Republic of China and Ukraine – T-274/07 – Zhejiang Harmonic
Hardware Products v Council of the European Union – Judgment of 8 November 2011
(OJ C 370, 17.12.2011, p. 22) 50

11.4.4... Certain magnesia bricks
originating from the People's Republic of China – T-423/09 – Dashiqiao v
Council of the Europen Union – Judgment of 16 December 2011 (OJ C 32, 4.2.2012,
p. 21) 51

11.5...... Judgments rendered by the
Court of Justice. 52

12......... Activities in the
framework of the World Trade Organization (WTO) 52

12.1...... Dispute settlement in the
field of anti-dumping, anti-subsidy and safeguards. 52

12.1.1... Overview of the WTO dispute
settlement procedure. 52

12.1.2... Dispute settlement procedures
against the Union. 53

12.2...... Other WTO activities. 54

13......... Conclusion. 54

LIST OF ANNEXES. 56

Executive
summary

This report is submitted to the European
Parliament following its resolution of 16 December 1981 on the EU's
anti-dumping activities[1], and the report of the European
Parliament’s Committee on industry, external trade, research and energy[2].

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 duties 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 2011.

2011 saw a slight increase  in the number
of new cases initiated when compared to the previous year, 21 as compared to 18
in 2010. Regarding other activities, 2011 saw a decrease in the number of
provisional measures imposed, 10 compared to 13 the previous year while the
number of investigations terminated without measures increased slightly from 10
in 2010 to 11 in 2011. There was an increase in the number of definitive
measures imposed up from 9 in 2010 to 13 in 2011.

As regards review investigations initiated,
there was a drop from 31 in 2010 to 24 in 2011. These included 8 expiry
reviews, 9 interim reviews, 2 new exporter reviews, 3 anti-circumvention
investigations as well as 2 other reviews. In the period, 8 expiry reviews were
concluded with confirmation of the measures and4 interim reviews were concluded
with the measures being confirmed and/or amended.

There was no new safeguard investigation
opened nor safeguard measures imposed during 2011.

As in previous years, this report continues
to provide an overview on the Court cases relating to the trade policy
instruments. In 2011, the Court of Justice (COJ) and the General Court (GC)
rendered 9 judgments in total relating to the areas of anti-dumping or
anti-subsidy.

2011 was the fourth full 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.

With the aim of improving the efficiency
and effectiveness of the EU's trade defence instruments, in 2011 DG Trade and
launched a debate for the Modernisation of the trade defence instruments in
October 2011. 2011 also saw the continued focus on the role of SMEs in trade
defence investigations and how the particular problems they incur might be
addressed. A paper was published in 2011 setting out concrete actions which
could be taken to help overcome certain difficulties facing SMEs in the TDI
process.

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. As regards WTO activity the
report also updates the situation regarding the trade negotiations on the
Anti-dumping and Subsidies Agreements.

The annexes to this report provide easy
access to the activities in table form.

This report is also available to the
general public with the following link.

Internet Website :
http://ec.europa.eu/trade/tackling-unfair-trade/trade-defence/anti-dumping/

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 Version[3]

–
Council Regulation (EC) No 597/2009 of 11 June
2009 on protection against subsidized imports from countries not members of the
European EU – Codified Version[4].

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 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.

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 260/2009[5] on the common rules of imports
– Codified Version

–
Council Regulation (EC) No 519/94[6] 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 adopted[7].
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 517/94[8] 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 868/2004[9] 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 General Court 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
legislation[10]
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.

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.

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
Modernisation

The Trade Commissioner's portfolio includes
the mission of updating and modernising the current system of the EU's trade
defence instruments (TDI).

The last substantial revision of these
mechanisms was adopted in 1995, following the Uruguay Round of negotiations,
and the Commission's services felt a need for an examination of their
efficiency and effectiveness. Therefore DG Trade has started looking into the
subject and launched a debate for the Modernisation of the trade defence
instruments in October 2011.

In the first phase, when preparing the
public consultation, the Commission services were inter alia drawing on the
results of an evaluation study on the EU's trade defence (conducted by an
external contractor and published in March 2012) but also on a number of
interviews with experts in the field. Both those initiatives, jointly with DG
Trade's experience in the daily administration of the instruments, allowed a
broader comprehension of the practical issues and served as a basis for the
preparation of the public consultation document. The public consultation,
published in Spring 2012, aims at involving all stakeholders including
producers, importers, exporters, business organisations, Member States in the
process.

The ideas indentified and put forward in
the public consultation have been grouped around 6 broader themes which are:

1. Further increase of transparency and
predictability: Transparency and predictability are, for all stakeholders, of
the utmost importance, not least because this will facilitate their planning
and decision making. Therefore, improved transparency and predictability are
top of the list of priorities in the modernisation process.

2. Fight against retaliation: Fear of
retaliation is a serious and increasing obstacle to an effective use of trade
defence instruments by EU industry. For example, authorities of exporting
countries exercise undue pressure on European companies in order to prevent
them from lodging anti-dumping or anti-subsidy complaints. Addressing this
issue is of primary importance for the operation of the instruments.

3. Effectiveness and enforcement: TDIs are
essentially directed against unfair trade while at the same time taking into
account the interests of users. A number of investigation practices and rules
could be further strengthened to improve the effectiveness of the instruments.

4. Facilitate cooperation: good quality
investigations usually depend on the cooperation of interested parties.
However, cooperation, in particular in the area of Union interest, is often
very weak. DG Trade has already streamlined the information requirements and
has screened procedural rules and the investigation schedule, in order to
identify changes that could facilitate the cooperation of interested parties
without compromising on the overall duration and quality of investigations.

5. Optimizing review practice: the review
practice has been screened and a number of aspects have been identified which
could be fine-tuned in order to better meet the objectives and purpose of
reviews.

6. Codification: in order to make the EU
legislation more clear or to make necessary amendments following ECJ or WTO
jurisprudence some technical changes are also suggested.

After gathering the questionnaires
submitted through the public consultation, the Commission will carry out an
impact assessment. In this manner, it will addres all significant impacts on
all stakeholders involved. Moreover, this would also explain if and why the EU
needs a legislative proposal to modernise its trade defence instruments. Any
Commission proposal will not be adopted before November/December 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:

i.          a low degree of government
influence over the allocation of resources and 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;

ii.          an absence of state-induced
distortions in the operation of enterprises linked to 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);

iv.         the existence and
implementation of a coherent, effective and transparent set of 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.

2011 saw the continued evaluation of four
of the six requests for country-wide MES from China, Vietnam, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Mongolia and Belarus. All countries, except Belarus and Armenia, continued to provide additional information in support of their claims throughout
the year and their requests are at various stages of progress. In 2010 the consultations
with the authorities of the Republic of Belarus were put on hold due to the
political situation in the country and the situation remained unchanged in
2011. In June 2010 additional questions on further
developments in their progress towards MES were sent to
Armenia. However, by the end of 2011 still no new
information had been sent to the Commission by the Armenian authorities.

Companies from these applicant countries
have the possibility to request market economy treatment on an individual basis
in the context of anti-dumping investigations.

4.1.        China

China is
undoubtedly the most important MES applicant country and the first of the six
countries to have requested this 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.

At the working group meeting in Brussels in November 2011, both parties discussed China's progress in the area of
Intellectual Property Rights and Anti-monopoly law. In 2011 the study on the
accounting practices in the People’s Republic of China was finalised. As a
result of the lack of cooperation by the Chinese authorities for this jointly
agreed study, the results of the study were unfortunately only partial and
insufficient to make sound conclusions on China's progress in this field.

The Commission will continue their
evaluation in close cooperation with relevant Chinese's authorities.

4.2.        Vietnam

The EU-Vietnam MES working group meeting took
place in Brussels in December 2011. The Vietnamese authorities provided
additional information to the Commission on the outstanding four criteria (Vietnam were considered to have fulfilled the first criteria above in 2010). Vietnam agreed to send additional information on issues raised during the meeting. However,
by the end of 2011 no further information had been sent to the Commission by Vietnam. A third assessment report is expected in 2012.

4.3.        Armenia

There was no progress on Armenia's MES request during 2011. The first assessment report on Armenia's MES request was transmitted to the Armenian authorities early in 2010. The report
had concluded that Armenia 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. However, by the end of 2011 no
new information had been sent to the Commission from Armenia.

4.4.        Kazakhstan

As a follow-up of DG Trade's assesment of Kazakhstan's progress towards fulfilling the market economy status criteria in 2010, a Note Verbale
was sent to the Kazakhstan authorities setting out the main problems regarding
the 5 MES criteria. Since then no reaction was received from the Kazakstani
authorities. While it was agreed already in 2010 to jointly develop a road map
setting out the next steps to be taken on MES, no progress on such a map was
made in 2011. The Commission remains committed to developing such a road map
once the Kazakhstan authorities consider it timely to do so.

4.5.        Mongolia

At the end of 2010 the Commission sent
questions to the Mongolian authorities, in order to make further progress on
the MES assessment report. Information was submitted by the Mongolian
authorities in Spring 2011 and a working group meeting took place in Ulan-Bator
in September 2011 to verify the replies received and clarify outstanding
issues. Work continued on this file during 2011 including the ongoing
collection and analysis of data.

4.6.        Belarus

In 2011 no progress was made on the MES
file. The Commission had decided already in 2010 to put the consultations with
the authorities of the Republic of Belarus on hold due to the political
situation in the country. As soon as the situation in Belarus changes the Commission is ready to continue the MES analysis.

5.           Information
and Communication activities / Bilateral contacts

5.1.        Small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs)

In
2011, the Commission published the "Paper on Actions to Address the
Difficulties Encountered by SMEs Involved in Trade Defence Instruments".
It contains a number of concrete actions which could be easily implemented to
better assist SMEs in all areas of trade defence and on which a certain degree
of convergence could be achieved with Member States. This paper, which was
based on the results of the study carried out by an independent contractor in
2010, was discussed with, and approved by, the Member States in 2011. The
objective of the study was to identify the needs of SMEs in the 27 EU Member
States when submitting a complaint or participating in trade defence
investigations as an importer or user or as an exporter in investigations
initiated by third countries. The study had been launched by the Commission
given the important role that SMEs have in the EU's economy and the
difficulties they face in participating in trade defence investigations.

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.

In 2011 these
contact points received many requests for information, from importers,
exporters and potential complainants/applicants. The number of queries remained
overall stable in comparison to the previous year. These requests, which were
all dealt with promptly, concerned both the procedures and substance of TDI
proceedings.

5.2.        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.

There were several
meetings with key stakeholder associations and companies in 2011, including
with Business Europe and Eurocommerce.

A seminar on trade defence for officials
from third countries took place in 2011. 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, Turkey and Australia held in 2011.

6.           The
Hearing Officer

The principal task of the Hearing Officer
is to safeguard the effective exercise of rights in trade proceedings before
the European Commission. The rights of defence include not only the right to be
heard and to have access to the file but comprises a wider set of rights
described in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights as follows: the right of
every person (i) "to be heard, before any individual measure which would
affect him or her adversely is taken", (ii) "to have his or her
affairs handled impartially, fairly and within a reasonable time" and
(iii) "to have access to his or her file, while respecting the legitimate
interests of confidentiality and of professional and business secrecy".
The Hearing Officer shall advise the member of the Commission responsible for
trade policy and where appropriate the Director General concerning the
follow-up of his recommendations and, when necessary, on possible remedies.

The Hearing Officer acts independently and
is now attached, for administrative purposes, to the Commissioner for Trade. In
2011, the Hearing Officer was attached to the Director General of DG Trade.

The formal mandate of the Hearing Officer
was published early in 2012[11].

In 2011 the Hearing Officer had 81
interventions in 35 trade defence cases and held 26 hearings out of which 4
were joint hearings of parties with similar interests. The interventions were
requested by exporting producers in third countries, by the Union industry, by
users and importers as well as by Governments of third countries. He intervened
on issues covering all stages of the investigation and made a number of
recommendations to the Commission services with the aim of strengthening the
rights of defence.  The recommendations of the Hearing Officer were largely
followed in 2011.

The main issues that the Hearing Officer
faced in 2011 can be grouped in three categories (i) content and quality of
disclosure (ii) access to files and quality of non-confidential files and (iii)
disagreement with determinations, findings and conclusions.

Content and quality of disclosures

The content and quality of disclosure
remains one of the major subjects of intervention requests. The Hearing Officer
continued to recommend that the Services provide, as detailed and as early as
possible, disclosure documents in order to enable the parties to exercise
effectively their rights of defence. Where parties complained about
insufficient analysis of arguments and submissions, the Hearing Officer ensured
that the matter was addressed in detail in an additional disclosure or in the
relevant Regulation. Interventions relating to requests for additional
disclosure of specific data and figures are usually complex and aim at finding
an adequate balance between the obligation of the Commission not to divulge
business secrets and the right to information of interested parties. In cases
where the risk of breaching confidentiality rules by disclosing more was
considered too high, the Hearing Officer ensured that the methodology used to
arrive at the findings was explained in detail. In some cases, the Hearing
Officer reviewed the confidential information and calculations in order to give
the party additional assurance regarding the findings.

Access to files – Quality of
non-confidential files

In principle, all interested parties
involved in an investigation are allowed access to the non-confidential file.
In some cases, parties questioned the meaningfulness and completeness of the
non-confidential file and requested the Hearing Officer's intervention. The
requests mainly related to the quality of non-confidential summaries of
complaints or questionnaire replies and to the need to apply consistent rules
to all parties. The Hearing Officer observed improvements in the overall
quality of the files after his interventions.

Another matter of concern was the requests
for confidential treatment regarding the identities of interested parties.
These requests were based on to fears of commercial retaliation and subsequent
complaints by other parties alleging infringement of their rights of defence
due to insufficient evidence of retaliation. Such requests decrease
transparency and may prevent other interested parties from submitting arguments
in their defence, which they would have otherwise submitted. However, the
Hearing Officer recognizes that alleged retaliation is of such nature that
compelling evidence of its existence may not be obtainable. A recent WTO
Appellate Body Report concluded that this issue has to be assessed on a case by
case basis regarding the kind of supporting evidence which can be considered
sufficient for treating the complainants' identity confidential. The Report
also confirmed the consistency of the EU practice with WTO rules in that
particular case. The Hearing Officer therefore recommended the Commission
Services in a particular case to encourage parties to explain and substantiate
their claim for confidential treatment of their identity in detail and to address
the issue comprehensively in the disclosure document and in the Regulation.

Disagreement with determinations,
findings and conclusions

In a number of cases parties disagreed
either with certain determinations, e.g. the initiation of a case; objected the
Commission's findings and conclusions, such as the selection of a sample,
MET-decisions declaring parties as non-cooperating or the definition of the
Union industry. The Hearing Officer organised hearings, ensured that parties
were fully informed about procedural rules and that comments and arguments of
the parties were heard and replied to in the disclosure document and the
Regulation. Some cases were terminated or findings were modified as a result of
the arguments put forward.

SME Policy

As a result of a study carried out in 2010
on how to assist SMEs in – inter alia - trade defence investigations a
set of concrete measures was identified. One of these measures was to include
in the Hearing Officer's report a section describing the problems related to SMEs
for which his intervention was requested and the solutions that were eventually
found.

In 2011, SME related problems appeared in
one case in which numerous SMEs were affected as users and downstream users of
the product under investigation. Many of these companies did not register in
time as interested parties since they became aware of the proceeding only when
provisional measures were imposed. It was argued that this is a particular
problem of SMEs since these companies often do not have the adequate resources
and capabilities to actively follow TDI issues and therefore fail to make
themselves known in time and cooperate in the proceeding. The Hearing Officer
agreed to hear all the companies that came forward and conducted two joint
hearings. All parties were satisfied with the open approach but the fundamental
problem described by the companies remained unsolved. The nature of the problem
requires identifying SMEs as early as possible in the proceeding. The Hearing
Officer therefore considers two of the other measures which have been
identified as crucial, (i) the readiness of the Commission Services to
endeavour identifying SMEs involved in TDI investigations and (ii) the
intention to foster the role of Member States as 'interface' by an increased
focus on SMEs within the ministerial departments dealing with TDI.

In addition, the Hearing Officer encourages
all parties to identify themselves as SMEs when contacting the Hearing Office
or the investigation services.

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

The number of new investigations initiated
in 2011 increased in comparison to the previous year, 21 compared to 18. The
number of definitive measures imposed increased by more than one third while
the number of provisional measures imposed in 2011 decreased by almost a
quarter compared to 2010. Below are details on new investigations and review
investigations.

7.1.        New investigations

At the end of 2011, the EU had 117
anti-dumping measures and 10 countervailing measures in force[12]. The anti-dumping measures
covered 62 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 117 anti-dumping measures in force
at the end of 2011 the main countries affected were China (53), India and Thailand (7 each), Ukraine Russia and Taiwan (5 each), Indonesia, Korea and Malaysia, (4 each) and Belarus, and USA (3 each). Of the 10 anti-subsidy measures in place
the majority concern imports from India – 5 in total, with imports from China, Iran, Pakistan, United Arab Emirates, USA and Canada (1 each).

Regarding the  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 2011, only 0.25%[13] 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 2007 – 2011.

TABLE
1

Anti-dumping
and anti-subsidy new investigations

during the period 1 January 2007 - 31 December 2011[14]

|| 2007 || 2008 || 2009 || 2010 || 2011

Investigations in progress at the beginning of the period || 33 || 20 || 26 || 25 || 24

Investigations initiated during the period || 9 || 20 || 21 || 18 || 21

Investigations in progress during the period || 42 || 42 || 47 || 43 || 45

Investigations concluded : -           imposition of definitive duty or acceptance of undertakings -           terminations[15] || 12 10 || 16 3 || 11 11 || 9 10 || 13 11

Total investigations concluded during the period || 22 || 19 || 22 || 19 || 24

Investigations in progress at the end of period || 20 || 26 || 25 || 24 || 21

Provisional measures imposed during the period || 12 || 5 || 10 || 13 || 10

7.2.        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).

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 2007 to
2011, a total of 153 review investigations were initiated. These review
investigations represented 63% of all investigations initiated in that period.

In 2011, 24 reviews were initiated. Of
these, 8 were expiry reviews, 9 interim reviews, 2 newcomer reviews, 2 other
reviews and 3 circumvention investigations.

An overview of the review investigations in
2011 can be found in Annexes F to K. Table 2 provides statistical information
for the years 2007 – 2011.

TABLE
2

Reviews
of anti-dumping and anti-subsidy investigations

during
the period 1 January 2007 - 31 December 2011[16]

|| 2007 || 2008 || 2009 || 2010 || 2011

Reviews in progress at the beginning of the period || 52 || 46 || 32 || 33 || 34

Reviews initiated during the period || 41 || 23 || 34 || 31 || 24

Reviews in progress during the period || 93 || 69 || 66 || 64 || 58

Total reviews concluded during the period[17] || 47 || 37 || 33 || 30 || 37

Reviews in progress at the end of the period || 46 || 32 || 33 || 34 || 21

8.           Overview
of activities in 2011

8.1.        New investigations

8.1.1.     Initiations

In 2011, 17 new anti-dumping
investigations, 4 new anti-subsidy investigations and no safeguard
investigations were initiated in the period. The anti-dumping investigations
involved 14 different products from 9 different countries. The anti-subsidy
investigations involve 3 products from 4 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 Belarus, Kazakhstan,
Oman, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and U.S.A.. The main sector concerned by
these new cases is chemicals.

In the five-year period from 2007 to 2011,
89 investigations were initiated on imports from 22 countries. The main sectors
concerned by the investigations included iron and steel – 30 investigations,
chemical and allied - 29 investigations, , other metals – 6 investigations and
electronics - 3 investigations, wood and paper – 2 investigations, other
mechanical engineering – 2 investigations. A breakdown of the product sectors
is given in Annex B(A).

The main countries concerned during the
period from 2007 to 2011 include the People's Republic of China with 37
investigations, India 8, USA 7, Thailand 4, Belarus,Turkey and Malaysia with 3
each, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Iran, Korea, Oman, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi
Arabia, Taiwan and U.A.E. with 2 each Armenia, Brazil, Indonesia, Kazakhstan,
Moldova and Ukraine with 1 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 2011 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 || Country of origin || Complainant

Oxalic acid || India P.R. China || European Chemical Industry Council (CEFIC)

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) || Oman Saudi Arabia || Committee of Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Manufacturers in Europe (CPME)

Sodium cyclamate || P.R. China || Productos Aditivos SA

Soy protein products (certain concentrated) || P.R. China || Solae Europe S.A.

Stainless steel fasteners || India || European Industrial Fasteners Institute (EIFI)

Seamless pipes and tubes of iron or steel (certain) || Belarus || Defence Committee of the seamless steel tubes industry of the EU

Woven and/or stitched glass fibre fabrics || P.R. China || Glass Fibre Fabrics Defence Coalition (GFFDC)

Tartaric acid || P.R. China || Distillerie Bonollo SpA, Industria Chimica Valenzana SpA, Distillerie Mazzari SpA, Caviro Distillerie S.r.l. and Comercial Quimica Sarasa s.l.

Aluminium radiators || P.R. China || International Association of Aluminium Radiator Manufacturers Limited Liability Consortium (AIRAL S.c.r.l)

Tube and pipe fittings of iron or steel || Russia Turkey || Defence Committee of the Steel Butt-Welding Fittings Industry of the European Union

Bioethanol || U.S.A. || ePure

White phosphorous || Kazakhstan || Thermphos International BV

Aluminium foil || P.R. China || Eurometaux

Organic coated steel products || P.R. China || Eurofer

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) (AS) || Oman Saudi Arabia || Committee of Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Manufacturers in Europe (CPME)

Stainless steel fasteners (AS) || India || European Industrial Fasteners Institute (EIFI)

Bioethanol (AS) || U.S.A. || ePure

8.1.2.     Provisional measures

In 2011, provisional duties were imposed in
10 anti-dumping proceedings. There were no provisional anti-subsidy measures
imposed. The AD measures involved imports of 7 products and covering 6
countries. As shown in Table 1 (see point 7.1), this figure compares to 13
provisional measures imposed in 2010 and 10 in 2009.

The list of cases where provisional
measures were imposed during 2011 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 || Type[18] and level of measure

Ring binder mechanisms || Thailand || Ad Duty of 17.2%

Glass fibres (certain open mesh fabrics) || P.R. China || AD duties ranging from 48.4% – 62.9% All others rate 62.9%

Ceramic tiles || P.R. China || AD Duties ranging from 26.2% - 36.6% Co-operating companies not in sample 32.3% All others rate 73%

Fatty alcohols and their blends || India Indonesia Malaysia || AD Duties ranging from 4.8% - 9.3% AD Duties ranging from 4.3% - 6.3% Other rate 7.6% AD Duties ranging from 5 – 5.3% Other rate 13.8%

Seamless pipes and tubes of stainless steel || P.R. China || Ad Duties ranging 48% - 71.5% Co-operating companies not in sample 56.6% All others 71.5%

Vinyl acetate || U.S.A. || AD Duties ranging from 12.1% - 13.8% All others 13.8%

Oxalic acid || India P.R. China || AD Duties 22.8% others rate 43.6% AD Duties ranging from 14.6% - 37.7%; All others rate 52.2%

8.1.3.     Definitive measures

During 2011, definitive duties were imposed
in 11 anti-dumping investigations and 2 anti-subsidy cases. They involved
imports from 6 different countries and covered 10 products. The People’s
Republic of China featured with 6 anti-dumping measures and 1 anti-subsidy
measure, with Bosnia and Hertzegovina, Thailand, Indonesia, and Malaysia with 1 anti-dumping measure each and India with 1 anti-dumping and 1 anti-subsidy measure.

The list of cases where definitive measures
were imposed during 2011 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 || Type[19] and level of measure

Continuous filament glass fibre products || P.R. China || AD – Duty of 7.3% - All others rate 13.8%

Melamine || P.R. China || AD duty: Minimum import price. All others rate: EUR 415/tonne

Zeolite A powder || Bosnia and Herzegovina || AD duty of 28,1%

Coated fine paper || P.R. China || AD/CVD duties of 20%-39,1% All other companies 39,1%

Glass fibres (certain open mesh fabrics) || P.R. China || AD duty of 48,4%-62,9% All other companies 62,9%

Ring binder mechanisms || Thailand || AD duty of 16,3%

Ceramic tiles || P.R. China || AD duty of 26,3%-36,% All other companies 69,7%

Fatty alcohols and their blends || India Indonesia Malaysia || AD duty of 35,19%-61,01% All other companies 61,01%-86,99%

Stainless steel bars || India || CVD duty of 3,3%-4,3% All other companies 4,3%

Seamless pipes and tubes of stainless steel || P.R. China || AD duty of 48,3%-71,9% All other companies 71,9%

8.1.4.     Details on individual cases

Zeolite A powder
originating in Bosnia and Herzegovina

The investigation was initiated in February
2010 following a complaint lodged by Industrias Quimicas del Ebro SA, MAL Magyar
Aluminium, PQ Silicas BV, Silkem d.o.o. and Zeolite Mira srl Unipersonale
representing the EU industry. The investigation period ('IP') ran from 1
January 2009 to 31 December 2009 and injury was considered over the period 1
January 2005 to the end of the IP. The product concerned was zeolite A powder,
also referred to as zeolite NaA powder or zeolite 4A powder. Provisional
anti-dumping duties were imposed in November 2010.

Dumping

In the absence of representative domestic
sales the normal value was constructed. To construct the normal value, the
selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses incurred and the
weighted average profit realised by each of the cooperating exporting producers
on domestic sales of the like product, in the ordinary course of trade, during
the investigation period, was added to their own average cost of production
during the investigation period. Since all exports to the Union were made via a
related importer, the export price was also constructed. This was done on the
basis of the resale price to independent customers. In the absence of
cooperation by unrelated importers in the investigation, a reasonable profit
margin of 5 % was used, based on information obtained from users who also
imported the product concerned in the IP. The comparison between normal value
and export prices was made on an ex-works level with allowances being made for
certain costs including transport, freight and insurance costs, bank charges,
packing costs and credit costs. This resulted in a dumping margin of 28,1%.

Injury

Sampling was applied to the EU producers
with the five largest companies being selected for the sample. Imports of
Zeolite A increased by 359 % between 2005 and the IP, resulting in an increase
in market share from below 5% to between 10-15% in the same period. The prices
of the dumped imports were found to undercut the European producers by between
20-25%.

During the period used to assess injury,
all indicators on the situation of the EU industry decreased, such as
production (-14%), capacity utilisation (-14%), sales volume (-18%), market
share (-11%) and productivity (-14%). Profitability, cash flow, and return on
investment all deteriorated over the period 2005-2008. 2008 was a particularly
serious year for the industry mainly because the companies lost more than 20 %
of their sales volume. In 2009 the market situation eased and prices increased
enabling an improved profitability situation but it was temporary and unlikely
to be repeated. In 2009 the profitability rate did not reach the 5,9% deemed as
a normal profit for this industry. It was therefore concluded that there was
evidence of injury to the EU industry.

Causation

The coincidence in time between the surge
of dumped imports and the deterioration in the situation of the EU industry was
found to be a clear indication that the injury was caused by dumped imports. A
number of factors other than the dumped imports were examined but none of these
could explain the serious losses in market share, production and sales volume
which occurred in 2008 and 2009.

EU Interest

The Commission carefully examined the
interests of EU producers, importers and consumers in order to determine
whether it was in the interest of the EU to impose measures. It was expected
that the Union industry would clearly be in a position to benefit from measures
since they could benefit from increased economies of scale because of a higher
capacity utilization due to an increase in production and sales. In addition,
it would not affect the Union users significantly so overall it was considered
to be in the Union interest.

Measures

Definitive measures were imposed on 11 May
2011, based on the level of the dumping found. In the course of the
investigation, the exporting producers offered a price undertaking which the
Commission accepted.

Coated fine
paper originating in the People's Republic of China (AD)

The proceeding was initiated in February
2010 following a complaint lodged by CEPIFINE, the European association of fine
paper manufacturers representing the EU industry. The investigation period
('IP') ran from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2009 and injury was considered
over the period 1 January 2006 to the end of the IP. The product concerned was
coated fine paper ('CFP') which is paper or paperboard coated on one or both
sides (excluding kraft paper or kraft paperboard), in either sheets or rolls,
and with a weight of 70 g/m2 or more but not exceeding 400 g/m2 and brightness
of more than 84 (measured according to ISO 2470-1), originating in the People's
Republic of China ('PRC'). Provisional anti-dumping duties were imposed in
November 2010.

Dumping

Since the two exporting groups that came
forward represented the total exports of the product concerned from the PRC to
the Union, sampling was not necessary. Only one exporting producer group
requested market economy treatment (MET) and both exporting producer groups
claimed individual treatment (IT). MET was not granted but both groups were
granted IT.

Given that none of the groups had been
granted MET, the normal value was established on the basis of an analogue
country, the USA. Where export sales to the Union were made through related
trading companies outside the Union, the export price was established on the
basis of the prices of the product when sold by the related trading companies
to the Union, i.e. to an independent buyer. Where export sales to the Union
were made through the one related trading company inside the Union, export
prices were constructed on the basis of the prices at which the imported product
was first resold to independent customers in the Union. The comparison between
normal value and export price was made on an ex-works basis with adjustments
made to take account of costs such as transport and insurance costs, credit
costs, year-end rebates, commissions, quality claims and bank handling charges.
This resulted in margins ranging from 43,5% to 63% for the companies granted
individual treatment.

Injury

Given that only four Union producers came
forward, representing 61% of total production, sampling was not necessary. The
volume of total imports from the PRC increased dramatically, almost tripling
over the period considered. As a result, their market share increased
significantly from approx. 1 % in 2006 to over 4 % in the IP. This, against the
background of decreasing consumption which dropped by 14 % during the same
period. During the IP, the dumped product undercut the Union producers’ sales
prices on average by 7,6 %.

The investigation has shown that most of
the injury indicators such as production volume (– 20 %), capacity utilisation
(– 10 %), sales volume to unrelated customers on the Union market (– 19 %),
market share (– 5 percentage points) deteriorated during the period considered.
In addition, the injury indicators related to the financial performance of the
cooperating Union producers such as return on investment and profitability were
seriously affected until 2008. While there was a sudden increase of the
profitability in the IP, this was due purely to the temporary and exceptional drop
of world pulp prices in the IP. It is noted that even during the IP the
profitability rate was very low and was not considered to be altering the
conclusion that the cooperating Union producers were in a very weak financial
position. It was therefore concluded that there was evidence of injury to the
EU industry.

Causation

The increase in volume and market share of
the low-priced dumped imports from the PRC coincided with an overall decrease
of the demand on the Union market and also with the negative development in the
market share of the Union producers during the period between 2006 and the IP.
At the same time a negative development in the main indicators of the economic
and financial situation of the Union industry was observed. The effect of other
factors was not found to be a cause of the injury suffered by the EU industry.

EU Interest

The Commission carefully examined the
interests of EU producers, importers and traders, and users in order to
determine whether it was in the interest of the EU to impose measures. It was
expected that the imposition of provisional anti-dumping duties would restore
effective and fair trade conditions on the Union market which would enable the
Union industry to regain at least part of the market share lost. Imports,
including imports from the PRC represented only a limited share of the
importers' total business and any negative impact of the proposed measures was
thus likely to be negligible. Even if some of the users were likely to be
negatively impacted by the measures on imports from the PRC, the impact on the
users in the two distinctive sectors (printers and publishers) appeared to be
limited overall. It was therefore concluded that there were no compelling
reasons against the imposition of measures on imports of CFP originating in the
PRC.

Definitive Measures

Definitive anti-dumping measures ranging
from 8% to 39,1% were imposed on 15 May 2011. They were based on the injury
elimination levels as these were lower than the dumping margins found.

Ceramic tiles
originating in the People's Republic of China

The proceeding was initiated in June 2010
following a complaint lodged by the European ceramic tiles manufacturer's
Association (CET) representing more than 30% of the total Union production of
ceramic tiles. The investigation period ('IP') ran from 1 April 2009 to 31
March 2010 and injury was considered over the period 1 January 2007 to the end
of the IP. The product concerned was glazed and unglazed ceramic flags and
paving, hearth or wall tiles; glazed and unglazed ceramic mosaic cubes and the
like, whether or not on a backing. Provisional anti-dumping duties were imposed
in March 2011.

Dumping

Due to the large number of Chinese
exporters that came forward (105), sampling was applied. Three groups
representing ten individual producers were selected accounting for 14,4% of
exports from cooperating producers. Two groups of exporting producers in China requested market economy treatment ('MET') which was denied. The two groups that
requested MET also requested Individual Treatment (IT) together with two other
groups. Three of the four groups were granted IT. Eight producers also
requested Individual Examination (IE) which was carried out for one exporting
producer who also received IT.

Given that none of the groups had been
granted MET, the normal value was established on the basis of an analogue
country, the USA. The export prices of the sampled Chinese exporters were based
on the export prices actually paid or payable, to the first independent
customer. Where sales were made via a related importer in the Union, prices
were constructed. The normal value and export prices were compared on an
ex-works basis. Adjustments had been made to take into account differences in
characteristics, for the lower cost of non-porcelain tiles, ocean freight,
insurance, handling and ancillary costs, packing, credit, bank charges and
commissions. This resulted in margins ranging between 26,3% and 67,7% for
individual companies and 69,7% for all others.

Injury

Sampling was also applied to EU producers
with ten companies being selected for the sample. Imports of ceramic tiles
decreased by 3% over the period considered but the market share of Chinese
imports increased by 35%. The level of undercutting ranged from 44 % to 57 %.
During the period used to assess injury, all injury indicators such as
production volume, capacity utilization, sales to unrelated customers and
employment deteriorated. In addition, the injury indicators related to the
financial performance of the Union producers – such as profitability, return on
investments and cash-flow were seriously negatively affected during the period
considered. Overall, the profitability deteriorated over the period considered.
In fact, the segment of small companies which constituted half of the Union
industry was loss making. Hence, it was concluded that there was evidence of
injury to the EU industry.

Causation

The increasing market share of Chinese
exporting producers over the period considered coincided in time with a
decrease of the Union industry’s profits and a substantial increase of its
stocks. The economic crisis and imports from third countries other than China had an impact on the situation of the Union industry but it was not such as to break the
causal link established between the dumped imports from China and the material injury suffered by the Union industry.

EU Interest

The Commission carefully examined the
interests of EU producers, importers and users in order to determine whether it
was in the interest of the EU to impose measures. It was expected that measures
would likely prevent a further surge of dumped, low-priced imports. Without
measures the effect of depression of sales prices exerted by the dumped imports
from China would continue to compress Union producers’ sales prices and
profits. The financial situation and profitability of the Union industry was
not strong enough to withstand further price pressure which would lead to the
progressive demise of a large number of Union producers. It was expected that
measures would, in all likelihood, have an impact on the importers' business
but the investigation revealed that it was possible for importers and users to
switch to products sourced from third countries or from within the Union. No
consumer groups participated. It was concluded that there were no compelling
reasons against the imposition of definitive measures on imports of the product
concerned originating in the PRC.

Measures

Definitive measures, imposed on 15
September 2011 ranged from 26,3% to 36,5% for participating company groups,
10,6% for separate companies listed in Annex I of the Regulation and 69,7% for
all other companies.

Certain seamless
pipes and tubes of stainless steel originating in the People's Republic of China

The proceeding was initiated in September
2010 following a complaint lodged by the Defence Committee of the Seamless
Stainless Steel Tubes Industry of the European Union representing more than 50%
of the total Union production. The investigation period ('IP') ran from 1 July
2009 to 30 June 2010 and injury was considered over the period 1 January 2006
to the end of the IP. The product concerned was certain seamless pipes and
tubes of stainless steel, other than with attached fittings suitable for
conducting gases or liquids for use in civil aircraft. Provisional anti-dumping
duties were imposed in June 2010.

Dumping

Due to the large amount of Chinese
exporting producers who came forward (31) sampling was applied. Three groups
were selected representing 25% of the total imports. All three sampled groups
of exporting producers requested market economy treatment (‘MET’) or Individual
treatment ('IT'). None of the groups were granted MET but they were all granted
IT.

Given that none of the groups had been
granted MET, normal value for the case was established based on prices actually
paid or payable in the Union for the like product duly adjusted if necessary.
In all cases the product concerned was exported to independent customers in the
Union, and therefore, the export price was established on the basis of export
prices actually paid or payable. The normal value and export prices were
compared on an ex-works basis. Adjustments had been made to take into account
indirect taxes, ocean freight and insurance, freight in the exporting country,
warranty expenses, commissions, credit costs, bank charges, level of trade and
quality perception. This resulted in margins ranging between 62,6% and 83,7%
for individual companies and 71,1 % for all others.

Injury

Sampling was also applied to the EU
producers with two groups representing five EU producers being selected for the
sample. Imports of seamless pipes and tubes increased by 76% between 2006 and
the IP resulting in an increase in market share from 10.5% to 18.4%. During the
period used to assess injury, all injury indicators developed negatively. This
was particularly noticeable for the indicators concerning profitability,
production volumes, capacity utilisation, sales volumes and market share that
have all showed a clearly deteriorating trend. At the same time, the imports
from the PRC were undercutting Union industry prices by up to 32 % during the
IP. It was therefore concluded that there was evidence of injury to the EU
industry.

Causation

Imports from the PRC have increased in
terms of quantities and gained substantial market share over the period
considered.However, while the Union industry had been able to offset the
negative effects of this pressure for a certain period thanks to the
exceptionally positive market conditions in the years of 2007 and 2008, this
was no longer possible when the economic crisis substantially reduced the level
of demand. A number of factors other than the dumped imports were examined but
none of these could explain the serious losses in market share, production and sales
volume which occurred in 2008 and 2009 which coincided with the increases in
volumes of dumped imports.

EU Interest

The Commission carefully examined the
interests of EU producers, importers and users in order to determine whether it
was in the interest of the EU to impose measures. It was expected that the
Union industry would have the opportunity to improve its situation through
increased sales volumes, sales prices and market share. Although some negative
effects could occur in the form of cost increases for certain users, they were
likely to be outweighed by the expected benefits for the producers and their
suppliers. On balance, there were no compelling reasons against the imposition
of definitive measures on imports of the product concerned originating in the
PRC.

Measures

Definitive measures ranging from 48,3% to
71,9% were imposed on 20 December 2011. They were based on the injury
elimination levels as these were lower than the dumping margins found. In order
to minimise the risks of circumvention due to the high difference in the duty
rates, it was considered that special measures were needed in this case to
ensure the proper application of anti-dumping duties.

Coated fine
paper originating in the People's Republic of China (AS)

An anti-subsidy investigation was initiated
on imports of coated fine paper originating in the People's Republic of China (the 'PRC') in April 2010 on the basis of a complaint lodged by CEPIFINE, the
European association of fine paper manufacturers on behalf of the producers
representing over 25% of the total EU production of coated fine paper. This was
the first anti-subsidy investigation initiated against imports of a product
from the PRC. The product concerned was defined as coated fine paper which is
paper or paperboard coated on one or both sides (excluding kraft paper or kraft
paperboard), in either sheets or rolls, and with a weight of 70 g/m 2 or more
but not exceeding 400 g/m 2 and brightness of more than 84. An anti-dumping
proceeding on the same product originating in the PRC was opened in February
2010.

Prior to the initiation of the case,
consultations were held between the Commission Services and the Chinese
authorities in accordance with the Basic Regulation. However, no mutually
agreed solution was reached. The investigation period (IP) was from 1 January
2009 to 31 December 2009 with injury analysis covering the period from 1
January 2006 to the end of the IP.

Subsidisation

Only two exporting producers groups in the
PRC consisting of 6 related exporting producers came forward. 23 Government
subsidy schemes were investigated.

The Preferential lending scheme to the
coated paper industry was found to be countervailable. All three Income tax
programmes: Preferential tax policies for companies that are recognised as high
or new technology enterprises; policies for Research & Development and
dividend exemption between qualified resident enterprises were also found to be
countervailable. All three Indirect tax and Import tariff programmes were also
found to be countervailable. These were: VAT and Tariff exemption on imported
equipment; VAT rebates on domestically produced equipment and City maintenance
ad Construction Taxes and education surcharges for Foreign Invested
Enterprises. Of the 13 Grant programmes, seven were considered to be
countervailable: Famous Brands; Special Funds for Encouraging Foreign
Investment Projects; Anti-dumping Respondent Assistance; Shouguang Technology
Renovation Grant; Suzhou Industrial Parc Intellectual Property Right Fund;
Subsidy of High Tech Industrial Development Fund and the Award received from Suzhou Industrial Park for maintaining growth. The other four involved such small amounts
of benefits that it was not considered necessary to pursue the investigation.
These were: the Special fund for water pollution treatment of Taihu lake of
Jiangsu province; Special funds for energy saving of Suzhou Industrial park;
Special fund for reduction of total emissions of major pollutants at municipal
level of Suzhou municipality; Subsidy for water-saving and emission reduction;
Environmental Protection award received from Suzhou Environmental Protection
Bureau and Energy saving award in Ahouguang. Lastly, of the three schemes on
Government provision of goods and services for less than adequate remuneration,
only one was found to be countervailable: the provisions of land-use rights.
The other two were not assessed mainly because the cooperating exporting
producers did not benefit from these schemes during the IP. These were the
Provision of electricity and of paper-making chemicals.

The amount of the countervailable subsidies
expressed ad valorem for the investigated companies ranges between 4,06% and
12,04%. Given the fact that the level of cooperation was considered high, it
was considered appropriate to set the subsidy level for the non-cooperating
exporting producers at 12,04%

Injury

The volume of total imports of the product
concerned from the PRC increased dramatically, almost tripling over the period
considered. As a result, their market share increased significantly from
approx. 1% in 2006 to over 4% in the IP. This has to be seen against the
background of a decreasing consumption which dropped by 14% during the same
period. The price of these imports were found to undercut the EU prices on
average by 7,6%

Only four Union producers came forward so
it was decided that sampling was not necessary. Most of the injury indicators
such as production volume (-20%), capacity utilisation (-10%), sales volume to
unrelated customers on the Union market (-19%), market share (-5 percentage
points) deteriorated during the period considered. In addition, the injury
indicators related to the financial performance of the four representative
Union producers such as return on investment and profitability were seriously
affected until 2008. It was therefore concluded that the EU industry had
suffered material injury.

Causality

Subsidised imports from the PRC increased
dramatically (+183%) over the period considered while Union consumption
decreased by about 14%. Other factors were examined in the context of the
causation analysis including the economic crisis, prices of raw material,
export performance of the representative union producers, imports from other
third countries and structural overcapacity. It was concluded that these
factors did not break the causal link between the subsidised imports and the
injury suffered.

EU interest

It was considered that the imposition of
countervailing duties on imports of coated fine paper from the PRC would allow
the Union industry to regain at least part of the market share lost during the
period considered, with a further positive impact on its economic situation and
profitability. Regarding the importers and traders it was concluded that the
imposition of measures should overall not have a significant impact. It was
also concluded that, since price increases would impact on all economic
players, it would have a neutral effect on the publishers. The direct impact on
the printers was considered to be negligible since most printers had no or very
limited direct purchases of Chinese paper in the IP and the amount of Chinese
paper used by printers was low in general.

Anti-subsidy measures

Definitive anti-subsidy measures were
imposed on imports of coated fine paper from the PRC ranging from a duty of 4%
to 12% for individual exporting producers and 12% for all other producers.

8.1.5.     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 2011, 11 new proceedings (7 anti-dumping
and 4 anti-subsidy) were terminated without measures, compared to 10 in 2010
and 11 in 2009.

The alphabetical list of cases which were
terminated without the imposition of measures during 2011 can be found below.
More information can be obtained from the Official Journal to which reference
is given in Annex E.

Product (type of investigation[20]) || Originating from || Main reason for termination

Purified terephthalic acid and its salts AD || Thailand || De minimis dumping

Wireless wide area networking (WWAN) modems AD || P.R. China || Complaint withdrawn

Stainless steel bars || India || Complaint withdrawn

Tris (2-chloro-1-methyl-ethyl) phosphate AD || P.R. China || Complaint withdrawn

Graphite electrode system (certain)AD || P.R. China || Complaint withdrawn

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) AD || Oman Saudi Arabia || Complaint withdrawn

Purified terephthalic acid and its salts (AS) || Thailand || AS duties – De minimis

Wireless wide area networking (WWAN) modems (AS) || P.R. China || Complaint withdrawn

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) AS || Oman Saudi Arabia || Complaint withdrawn

8.1.6.     Details on some individual cases

Wireless wide area networking (WWAN)
modems originating in the People's Republic of China

On 30 June 2010 the Commission initiated an
anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of wireless wide area networking
(WWAN) modems originating in the People's Republic of China ('the PRC') after
receiving a complaint. On 16 September 2010 the Commission initiated an
anti-subsidy proceeding concerning WWAN modems originating in the PRC after
receiving a complaint. Both complaints were lodged by Option NV.

On 26 October 2010 Option NV withdrew its
anti-dumping and anti-subsidy complaints because it had entered into a
cooperation agreement with an exporting producer in the PRC. Consequently, the
Commission informed interested parties that it considered terminating the
proceedings since the investigations had not brought to light any
considerations showing that a termination would not be in the Union interest.

Subsequent to the withdrawal one company
contacted the Commission claiming that it was a Union producer of WWAN and that
the proceedings should be continued. However, the company only came forward
after the procedural deadlines in both proceedings had passed. In addition, the
allegations and information put forward by the company were not such as to lead
the Commission to conclude that it would be in the Union interest to pursue the
proceedings.

The Commission concluded that it would be
disproportionate to continue with the investigation and impose measures following
the withdrawal of the complaints. The proceedings were terminated in March
2011.

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET)
originating in Oman and Saudi Arabia

On 16 February 2011 the Commission
initiated an anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of certain polyethylene
terephthalate (PET) originating in Oman and Saudi Arabia, following a complaint
lodged by the Committee of Polyethylene Terephthalate Manufacturers in Europe
(CPME). On the same day the Commission initiated an anti-subsidy proceeding concerning
imports of PET originating in the countries concerned.

By a letter of 12 October 2011, the CPME
formally withdrew its complaint. Since the Commission did not identify any
reason to indicate that termination would not be in the Union interest, it was
decided to terminate the proceedings. Interested parties requested a disclosure
of the findings of the investigation, but the Commission noted that it was not
in the position to disclose data gathered prior to the withdrawal of the
complaint because it did not reach a conclusion on its findings.

8.2.        Review investigations

8.2.1.     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 2011, 18 anti-dumping measures and 3
anti-subsidy measure expired automatically. The references for these measures
are set out in Annex N.

Since the expiry provision of the basic
Regulations came into force in 1985, a total of 473 measures have been allowed
to expire automatically.

8.2.1.1.  Initiations

The alphabetical list of the reviews initiated
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 investigation[21]) || Originating from || Complainant

Tartaric acid \* || P.R. China || Distillerie Bonollo SpA, Industria Chimica Valenzana SpA, Distillerie Mazzari SpA, Caviro Distillerie S.r.l. and Comercial Quimica Sarasa s.l.

Seamless pipes and tubes of iron or steel\* || Croatia Russia Ukraine || Defence Committee of the seamless steel tubes industry of the EU

Lever arch mechanisms || P.R. China || Interkov spol.s.r.o, IML Industria Meccanica Lombardia S.r.l and Niko metalurgical company d.d. Zelezniki

Chamois leather || P.R. China || British Leather Confederation

Plastic sacks and bags || P.R. China Thailand || 33 Union Producers

8.2.1.2.  Reviews
concluded with confirmation of duties

During 2011, 8 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 2011, 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 || Result of the investigation/ Type[22] and level of measure

Okoumé plywood || P.R. China || Confirmation of duty AD duty of 6,5%-23,5% All other companies 66,7%

Tungsten carbide and fused tungsten carbide || P.R. China || Confirmation of duty AD duty of 33%

Furfuraldehyde || P.R. China || Confirmation of duty AD duty of EUR 352 per tonne

Barium carbonate || P.R. China || Confirmation of duty AD duty of 6,3%-8,1% All other companies 56,4%

Bicycles || P.R. China || Confirmation of duty AD duty of 48,5%

Hand pallet trucks and their essential parts || P.R. China Thailand (ext.) || Confirmation of duty AD duty of 7,6%-39,9% All other companies 46,7%

Trichloroisocyanuric acid (TCCA) || P.R. China || Confirmation of duty AD duty of 3,2%-40,5% All other companies 42,6%

8.2.1.3.  Details
on some individual cases concluded by confirmation of duty

Bicycles

In September 1993 the Council imposed a
definitive anti-dumping duty of 30,6% on imports of bicycles originating in the
People's Republic of China (the 'PRC'). Following an anti-circumvention
investigation, this duty was extended to imports of certain bicycle parts
originating in the PRC. In addition, it was decided to create an 'exemption
scheme' for imports of parts not constituting circumvention. Following an
expiry review, it was decided in July 2000 that the measures should be
maintained. Following an interim review, it was decided in July 2005 to
increase the anti-dumping duty in force to 48,5%.

In July 2010 following a request from the
European Bicycles Manufacturers Associations (EBMA), the EU initiated an expiry
review.

The investigation of dumping and injury
covered the period from 1 April 2009 to 31 March 2010 ('review investigation
period' or 'RIP'). The examination of trends in the context of the analysis of
injury covered the period from January 2007 to the end of the RIP.

Owing to the large number of EU producers
willing to cooperate, sampling was used for EU producers. Eight Union producers
were selected for the sample. Only seven Chinese producers and four importers
cooperated in the investigation, therefore it was decided not to apply further
sampling.

Recurrence of dumping

It was proposed to use Mexico as an analogue country to establish the normal value for the PRC. One party objected
and proposed India as an alternative, yet the objection was not substantiated
and therefore rejected. The average normal value was established based on
domestic sales. The export price was established on the basis of Eurostat data.
Even though the prices found in Eurostat were inconclusive, the Commission
considered them to be a reasonable source for the purpose of the investigation
due to the low cooperation from the Chinese exporters. Because of the
limitations, the data only served as an indicator of price trends. The weighted
average normal value from Mexico was compared to the weighted average Chinese
export price on an ex-works basis. For the purpose of ensuring a fair
comparison, the price derived from Eurostat was adjusted for the average cost
of sea freight per transaction. A conservative comparison using Eurostat
figures indicated a dumping margin of more than 20% although it was noted that
it was more likely to reach levels of more than 100%. In view of the fact that
even considering the measures in force, a dumping margin of more than 20%
existed during the RIP, it was considered very likely that dumping would
continue in the absence of measures.

Injury and likelihood of continuation of
injury

The investigation found that the existing
anti-dumping measures had clearly had an effect on the situation of the Union
industry. It had managed, to some extent, to benefit from the existence of the
measures maintaining a stable market share. However, the Union production
decreased and profit margin remained insufficient. Any possibility for further
growth and profits had been undermined by the price and volume pressure of
dumped imports.

The industry was clearly in a fragile
situation, as it made a loss. Almost all injury indicators relating to the
financial performance of the Union producers – such as profitability, return on
investments and cash flow – deteriorated during the period considered.
Consequently, it could not be concluded that the situation of the Union
industry was secure. On this basis, it was concluded that the Union industry,
as a whole, remained in a vulnerable economic situation and continued to suffer
material injury.

In the context of the likelihood of
recurrence of injury, it was found that the Union industry had been suffering
from the effects of the Chinese dumped imports for several years. It only
managed to recover thanks to the anti-dumping measures in force. Exposing the
Union industry to increased volumes of dumped low-priced imports from the PRC,
would likely result in a further deterioration of its sales, market share and
sales prices, as well as a further deterioration of its financial situation. It
was also found that the undercutting of sales prices of Chinese producers by 53
% appeared to indicate that in the absence of measures, Chinese exporting
producers would export the product concerned to the Union market at prices
considerably lower than those of the Union industry.

In view of the findings made during the
investigation, namely the spare capacity in the PRC, the export oriented
characteristic of the Chinese industry and the past behaviour of the Chinese
exporters on foreign markets, any repeal of the measures would point to a
likelihood of continuation of injury. The circumvention of the measures
strongly underpinned this conclusion. It constituted clear evidence of the
attractiveness of the Union market for the Chinese producers.

Union interest

As regards the Union industry it was
considered that maintaining the measures would allow it to grow and improve its
situation in a restored fair competitive environment. It would also be in the
interest of consumers for whom Europe is the most important market for modern
cycling products with high standards in quality and safety. An inflow of
products from the PRC would lessen those standards. Furthermore, the importers
would not be substantially affected since fairly priced bicycles would still be
available in the market. By contrast, if measures were not imposed, Union
producers of bicycles would likely go out of business, thus also threatening
the existence of Union suppliers of bicycle parts.

There were no compelling reasons not to
impose anti-dumping duties against imports of bicycles originating in the PRC
therefore the anti-dumping measures on bicycles were maintained.

Trichloroisocyanuric acid (TCCA)

In October 2005 the Council imposed
definitive anti-dumping measures consisting of individual duties ranging from
7,3% to 40,5% on imports of trichloroisocyanuric acid ('TCCA') originating in
the People's Republic of China ('the PRC'). In September 2010 the Council
lowered the individual duty applied to one company from 14,1% to 3,2%.

In October 2010, following a request from
the European Chemical Industry Council (CEFIC), the EU initiated an expiry
review of these measures. The request was based on the grounds that the expiry
of the measures would be likely to result in a continuation or recurrence of
dumping and injury to the Union industry.

The review investigation period (RIP)
lasted from 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2010. The likelihood of continuation or
recurrence of injury aspects was analysed during the period from 1 January 2007
to the end of the RIP.

Recurrence of dumping

Since none of the exporting producers in
the PRC cooperated, data submitted by the cooperating exporting producer in the
analogue country, Japan, were used to determine the normal value. Since all
sales on the domestic market were considered to have been sold at a profit,
normal value was based on the actual weighted average domestic price during the
RIP. In the absence of any cooperation from exporting producers in the PRC, the
export price was established on the basis of Eurostat data. The weighed average
normal value was compared with the weighed average export price. Consequently,
the dumping margin was established to amount to 75%. In addition the likelihood
of the continuation of dumping was investigated. From the investigation it
could be concluded that exports from the PRC were still being dumped despite
the measures in place and that it was likely that dumping would continue on the
Union market if these measures were removed. Taking into account the huge
amount of spare capacity in the PRC and the attractiveness of the Union market,
based on a comparison between export prices to the EU and those to third
countries, it was likely that the volume of dumped PRC exports into the Union would increase substantially if measures were allowed to lapse.

Injury and likelihood of continuation of
injury

The continued dumping of imports from the
PRC along with the economic crisis altered the recovery process and accentuated
the difficulties of the Union industry. Although other factors contributed to
the deterioration in the performance of the Union industry, none of them proved
to be sufficient to break the causal link between dumped imports from the PRC
and the injury suffered by the Union industry. On these grounds, it was
concluded that dumped imports from the PRC caused material injury to the Union
industry.

In the context of the likelihood of
continuation of injury the investigation revealed that the Union industry had
been suffering from the effects of PRC dumped imports for several years and was
still in a precarious economic situation. The injurious situation of the Union
industry had continued throughout the period considered which is in itself a
strong indicator that the injury was likely to continue in the future, which
suggested that the measures had to be maintained. Given the spare capacity
available in the PRC and the attractiveness of the Union market, if the
measures were lifted the growing trend whereby large imports from the PRC at
dumped prices significantly undercut Union producers' prices was likely to
continue. If the measures in force were not extended, the situation of the
Union industry would deteriorate and its very existence would be jeopardised.
Therefore, it was concluded that there was a clear likelihood of continuation
of injury to the Union industry, should existing measures be removed.

Union interest

The continuation of measures was expected
to assist the Union industry, with consequent beneficial effects on the
competitive conditions on the Union market and the consolidation of the sector
after the economic crisis and the restructuring. Furthermore, the continuation
of the measures was also expected to benefit users and importers by maintaining
a wide range of suppliers in the Union market. There were no compelling reasons
against the continuation of the measures in question.

The anti-dumping measures applicable to
imports of TCCA originating in the PRC were therefore maintained.

8.2.1.4.  Reviews
concluded by termination

During 2011, 4 expiry reviews were concluded by
termination.

Product || Originating from || Reason for termination

Polyester staple fibres || P.R. China || Request withdrawn

Magnesia bricks (certain) || P.R. China || EU Company producing over 50% of EU production opposed the review.

Broad spectrum antibiotics (AS) || India || No liklihood of recurrence of injury

Castings (certain) || P.R. China || Request withdrawn

Details of some individual cases

Certain magnesia bricks

In October 2005, the EC imposed definitive
anti-dumping duties on imports of certain magnesia bricks originating in the
People's Republic of China ('the PRC'). Following the imposition of these
measures, two interim reviews requested by Chinese exporting producers resulted
in a lowering of the duties which now range from 0% to 39,9%.

In October 2010, following a request from
the Magnesia Bricks Production Defence Coalition ('MBPDC'), the EU initiated an
expiry review of the measures on certain magnesia bricks from the PRC. The
request was based on 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.

In addition, in September 2010 the
Commission initiated a 'new exporter' review, following an application lodged
by TRL China Ltd ('TRL'), an exporting producer in the PRC. TRL claimed it
operated under market economy conditions and that it did not export the product
concerned to the Union during the period of investigation on which the
anti-dumping measures were based.

The investigation period (IP) for the
expiry review covered the period from 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2010 while the
investigation period for the 'new exporter' review was examined over the period
from 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2010.

Investigation for the expiry review

The applicant claimed that an
Austrian-based company, RHI AG ('RHI'), had to be excluded from the definition
of the Union industry on the grounds that it had shifted its core business
activities to the PRC, where it had a related company producing the product
concerned, and increased its business activities relating to the product
concerned in the PRC.

In the original investigation initiated in
July 2004, RHI was one of the complainant Union producers. At that time RHI was
also importing the product concerned from its related company in the PRC. It
was also examined whether the company should be excluded from the definition of
the Union industry but it was found that the company's core business was
situated in the Union as regards the product concerned.

In the present review it was concluded that
RHI should not be excluded from the definition of the Union industry because
the company's situation had not changed substantially since the original
investigation. The findings confirmed that the company still had its core
business activities (headquarters, research and development centre and main
production sites) in the EU. The increase in the production capacity of the plant
in the PRC in the period 2005 to the end of the IP could not be considered as a
shift of the company's core activities to the PRC. Therefore the applicant's
argument that RHI should be excluded on the basis that it has a related company
in the PRC producing the product concerned and increasing business activities
in the PRC was rejected.

By including RHI's production volume in the
total Union production figure, the applicant's output constituted less than 50%
of the total Union production. RHI, however, produced over 50% of total Union
production within the meaning of Article 5(4), In addition, RHI was opposed to
the expiry review. In the light of these facts, it was decided to terminate the
proceedings.

In view of the termination of the expiry
review and given the fact that TRL did not export the product concerned between
the date of the entry into force of the anti-dumping measures, it was also
decided to terminate the 'new exporter' review.

Broad spectrum antibiotics

In May 2005, the Council imposed a
definitive countervailing duty on imports of certain broad spectrum antibiotics
originating in India. The measures took the form of an ad valorem duty ranging
from 17,3% to 32%. Following a partial interim review, the countervailing duty
rate applicable to one Indian exporter was amended.

In May 2010, following a request from two
union producers DSM and Sandoz, the EU initiated an expiry review. The
investigation of continuation or recurrence of subsidisation covered the period
from 1 April 2009 to 31 March 2010 (the 'review investigation period' or
'RIP'). The examination of the trends relevant for the assessment of the
likelihood of a continuation or recurrence of injury covered the period from 1
January 2007 to the end of the review investigation period (the period
considered).

Three Union producers, three Indian
exporting producers and the Government of India ('GOI') cooperated in the
review.

Recurrence of Subsidisation

During the expiry review 10 schemes, which
allegedly involved the granting of subsidies, were investigated. Of these
schemes, four - The Punjab Industrial Incentive Scheme, the Gujarat Industrial
Incentive Scheme, the Duty Free Import Authorisation and Export Oriented Units
(EOU)/Export Processing Zones 9EPZ)/Special Economic Zones (SEZ) - did not to
grant any benefits to producers. It was therefore not necessary to further
analyse these schemes in this investigation. The Advance Authorisation Scheme
(AAS) was found to be countervailable for physical exports. The subsidy rate
established in respect to this scheme during the RIP amounted to 12,3%. The
subsidy rate for the Duty entitlement Passbook Scheme (DEPBS) amounted to 6,9%.
The subsidy rate established for the Export Promotion Capital Goods scheme
(EPCGS) amounted to 0,1%-0,5% during the RIP. The subsidy rate for the Focus
Market Scheme (FMS) amounted to <0,1% while the subsidy rate of the Export
Credit Scheme (ECS) was found to be negligible.

It was concluded that subsidisation by the
Indian authorities continued during the RIP with an amount of countervailable
subsidies that ranged between 7,5% and 12,4%.

The investigation found that during the
RIP, the cooperating exporting producers continued to benefit from
countervailable subsidisation by the Indian government. 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 producers would stop obtaining benefits under
these schemes. As regards the other known exporting producers in India, according to the review request, they 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. It was concluded that
subsidisation continued during the RIP and would therefore be likely to
continue in the future.

Injury and likely hood of recurrence of
injury

The investigation showed that between 2007
and the RIP, the volume of subsidised imports of the product concerned was
negligible. With the exception of certain injury indicators such as market
share, production volume and return on investment, most injury indicators including
profitability (+ 153 %), sales price (+ 4 %), sales volume (+ 14 %), employment
(+ 10 %) and investments (+ 29 %) developed positively during the period
considered. The profit levels achieved in the Union market were, with the
exception of year 2007, above the target profit margin established in the
previous expiry review investigation; i.e. 10 %. The positive trend shown by
the vast majority of indicators was mainly due to the reliability of the Union
industry and the long standing customer relationship that it had developed over
the past years, but also to the price level that it managed to achieve on the
market. In view of the positive development of the indicators pertaining to the
Union industry, it was considered that the Union industry did not suffer
material injury during the period considered.

Given the low volumes of the product
concerned that were imported in the Union over the period considered, the
subsidised imports did not adversely affect the performance of the Union
industry. It was therefore concluded that, should measures be allowed to lapse,
subsidised imports from India were not likely to cause material injury to the
Union industry as most injury indicators developed positively over the period
considered in spite of significant and increasing imports from other countries
priced similarly to Indian exports to other countries. Consequently, material
injury was not likely to recur, should measures be allowed to lapse.

It was considered appropriate to repeal the
countervailing duty on imports of certain broad spectrum antibiotics
originating in India.

8.2.2.     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 2011, a total of 9 interim reviews
were initiated (8 anti-dumping and 1 anti-subsidy). 7 interim reviews were
concluded with confirmation or amendment of duty and 5 were concluded by
terminating the measures. The list of cases which were concluded during 2011 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/ Type[23]

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film || India || Reduction of anti-dumping duty for Garware Polyester Ltd. to 0% - AD

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film || India || Reduction of anti-dumping duty for Vacmet India Ltd. to 0% - AD

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film (AS) || India || Amendment of anti-subsidy duty for Vacmet India Ltd. to 11% - AS

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) (AS) || India || Measures remain unchanged for Reliance Industries Ltd - AS

Okoumé plywood\* || P.R. China || Measures continue unchanged - AD

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) || Korea (Rep. of) || Terminated with no change to dumping margins for KP Chemical Group AD

Polyethylene terephthalate (certain) (PET) || India || Terminated with no change to dumping margins for Reliance Industries Ltd. AD

8.2.2.1.  Details
on individual cases

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film
originating in India

In August 2001 the Council imposed a
definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of polyethylene terephthalate (PET)
film originating, inter alia, in India. The measures consisted of an ad valorem
anti-dumping duty ranging between 0% and 62,6%. In March 2006 following the
expiry review, the anti-dumping duty was amended to range between 0% and 18%.
In November 2007, following another expiry review the Council imposed another
definitive anti-dumping duty. In January 2009, following a partial interim
review initiated by the Commission on its own initiative, the Council amended
the anti-dumping duty for five Indian PET film producers and extended the
measures to Brazil and Israel. The last amendment was made in September 2010
when one Israeli exporter of PET film was granted an exemption of the measures
imposed.

In August 2009, following a request by
Vacmet India Limited, the Commission initiated a partial interim review,
limited to the examination of dumping in respect of the applicant, to assess
the need to amend the rate of duty applicable till then. The applicant claimed
that the circumstances on the basis of which measures were imposed have changed
and that these changes were of a lasting nature.

The investigation of the level of dumping
covered the period from 1 January to 31 December 2009 ('review investigation
period' or 'RIP').

Findings of the investigation

Investigation showed that the calculated
indicative dumping margin of the applicant to third countries in the RIP was
negative. After comparing the weighed average normal value with the weighed
average export price, no evidence was found of dumping. It was also found that
the applicant had made significant investments as from 2007 to improve its
production process and to produce the basic raw material necessary for the
production of the product concerned. These changes resulted in a reduction of
costs which explained the direct impact on the company's dumping margin.

It was therefore concluded that the
circumstances that led to the initiation of the interim review were unlikely to
change in the foreseeable future in a manner that would affect the findings.
The changed circumstances were of a lasting nature therefore the application of
the anti-dumping measure at the then current level was no longer justified.

As a result of these findings it was
decided to amend the anti-dumping duty applicable to imports of the product
concerned from the applicant to 0%.

Okoumé plywood

In November 2004 the EU imposed a
definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of okoumé plywood originating in the
People's Republic of China (the PRC). The duty levels imposed ranged from 6,5%
to 23,5% for four producers and 66,7% for all other producers.

In January 2011 the Commission initiated an
expiry review and, in parallel, an ex officio partial interim review. The
request for the expiry review was lodged by the European Federation of the
Plywood Industry (FEIC) following the publication of a notice of impending
expiry. The request was based on the grounds that the expiry of the measures would
be likely to result in a continuation or recurrence of dumping and a recurrence
of injury to the Union industry. The partial interim review was initiated
following a French court proceeding into anti-competitive behaviour of a number
of French producers of okoumé plywood. Because their behaviour could have
distorted the injury assessment in the original investigation, a re-examination
of the injury situation of the Union was deemed appropriate.

The investigation of the likelihood of
continuation or recurrence of dumping covered the period from 1 October 2008 to
30 September 2009 ('the review investigation period' or 'RIP'). The examination
of the trends relevant for the assessment of the likelihood of a continuation
or a recurrence of injury covered the period from 1 January 2006 to the end of
the RIP (the 'period considered').

Likelihood of continuation or recurrence of
dumping

It was examined whether dumping was likely
to continue or recur upon a possible expiry of the measures in force against
the PRC. The investigation showed that the product concerned was still sold on
the Union market at dumped prices, with a dumping margin of 34,2%, and in not
insignificant volumes. Moreover, the information available indicated that the
production volumes in the PRC were very high and that the share of its exports
to the Union was restrained due to the measures in place. In this respect, it
could be expected that okoumé plywood exported to other countries at lower
prices would be redirected to the Union market should, measures be repealed. In
addition, Chinese producers of plywood were expected to increase their
production of okoumé plywood if measures would lapse, as the Union market of
okoumé plywood is relatively lucrative.

It was therefore concluded that there was a
likelihood of continuation of dumping if the anti-dumping measures were allowed
to lapse.

Likelihood of recurrence of injury

Although the Union industry seemed to have
stabilised and recovered from the effects of the dumped imports from the PRC,
the industry as a whole was still somewhat fragile. A number of elements were
found to support the likelihood of a recurrence of injury, if measures were
allowed to lapse. Firstly, the Union industry would not be in a position to
maintain the current price level given the undercutting levels for imports from
the PRC and assuming the low level of import prices would continue or be
reinforced to gain lost market share. Secondly, it was likely that dumped
imports would increase at low price levels in view of the considerable
production capacity of the Chinese exporting producers.

It was therefore concluded that the expiry
of the measures would be likely to result in a recurrence of injury to the
Union industry caused by dumped imports of the product concerned from the PRC.

Interim review limited to the injury
aspects in view of the decision of the French Conseil de la Concurrence.

A number of French producers were fined
because of anti-competitive behaviour. It was thus considered appropriate to
re-examine the injury situation of the Union industry in particular in
comparison to the situation which prevailed in the investigation period of the
original investigation. Consequently, the data of the fined French companies
was removed from the injury calculation. It was found that the findings of the
original investigation would not change significantly without the data firm the
fined French companies.

It was therefore concluded that the
anti-competitive behaviour of French producers did not affect the injury
situation of the Union industry in particular in comparison to the situation
which prevailed in the investigation period of the original investigation.

As a result of these findings it was
concluded that the anti-dumping measures applicable to imports of okoumé plywood
originating in the PRC should be maintained while the partial interim review
should be terminated.

Coumarin

In July 2008, the EU imposed a definitive
anti-dumping duty on imports of coumarin originating in the People's Republic
of China. These measures were later extended to imports of coumarin consigned
from India, Thailand, Indonesia and Malaysia, whether declared as originating
in these countries or not.

In November 2010, the Commission initiated
a partial interim review limited to the injury aspects of the anti-dumping
measures applicable, after it was informed that the sole producer of coumarin
in the Union decided to discontinue its production within the Union at the end
of August 2010.

The investigation confirmed that the only
Union producer of coumarin had permanently closed its production facility in
august 2010. Since there was no evidence to indicate that termination of the
anti-dumping measures would not be in the Union interest, the measures were
terminated in June 2011.

8.2.3.     “Other” reviews

A number of other reviews, not falling
under Article 11(3) or Article 19 of the basic Regulations were concluded
during 2011.

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 .

8.2.4.     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 2011, 2 new exporter review were
initiated. Since the Commission carried out the first reviews of this type in
1990, a total of 65 such investigations have been initiated. 1 new exporter
review was terminated during 2011 without amendment of the duty.

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

8.2.5.     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 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 2011, there
were no anti-absorption investigations initiated or concluded. – Annex J.

8.2.6.     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 2011, 3 anti-circumvention investigation
were initiated. 4 such investigations were concluded with an extension of the
duty and 2 were terminated without extending the duty. More information can be
obtained from the Official Journal to which reference is given in Annex K.

Biodiesel

In July 2009 the Council imposed definitive
anti-dumping duties on imports of biodiesel originating in the United State s of America. Following the imposition of these measures it was found that
they were being circumvented by means of transhipment via Canada and by exports
of biodiesel originating from the USA in a blend containing by weight 20% or
less of biodiesel ('B20 and below'). The measures were consequently extended to
cover imports of both products concerned. On the basis of a request from the
European Biodiesel Board (EBB), the Commission initiated an anti-circumvention
investigation in August 2010. The request was based on allegations of a
significant change in pattern of trade in the product concerned from the USA, Canada and Singapore. The request further alleged that exports of biodiesel blends containing
20% or less of biodiesel originating from the USA had begun to arrive in the Union after the imposition of the definitive anti-dumping measures.

The investigation period (the 'IP') covered
the period from 1 April 2009 to 30 June 2010. Data was collected for the period
from 2008 up to the end of the IP to investigate the alleged change in the
pattern of trade.

Circumvention

Trade statistics showed a significant
increase in imports of biodiesel and certain biodiesel blends from Canada between 2008 and the IP, where their share of total imports into the EU of the
products increased from 0,10% to 9,28% respectively. This significant increase
contrasted with the small production volumes by the Canadian exporters since
Canadian biodiesel producers could not have produced the volume exported from Canada into the Union. It also contrasted with the significant increases in exports of the product
from the USA to Canada at the time. While imports from Singapore also increased in the period under consideration, the majority of these imports
were of genuine Singaporean origin. Those imports not considered to be of
genuine Singaporean origin were found to be extremely low. At the same time
imports from the USA dropped by more than 83% to 0% between 2008 and the IP. It
was concluded that, in the absence of any information to the contrary, the
change in pattern in trade particularly since 2008 when both Canadian and
Singaporean exporters increased their volumes while the American exports to the
EU dropped, was as a result of the imposition of the anti-dumping measures on
biodiesel imports from the USA. Concerning the exports of B20 blends
originating from the USA, a significant amount of the product was found to be
exported to the Union. Since no other economic justification was found for the
export other than the subsidization of the USA on the one hand, and the
avoidance of paying any anti-dumping duties when importing into the Union on
the other hand, it was found to be a result of the imposition of the
anti-dumping measures.

A dumping test was carried out regarding
the exports from Canada and the USA and it was found that, compared to the
normal value from the original investigation, dumping existed. It was also
found that the imports from Canada and the USA undermined the remedial effects
of the original measures owing to significantly increased quantities and dumped
prices significantly below the injury elimination level established in the
original investigation.

Extension of the measure

The investigation concluded that there was
clear circumvention of the measures on the product concerned from the USA both via transhipment via Canada and by imports into the Union of biodiesel in a B20 blend. On
the other hand the investigation concluded that exports to the EU of the
products concerned from Singapore were of genuine Singaporean origin. As a
result the anti-dumping measures imposed by the original definitive Regulation
on imports of the product concerned originating from the USA were extended in
May 2011 to the same product consigned from Canada, whether declared as
originating from Canada or not. In addition, the measures in force on imports
of the product concerned originating in the USA were also extended to imports
of B20 and below. At the same time the investigation regarding Singapore was terminated without extending the measures to imports from that country.

8.3.        Safeguard investigations

Safeguard measures have always been and
remain an 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 2011 there were no
safeguard measures in place or investigations ongoing. During 2011 no safeguard
investigation was initiated – Annex L. 1 safeguard investigation on Wireless
wide area network (WWAN) modems which had been initiated in 2010 was terminated
in 2011 without the imposition of measures.

9.           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
2011 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).

9.1.        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.

9.2.        Monitoring of undertakings

Monitoring of undertakings forms part of the
enforcement activities, given that undertakings are a form of AD or CVD
measures. They are accepted by the Commission if it is satisfied that they can
effectively eliminate the injurious effects of dumping or subsidisation.

At the beginning of 2011, there were 22
undertakings in force. During 2011, the following changes to the portfolio of
undertakings took place: undertakings of 5 companies came to an end due to the
expiry/repeal of measures and an undertaking of one company was accepted. This
brings the total number of undertakings in force at the end of 2011 to 18..

10.         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 2011, 26 new refund requests were
submitted. At the end of 2011, 12 investigations were on-going, covering 18
requests. In 2011, 24 Commission Decisions were adopted: 12 granting partial
refund and 12 rejecting the refund requests. 7 requests were withdrawn.

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

11.1.      Overview of the judicial reviews in 2011.

In 2011, the General Court and the Court of
Justice rendered 9 judgments in total relating to the areas of anti-dumping or
anti-subsidy. In addition there were also 4 orders.

11.2.      Cases pending

A list of the anti-dumping/anti-subsidy
cases before the General Court and the Court of Justice still pending at the
end of 2011 is given in Annex S (37 before the General Court and 12 before the
Court of Justice).

11.3.      New cases

16 new cases were lodged in 2011 (compared
to 13 in 2010, 17 in 2009, 16 in 2008 and 10 in 2007). 12 of these were lodged
before the General Court and 4 before the Court of Justice.

11.4.      Judgments rendered by the General Court

In 2011, the General Court rendered 8 judgments relating to the areas of anti-dumping or
anti-subsidy. The General Court additionally terminated 1 case by issuing an
order. Details of some of the cases are set out below.

11.4.1.   Certain polyethylene terephthalate originating in India, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Republic of Korea, Thailand and Taiwan – T-167/07 – Far Eastern New Century
Corp. v Council of the European Union – Judgment of 13 April 2011 (OJ 160, 28.5.2011, p. 15)

The applicant, Far Eastern New Century
Corp., sought the annulment of Regulation (EC) No 192/2007 imposing a
definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain polyethylene
terephthalate originating in India, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Republic of Korea,
Thailand and Taiwan following an expiry review and a partial interim review,
applying to the applicant a duty of EUR 36.3 per tonne polyethylene
terephthalate. The applicant put forward two main claims in support of its
action. The first one concerns the method for the calculation of the dumping
margin and the second one the use of zeroing technique. The main findings are
set out below.

First, the applicant contested the choice
of the asymmetrical method for the calculation of the dumping margin made by
the institutions pursuant to Article 2(11) of the basic Anti-dumping
Regulation.

The Court upheld the institutions' choice
as it found that the two conditions for the application of the asymmetrical
method were well established, namely the existence of a significant difference
in the pattern of export prices as between the different purchasers, regions or
time periods and that the symmetrical methods would not reflect the full degree
of dumping practiced. In particular as regards the first condition, the Court
clarified that the existence of any one of the three differences in the pattern
of export prices, the different purchasers, regions or time periods, referred
to in Article 2(11) of the Basic Regulation is sufficient for the first
condition laid down in that provision to be satisfied. Also, it indicated that
the existence of a pattern of export prices which differs significantly by time
period must be assessed solely on the basis of an objective analysis of the
development of those prices over time, no account being taken of how they
compare with domestic prices or of the reasons for the different export prices.

Second, as regards the use of zeroing
technique, the applicant claimed that the negative dumping margins should not
have been zeroed when its dumping margin was calculated in accordance with the
asymmetrical method and instead other calculations should have been employed.

The Court held that the need to use the
zeroing technique in the context of applying the asymmetrical method results
directly from Article 2(11) of the basic Anti-dumping Regulation and from
Article 2.4.2 of the 1994 Anti-dumping Code, which defines the
asymmetrical method as an alternative to the symmetrical methods. The Court
indicated that the zeroing technique is commonly used by importing countries
and customs unions, including the European Union. Furthermore, the Court held
that it is neither contrary to Article 2.4.2 of the 1994 Anti-dumping
Code or Article 2(11) of the Basic Regulation, nor unfair for the purposes of
Article 2(10) of that regulation, to employ the zeroing technique in the
context of the asymmetrical method, where the two conditions for applying that method
are satisfied. It was clarified that the zeroing technique has proved to be
mathematically necessary in order to distinguish, in terms of its results, the
asymmetrical method from the first symmetrical method. In the absence of that
reduction, the asymmetrical method will always yield the same result as the
first symmetrical method.

In the light of the above findings the
Court dismissed the action.

The judgment has not been appealed.

11.4.2.   Cotton-type bed linen originating in Pakistan – T-199/04 – Gul Ahmed Textile Mills v
Council of the European Union – Judgment of 27 September 2011 (OJ C 331, 12.11.2011, p. 15)

The applicant, a Pakistani company engaged
in the export sales and marketing of bed linen, sought an annulment of
Regulation (EC) No 397/2004, which imposed a definitive anti-dumping duty on
imports of cotton-type bed linen originating in Pakistan. The applicant was
subject to a duty of 13.1% which was later lowered to 5.6%

The main claim put forward by the applicant
in support of his action concerned the establishment of a causal link between
the dumped imports and the injury allegedly suffered by the Union industry. The
applicant argued, in essence, that the Council made an error of law by failing
to examine whether the abolition of the previous anti-dumping duties on bed
linen from Pakistan, and the implementation of a scheme of generalised tariff
preferences in favour of Pakistan at the start of 2002 had the effect of
breaking the causal link between the injury suffered by the Union industry and
the dumped imports from Pakistan.

The Court concluded that the EU
institutions did not correctly carry out the determination of the said causal
link.

Since the exporting producers of Pakistani
bed linen drew the attention of the EU institutions to what they believed to be
the origin of the injury allegedly suffered by the Union industry, the EU
institutions were placed in a position to assess the effects which both the
abolition of previous anti-dumping duties and the implementation of a scheme of
generalised tariff preferences were capable of producing on the Union industry
and, consequently, on the causal link. Because these legislative changes were
known factors, in the context of the Basic Regulation, the EU institutions had
to take them into account, as the causal link formed the subject matter of the
anti-dumping investigation.

If the injurious effects of the dumped
imports are not correctly separated and distinguished from the injurious
effects of other factors such as the abolition of the previous anti-dumping
duties, the EU institutions will not be in a position to conclude that the
injury which they attribute to the dumped imports has actually been caused by
the latter, rather than by other factors. The institutions would thus have no
rational basis to conclude that the dumped imports are indeed causing the
injury which justifies the imposition of anti-dumping duties.

In the light of the above findings the
Court ruled that the contested regulation had to be annulled. The Council
appealed the judgment and the appeal case is pending before the Court of
Justice.

11.4.3.   Ironing boards originating in the People’s Republic of China and Ukraine – T-274/07 – Zhejiang Harmonic Hardware Products v Council of the European Union – Judgment of 8
November 2011 (OJ C 370,
17.12.2011, p. 22)

The applicant, a Chinese manufacturer of
ironing boards, sought the annulment of Council Regulation (EC) No 452/2007,
which imposed a definitive anti-dumping duty and collected the provisional duty
on imports of ironing boards originating in, inter alia, China. The applicant was subject to a duty of 26.5%. The applicant put forward four main
claims in support of its action.

Firstly, the applicant argued that the
Commission failed to justify its reassessment of the question of market economy
treatment with new information which differed from that on which the previous
assessment was based.

The Court dismissed this plea as unfounded
because, having regard to the very nature of the disclosure documents in the
general scheme of the Basic Regulation (purely informative), the Commission was
not required to justify by new data or information the evolution of its
position. In the present case, it was sufficient for the Commission to give
reasons for its final position, confirming its initial decision, in relation to
all the relevant matters of fact and law, for the purpose of determining
whether to grant market economy treatment.

Secondly, the applicant claimed that, by
conferring anonymity on the intervening companies and thus protecting the
identity of the companies, it was impossible for the applicant to analyse
properly much of the key data in the complaint and to respond effectively to it
in the earlier stages of the investigation, thus breaking the applicant's right
of defence.

The Court dismissed this plea and held that
the Commission did not commit an error of law in deciding that the alleged risk
of pressure being applied to the intervening companies justified agreeing to
their request for confidentiality.

Thirdly, the applicant argued that it had
no opportunity to defend its interests effectively because the Commission,
contrary to the Basic Regulation, allowed the applicant a period of less than
ten days in which to submit comments.

The Court upheld this plea. By failing to
comply with the ten-day period the applicant's right of defence was affected.
Since it could not be ruled out that the Commission would have reconsidered its
assessment for market economy treatment again, in the absence of procedural
irregularities, a further period might have enabled the applicant to develop
substantive arguments thus allowing the applicant to defend himself more
effectively. In addition, an answer from the applicant to the procedural
arguments could have influenced the content of the proposal for definitive
measures. If the Commission had fulfilled its procedural obligations to the
applicant, the administrative procedure could have produced a different result.

Lastly, the applicant pleaded an
infringement of its rights as exporter to offer undertakings.

The Court also upheld this plea. By failing
to comply with the ten-day period, the Commission infringed the applicant's
rights to offer undertakings up until the expiry of that period.

Therefore, the contested regulation was
annulled, in so far as it imposed a definitive anti-dumping duty and collected
definitively the provisional duty on ironing boards manufactured by the
applicant.

11.4.4.   Certain magnesia bricks originating from the People's
Republic of China –
T-423/09 – Dashiqiao v Council of the Europen Union – Judgment of 16 December
2011 (OJ C 32, 4.2.2012,
p. 21)

The applicant, a company established in China, sought the annulment of Council Regulation (EC) No 826/2009 amending Regulation (EC)
No 1659/2005. The regulation imposed a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports
of certain magnesia bricks originating from China, in so far as the
anti-dumping duty that it set exceeded that which would be applicable if that
duty had been determined on the basis of the method applied in the original
investigation in order to take account of the fact that Chinese export VAT was
not refunded. The applicant was subject to a duty of 14, 4%.

The applicant put forward two pleas in
support of its action.

Firstly, the applicant argued that the
method used by the Commission in the review, to deal with the fact that export
VAT was not refunded, infringed the principle of fair comparison between the
export price and the normal value as laid down in the Basic Regulation.

The Court found that the export price or
the normal value should only be corrected in order to take into account the
different factors that are of influence on the prices so as to make the prices
comparable. The aim of the correction is thus to restore the symmetry between
the normal value and the export price of a product. In light of the definitions
given in the Basic Regulation, the Council could consider the comparison of the
normal value with the export price on a VAT-inclusive basis, as a fair method
of comparison.

Since the applicant did not provide any
arguments demonstrating that this comparative method is unsuitable, the Court
dismissed the plea and held that the Council did not commit an error in
judgement by comparing the export price with the normal value on a
VAT-inclusive basis and consequently did not infringe the principle of fair
comparison.

Second, the applicant argued that the
calculation method differed radically from that applied in the original
investigation without any valid justification.

The Court also dismissed this plea. The
circumstances during the original and the new investigation had changed. During
the original investigation, the Chinese VAT was partially refunded for the
products under consideration while, during the new investigation, VAT was not
refunded at all. While in the original investigation it was found necessary to
correct the situation, considering the changed circumstances, the Council was
allowed to cease the correction of the normal value and the export price, since
this value and price could fairly be compared on a VAT-inclusive basis.

The Court thus dismissed the action for
annulment.

11.5.      Judgments rendered by the Court of Justice

In 2011, the Court of Justice rendered 1 judgment relating to the area of anti-dumping
regarding an appeal against the judgment of the General Court. In addition the
Court of Justice rendered two orders which concern a leave to intervene on
appeal.

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

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

12.1.1.   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.

12.1.2.   Dispute settlement procedures against the Union

China-Certain
Footwear

By Council Regulation (EC) No 1472/2006 and
Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1294/2009, the Council imposed
anti-dumping measures on certain leather footwear originating in the People's
Republic of China. In February 2010, China requested consultations with the
European Union concerning the above Regulations. Consultations were held in
March 2010. Subsequently, in April 2010, China requested the establishment of a
panel. The panel was established in May 2010 and its members were elected in
July 2010. The panel report was issued in October 2011

The panel concluded that, in the great
majority of the issues examined, the EU acted in full compliance with WTO
rules. However, the Panel found that Article 9(5) of the Basic Regulation was
inconsistent with the European Union's obligations under 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, and that the application of Article 9(5) of the
Basic Regulation in the footwear original investigation was inconsistent
with Articles 6.10 and 9.2 of the AD Agreement.

In addition, the Panel found that the EU
had acted inconsistently with the AD Agreement with respect to the
determination of the amounts for SG&A and profit for one producer-exporter
in the original investigation. Moreover it found that the European Union acted
inconsistently with its obligations under Articles 6.5 and 6.5.1 of the AD
Agreement with respect to the confidential treatment, or the non-confidential
summarization, of certain information in the original investigation and the
expiry review.

The Panel rejected the majority of China's
claims with respect to individual treatment requests; market economy treatment;
dumping determination; selection of countries for expiry review and
investigation; scope of the product under consideration, or the like product;
sample for the injury analysis and determination; cumulative assessment;
evaluation of injury indicators; causation; the amount of time provided for
comments and responses; questionnaire responses; confidential treatment of
information; non-confidential summarization of information; not applying
available facts; and imposition and collection of anti-dumping duties.

Lastly, the Panel concluded that, since
Article 17.6(i) of the AD Agreement does not impose any obligations
on the investigating authorities of WTO Members in anti-dumping investigations
that could be the subject of a finding of violation, China's claims of
violation of Article 17.6(i) had to be dismissed. Further, it applied
judicial economy with respect to some of China's claims regarding all three
measures.

Since the Review and Definitive Regulations
expired as of 31 March 2011, the Panel concluded that there was no basis for a
recommendation to “bring the [expired] measure[s] into conformity” under
Article 19.1 of the DSU. With respect to Article 9(5) of the
Basic Regulation, the Panel recommended that the European Union bring this
measure into conformity with its obligations under the WTO Agreements. The
Panel declined to make a suggestion on how the DSB recommendations and rulings
may be implemented by the European Union.

China – Fasteners

In July 2011 the WTO Appellate Body issued
a report on the dispute settlement case taken by China against the EU on
anti-dumping measures on imports of certain iron or steel fasteners originating
in China. This was the first WTO challenge launched by China against the EU since it joined the WTO in 2001. China challenged the WTO-consistency
of Article 9.5 of the EU basic AD regulation (the provision on "individual
treatment" of exporters from non-market economies) and of the EU
regulation imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain iron
or steel fasteners from China.

The panel had circulated its report to WTO
Members in December 2010 and in March 2011 the EU appealed certain aspects of
the panel report. The Appellate Body issued its report in July 2011 and at its
meeting on 28 July 2011 the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) adopted the Report.
While the large majority of China's claims with respect to the fasteners
regulation were rejected by the Panel and by the Appellate Body, certain
aspects of that regulation were considered to be in breach of WTO law. The
Appellate Body upheld the Panel's findings that Article 9(5) of the European
Union's Basic Anti‑Dumping Regulation was WTO-inconsistent in and of itself
("as such") because it conditions the determination of individual
dumping margins, and the imposition of individual anti‑dumping duties, on the
fulfilment of an “Individual Treatment" test.

In September 2011, the European Union
informed the WTO DSB that it intends to implement the recommendations and rulings
of the DSB in this dispute in a manner that respects its WTO obligations. In
February 2012, the Commission proposed to the European Parliament  and the  Council
an amendment to the Basic Anti-Dumping Regulation to take account of the DSB
Ruling[24]. The amendment
was published in September 2012 [25].

12.2.      Other WTO activities

In 2011, the Chair of the DDA Negotiating
Group on rules launched a process of informal plurilateral consultations on
various topics where it was felt that the gaps remaining among Members should
be further worked on. This resulted in the circulation of a new text on
anti-dumping disciplines highlighting areas of convergence and outstanding
problematic issues, whereas progress on subsidies and fisheries subsidies
negotiations was treated in a report (WTO Document TN/RL/W/254 of 21 April
2011). While these documents accurately reflected the state of the negotiations
in those areas, it did not prove possible to take the latter forward in 2011
partly because of the overall dynamics of the DDA negotiations. Following
resignation by the Chair Francis, a consensus among Members was found to
appoint Ambassador McCook (Jamaica) as Chairman of the Negotiating Group on
Rules. His appointment was confirmed at a formal meeting held in February 2012.
Subsequently, the Technical Group, a subgroup of the negotiating group, was
convened twice (in February and April 2012).

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.

13.         Conclusion

Overall the level of activity in 2011 over
2010 increased when based on the initiation of new cases – 21 as compared to
18. This represented an increase in both anti-dumping and anti-subsidy cases
initiated compared to the previous year. There was a slight increase in the
number of cases terminated without the imposition of measures up 1 to 11 in
2011. 2011 saw the number of reviews initiated drop from 31 in 2010 to 24 in
2011. There were no safeguard cases initiated unlike the previous year where
the first case in many years had been initiated.

2011 also saw the
launch of a debate for the modernisation of the trade
defence instruments. In launching the exercise the Commission services drew on
an evaluation study on the EU's trade defence instruments (commissioned in 2010
and continued throughout 2011) by an independent contractor and also on a
number of interviews with experts in the field. The modernisation exercise and
the evaluation study are designed to improve the EU's application of Trade
Defence instruments.

In 2011, the Commission
continued to focus on the needs of SMEs in the context of trade defence
investigations publishing the "Paper on Actions to Address the
Difficulties Encountered by SMEs Involved in Trade Defence Instruments".
This was a follow on from the results of the study carried out by an
independent contractor in 2010 launched by the Commission in recognition of the
important role that SMEs have in the EU's economy and the difficulties they
face in participating in trade defence investigations. The paper published in
2011 contains a number of actions designed to assist SMEs when participating in
trade defence investigations.

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.

LIST OF
ANNEXES

ANNEXES : SUMMARY

ANNEX A || New investigations initiated during the period 1 January – 31 December 2011 A.  Anti-dumping investigations B.  Anti-subsidy investigations

ANNEX B || New investigations initiated A.  by product sector during the period 2007 – 2011 (31 December) B.  by country of export during the period 2007 – 2011 (31 December)

ANNEX C || New investigations concluded by the imposition of provisional duties during the period 1 January - 31 December 2011 A.  Anti-dumping investigations B.  Anti-subsidy investigations

ANNEX D || New investigations concluded by the imposition of definitive duties during the period 1 January - 31 December 2011 A.  Anti-dumping investigations B.  Anti-subsidy investigations

ANNEX E || New investigations terminated without imposition of measures during the period 1 January - 31 December 2011 A.  Anti-dumping investigations B.  Anti-subsidy investigations

ANNEX F || Expiry reviews initiated or concluded during the period 1 January – 31 December 2011

ANNEX G || Interim reviews initiated or concluded during the period 1 January – 31 December 2011

ANNEX H || Other reviews concluded during the period 1 January - 31 December 2011

ANNEX I || New exporter reviews initiated or concluded during the period 1 January – 31 December 2011 A.  Anti-dumping investigations B. Anti-subsidy investigations

ANNEX J || Anti-absorption investigations initiated or concluded during the period 1 January - 31 December 2011

ANNEX K || Anti-circumvention investigations initiated or concluded during the period 1 January - 31 December 2011

ANNEX L || Safeguard investigations initiated or concluded during the period 1 January - 31 December 2011

ANNEX M || Undertakings accepted or repealed during the period 1 January – 31 December 2011

ANNEX N || Measures which expired during the period 1 January - 31 December 2011

ANNEX O || Definitive anti-dumping measures in force on 31 December 2011 A.  Ranked by product B.  Ranked by country

ANNEX P || Definitive anti-subsidy measures in force on 31 December 2011 A.  Ranked by product B.  Ranked by country

ANNEX Q || Undertakings in force on 31 December 2011 A.  Ranked by product B.  Ranked by country

ANNEX R || Anti-dumping & anti-subsidy investigations pending on 31 December 2011 : A.  New investigations (ranked by product) B.  Review investigations (ranked by product) C.  Ranked by country (new & review investigations)

ANNEX S || Court cases A. Court cases pending before the Court of Justice and the General Court on 31 December 2011 B. Judgments, orders and other decisions rendered by the Court of Justice and the General Court on 31 December 2011

ANNEX T || Safeguard and surveillance measures in force on 31 December 2011

ANNEX A

New investigations initiated

During the period 1 January – 31 December
2011

A.           Anti-dumping investigations (chronological by date of
publication)

Product || Country of origin || OJ Reference

Oxalic acid || India P.R. China || C 24 26.01.2011 p. 8

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) || Oman Saudi Arabia || C 49 16.02.2011 p. 16

Sodium cyclamate || P.R. China || C 50 17.02.2011 p. 9

Soy protein products (certain concentrated) || P.R. China || C 121 19.04.2011 p. 71

Stainless steel fasteners || India || C 142 13.05.2011 p. 30

Seamless pipes and tubes of iron or steel (certain) || Belarus || C 187 28.06.2011 p. 22

Woven and/or stitched glass fibre fabrics || P.R. China || C 222 28.07.2011 p. 12

Tartaric acid || P.R. China || C 223 29.07.2011 p. 11

Aluminium radiators || P.R. China || C 236 12.08.2011 p. 18

Tube and pipe fittings of iron or steel || Russia Turkey || C 320 01.11.2011 p. 4

Bioethanol || U.S.A. || C 345 25.11.2011 p. 7

White phosphorous || Kazakhstan || C 369 17.12.2011 p. 19

Aluminium foil || P.R. China || C 371 20.12.2011 p. 4

Organic coated steel products || P.R. China || C 373 21.12.2011 p. 16

B.           Anti-subsidy
investigations (chronological by date of publication)

Product || Country of origin || OJ Reference

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) (AS) || Oman Saudi Arabia || C 49 16.02.2011 p. 21

Stainless steel fasteners (AS) || India || C 142 13.05.2011 p. 36

Bioethanol || U.S.A. || C 345 25.11.2011 p. 13

ANNEX B

A.           New investigations
initiated by product sector during the period 2007 – 2011 (31 December)

Product || 2007 || 2008 || 2009 || 2010 || 2011

Chemical and allied || 2 || 2 || 9 || 7 || 9

Textiles and allied || - || - || 3 || - || -

Wood and paper || - || - || - || 2 || -

Electronics || - || - || 1 || 2 || -

Other mechanical engineering || - || 1 || - || 1 || -

Iron and Steel || 6 || 11 || 4 || 3 || 6

Others metal || - || 3 || 1 || - || 2

Other || 1 || 3 || 3 || 3 || 4

|| 9 || 20 || 21 || 18 || 21

Of which          anti-dumping || 9 || 18 || 15 || 15 || 17

anti-subsidy || 0 || 2 || 6 || 3 || 4

B.           New investigations
initiated by country of export during the period 2007 –2011 (31 December)

Country of origin || 2007 || 2008 || 2009 || 2010 || 2011

Armenia || - || 1 || - || - || -

Belarus || 1 || 1 || - || - || 1

Bosnia & Herzegovina || 1 || - || - || 1 || -

Brazil || - || 1 || - || - || -

China (People's Republic of) || 6 || 6 || 7 || 10 || 8

India || - || - || 2 || 3 || 3

Indonesia || - || - || - || 1 || -

Iran || - || - || 2 || - || -

Kazakhstan || - || - || - || - || 1

Korea (Rep. of) || - || 1 || 1 || - || -

Malaysia || - || - || 2 || 1 || -

Moldova (Rep. of) || - || 1 || - || - || -

Oman || - || - || - || - || 2

Pakistan || - || - || 2 || - || -

Russia || 1 || - || - || - || 1

Saudi Arabia || - || - || - || - || 2

Taiwan || - || 1 || 1 || - || -

Thailand || - || 1 || 2 || 1 || -

Turkey || - || 2 || - || - || 1

Ukraine || - || 1 || - || - || -

U.A.E. || - || - || 2 || - || -

U.S.A. || - || 4 || - || 1 || 2

|| 9 || 20 || 21 || 18 || 21

ANNEX C

New investigations concluded by the
imposition of provisional duties

During the period 1 January – 31
December 2011

A.           Anti-dumping
investigations (chronological by date of publication)

Product || Country of origin || Regulation N° || OJ Reference

Rind binder mechanisms || Thailand || Commission Reg. (EU) No 118/2011 10.02.2011 || L 37 11.02.2011 p. 2

Glass fibres (certain open mesh fabrics) || P.R. China || Commission Reg. (EU) No 138/2011 16.02.2011 || L 43 17.02.2011 p. 9

Ceramic tiles || P.R. China || Commission Reg. (EU) No 258/2011 16.03.2011 || L 70 17.03.2011 p. 5

Fatty alcohols and their blends || India Indonesia Malaysia || Commission Reg. (EU) No 446/2011 10.05.2011 || L 122 11.05.2011 p. 47

Seamless pipes and tubes of stainless steel || P.R. China || Commission Reg. (EU) No 627/2011 27.06.2011 || L 169 29.06.2011 p. 1

Vinyl acetate || U.S.A. || Commission Reg. (EU) No 821/2011 16.08.2011 || L 209 17.08.2011 p. 24

Oxalic acid || India P.R. China || Commission Reg. (EU) No 1043/2011 19.10.2011 || L 275 20.10.2011 p. 1

B.           Anti-subsidy
investigations (chronological by date of publication)

Product || Country of origin || Regulation N° || OJ Reference

None || - || - || -

ANNEX D

New investigations concluded by the imposition of definitive duties

During the period 1 January – 31 December 2011

A.           Anti-dumping
investigations (chronological by date of publication)

Product || Country of origin || Regulation N° || OJ Reference

Continuous filament glass fibre products || P.R. China || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 248/2011 09.03.2011 || L 67 15.03.2011 p. 1

Melamine || P.R. China || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 457/2011 10.05.2011 || L 124 13.05.2011 p. 2

Zeolite A powder || Bosnia and Herzegovina || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 464/2011 11.05.2011 || L 125 14.05.2011 p. 1

Coated fine paper || P.R. China || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 451/2011 06.05.2011 || L 128 14.05.2011 p. 1

Glass fibres (certain open mesh fabrics) || P.R. China || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 791/2011 03.08.2011 || L 204 09.08.2011 p. 1

Ring binder mechanisms || Thailand || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 792/2011 05.08.2011 || L 204 09.08.2011 p. 11

Ceramic tiles || P.R. China || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 917/2011 12.09.2011 || L 238 15.09.2011 p. 1

Fatty alcohols and their blends || India Indonesia Malaysia || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 1138/2011 08.11.2011 || L 293 11.11.2011 p. 1

Seamless pipes and tubes of stainless steel || P.R. China || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 1331/2011 14.12.2011 || L 336 20.12.2011 p. 6

B.           Anti-subsidy
investigations (chronological by date of publication)

Product || Country of origin || Regulation N° || OJ Reference

Stainless steel bars and rods (AS) || India || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 405/2011 19.04.2011 || L 108 28.04.2011 p. 3

Coated fine paper (AS) || P.R. China || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 452/2011 06.05.2011 || L 128 14.05.2011 p. 18

ANNEX E

New investigations terminated without
the imposition of measures

During the period 1 January – 31
December 2011

A.           Anti-dumping
investigations (chronological by date of publication)

Product || Country of origin || Decision N° || OJ Reference

Purified terephthalic acid and its salts || Thailand || Commission Dec. No 2011/32/EU 20.01.2011 || L 15 20.01.2011 p. 22

Wireless wide area networking (WWAN) modems || P.R. China || Commission Reg. (EU) No 209/2011 02.03.2011 || L 58 03.03.2011 p. 36

Stainless steel bars || India || Commission Dec. No 2011/154/EU 09.03.2011 || L 63 10.03.2011 p. 21

Tris (2-chloro-1-methyl-ethyl) phosphate || P.R. China || Commission Dec. No 2011/498/EU 09.09.2011 || L 205 10.08.2011 p. 35

Graphite electrode system (certain) || P.R. China || Commission Dec. No 2011/642/EU 29.09.2011 || L 254 30.09.2011 p. 20

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) || Oman Saudi Arabia || Commission Dec. No 2011/835/EU 13.12.2011 || L 330 14.12.2011 p. 45

B.           Anti-subsidy investigations (chronological by date of
publication)

Product || Country of origin || Decision N° || OJ Reference

Purified terephthalic acid and its salts (AS) || Thailand || Commission Dec. No 2011/31/EU 20.01.2011 || L 15 20.01.2011 p. 17

Wireless wide area networking (WWAN) modems (AS) || P.R. China || Commission Reg. (EU) No 209/2011 02.03.2011 || L 58 03.03.2011 p. 36

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) || Oman Saudi Arabia || Commission Dec. No 2011/834/EU 13.12.2011 || L 330 14.12.2011 p. 43

ANNEX F

Expiry reviews initiated or concluded

During the period 1 January – 31
December 2011

(Chronological by date of publication)

Initiated

Product || Country of origin || OJ Reference

Tartaric acid || P.R. China || C 24 26.01.2011 p. 14

Seamless pipes and tubes of iron or steel || Croatia Russia Ukraine || C 187 28.06.2011 p. 16

Lever arch mechanisms || P.R. China || C 217 23.07.2011 p. 35

Chamois leather || P.R. China || C 270 13.09.2011 p. 6

Plastic sacks and bags || P.R. China Thailand || C 283 27.09.2011 p. 11

Concluded : confirmation of duty

Product || Country of origin || Regulation/Decision N° || OJ Reference

Okoumé plywood || P.R. China || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 82/2011 31.01.2011 || L 28 02.02.2011 p. 1

Tungsten carbide and fused tungsten carbide || P.R. China || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 287/2011 21.03.2011 || L 78 24.03.2011 p. 1

Furfuraldehyde || P.R. China || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 453/2011 04.05.2011 || L 123 12.05.2011 p. 1

Barium carbonate || P.R. China || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 831/2011 16.08.2011 || L 214 19.08.2011 p. 1

Bicycles || P.R. China || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 990/2011 03.10.2011 || L 261 06.10.2011 p. 2

Hand pallet trucks and their essential parts || P.R. China Thailand (ext.) || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 1008/2011 10.10.2011 || L 268 13.10.2011 p. 1

Trichloroisocyanuric acid (TCCA) || P.R. China || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 1389/2011 19.12.2011 || L 346 30.12.2011 p. 6

Concluded : termination and repeal of the measures

Product || Country of origin || Regulation/ Decision N° || OJ Reference

Polyester staple fibres || P.R. China || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 554/2011 30.05.2011 || L 150 09.06.2011 p. 1

Magnesia bricks (certain) || P.R. China || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 616/2011 21.06.2011 || L 166 25.06.2011 p. 1

Broad spectrum antibiotics (AS) || India || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 803/2011 04.08.2011 || L 206 11.08.2011 p. 1

Castings (certain) || P.R. China || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 871/2011 26.08.2011 || L 227 02.09.2011 p. 1

ANNEX G

Interim
reviews initiated or concluded

during the period 1 January – 31 December 2011

(chronological by date of publication)

Initiated

Product || Country of origin || OJ Reference

Sodium cyclamate || P.R. China || C 50 17.02.2011 p. 6

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) (AS) || India || C 102 02.04.2011 p. 15

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) || India || C 102 02.04.2011 p. 18

Potassium chloride || Russia || C 170 10.06.2011 p. 10

Furfuraldehyde || P.R. China || C 196 05.07.2011 p. 9

Tartaric acid || P.R. China || C 223 29.07.2011 p. 16

Seamless pipes and tubes of iron or steel || Ukraine || C 223 29.07.2011 p. 8

PSC wires and strands || P.R. China || C 291 04.10.2011 p. 6

Seamless pipes and tubes of iron or steel || Russia || C 303 14.10.2011 p. 11

Concluded : confirmation/amendment of duty

Product || Country of origin || Regulation/Decision N° || OJ Reference

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film || India || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 38/2011 20.01.2011 || L 15 20.01.2011 p. 1

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film || India || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 205/2011 28.02.2011 || L 58 03.03.2011 p. 14

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film (AS) || India || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 206/2011 28.02.2011 || L 58 03.03.2011 p. 18

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) (AS) || India || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 906/2011 02.09.2011 || L 232 09.09.2011 p. 19

Concluded by termination of review/confirmation of duty

Product || Country of origin || Regulation/Decision N° || OJ Reference

Okoumé plywood || P.R. China || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 82/2011 31.01.2011 || L 28 02.02.2011 p. 1

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) || Korea (Rep. of) || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 167/2011 21.02.2011 || L 49 24.02.2011 p. 1

Polyethylene terephthalate (certain) (PET) || India || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 905/2011 01.09.2011 || L 232 09.09.2011 p. 14

Concluded : termination and repeal of measures

Product || Country of origin || Regulation/ Decision N° || OJ Reference

Coumarin || P.R. China || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 655/2011 28.06.2011 || L 180 08.07.2011 p. 1

Castings (certain) || P.R. China || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 871/2011 26.08.2011 || L 227 02.09.2011 p. 1

Potassium chloride || Belarus || Notice of the expiry of certain anti-dumping measures (2011/C 206/10) || C 206 12.07.2011 p.18

Potassium chloride || Russia || Notice of the expiry of certain anti-dumping measures (2011/C 206/10) || C 206 12.07.2011 p.18

ANNEX H

Other reviews initiated or concluded

during the period 1 January – 31 December 2011

(chronological by date of publication)

Initiated

Product || Country of origin || OJ Reference

Compressors [26] || P.R. China || C 98 30.03.2011 p. 22

Citrus fruits[27] || P.R. China || C 353 03.12.2011 p. 15

Concluded : confirmation/amendment of duty

Product || Country of origin || Regulation/Decision N° || OJ Reference

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film [28] || India || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 469/2011 13.05.2011 || L 129 17.05.2011 p. 1

Plastic sacks and bags [29] || P.R. China || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 475/2011 13.05.2011 || L 131 18.05.2011 p. 10

Bicycle parts (extension to bicycles)[30] || P.R. China || Commission Decision 2011/304/EU 23.05.2011 || L 136 24.05.2011 p. 99

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film[31] || India || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 824/2011 12.08.2011 || L 211 18.08.2011 p. 1

High tenacity yarns of polyesters[32] || P.R. China || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 907/2011 06.09.2011 || L 232 09.09.2011 p. 29

Compressors[33] || P.R. China || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 1306/2011 12.12.2011 || L 332 15.12.2011 p. 1

ANNEX I

New exporter reviews initiated or concluded

during the period 1 January – 31 December 2011

(chronological by date of publication)

A.           Anti-dumping
investigations

Initiated

Product || Country of origin || Regulation/Decision N° || OJ Reference

Iron or steel fasteners || Malaysia || Commission Reg. (EU) No 1164/2011 15.11.2011 || L 297 16.11.2011 p. 53

Steel ropes and cables || Korea (Rep. of) || Commission Reg. (EU) No 969/2011 29.09.2011 || L 254 30.9.2011 p.7

Concluded: imposition/amendment of duty

Product || Country of origin || Regulation/Decision N° || OJ Reference

None || - || - || -

Concluded: termination

Product || Country of origin || Regulation/Decision N° || OJ Reference

Magnesia bricks (certain) || P.R. China || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 616/2011 21.06.2011 || L 166 25.06.2011 p. 1

B.           Anti-subsidy
investigations ("accelerated" investigations)

Initiated

Product || Country of origin || Regulation/Decision N° (if applicable) || OJ Reference

None || - || - || -

Concluded : imposition/amendment of duty

Product || Country of origin || Regulation/Decision N° || OJ Reference

None || - || - || -

Concluded: termination

Product || Country of origin || Regulation/Decision N° || OJ Reference

None || - || - || -

ANNEX J

Anti-absorption investigations
initiated or concluded

during the period 1 January – 31 December 2011

(chronological by date of publication)

Initiated

Product || Country of origin || OJ Reference

None || - || -

Concluded with increase of duty

Product || Country of origin || Regulation/Decision N° || OJ Reference

None || - || - || -

Concluded without increase of duty / termination

Product || Country of origin || Regulation/Decision N° || OJ Reference

None || - || - || -

ANNEX K

Anti-circumvention investigations initiated or concluded

during the period 1 January – 31 December 2011

(chronological by date of publication)

Initiated

Product || Country of origin || Regulation/Decision N° || OJ Reference

Molybdenum wires || P.R. China (Malaysia, Switzerland ) || Commission Reg. (EU) No 477/2011 17.05.2011 || L 131 18.05.2011 p. 14

Glass fibres (certain open mesh fabrics) || P.R. China (Malaysia) || Commission Reg. (EU) No 1135/2011 09.11.2011 || L 292 10.11.2011 p. 4

Concluded with extension of duty

Product || Country of consignment || Regulation N° || OJ Reference

Biodiesel || Canada || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 444/2011 05.05.2011 || L 122 11.05.2011 p. 12

Biodiesel (AS) || Canada || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 443/2011 05.05.2011 || L 122 11.05.2011 p. 1

Plastic sacks and bags || P.R. China || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 474/2011 03.05.2011 || L 131 18.05.2011 p. 2

Iron or steel fasteners || Malaysia || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 723/2011 18.07.2011 || L 194 26.07.2011 p. 6

Concluded without extension of duty / termination

Product || Country of consignment || Regulation N° || OJ Reference

Biodiesel || Singapore || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 444/2011 05.05.2011 || L 122 11.05.2011 p. 12

Biodiesel (AS) || Singapore || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 443/2011 05.05.2011 || L 122 11.05.2011 p. 1

Exemptions granted and/or rejected

Product || Country of consignment || Regulation N° || OJ Reference

None || - || - || -

ANNEX L

Safeguard investigations initiated and
concluded

during the period 1 January – 31 December 2011

(chronological by date of publication)

New investigations initiated

Product || Country of origin || OJ Reference

None || - || -

New investigations terminated without imposition of measures

Product || Country of origin || Regulation/Decision N° || OJ Reference

Wireless wide area networking modems || P.R. China || Notice 2011/C 24/09 26.01.2011 || C 24 26.01.2011, p. 19

Issue of licences

Product || Country of origin || Regulation/Decision N° || OJ Reference

None || - || - || -

Safeguard measures which expired

Product || Country of origin || Date of expiry

None || - || -

ANNEX M

Undertakings accepted or repealed

during the period 1 January – 31 December 2011

(chronological by date of publication)

Undertakings accepted

Product || Country of origin || Regulation N° || OJ Reference

Zeolite A powder || Bosnia and Herzegovina || Commission Dec. No 2011/279/EU 13 May 2011 || L 125,14.5.2011, p. 26

Undertakings withdrawn or repealed

Product || Country of origin || Regulation N° || OJ Reference

none || || ||

Undertakings which expired/lapsed

Product || Country of origin || Original measure(s) & OJ Reference || OJ Reference

Coumarin || India || Commission Dec. No 2005/3/EC 03.01.2005 || L 180, 8.7.2011, p.1.

Potassium chloride || Russia || Commission Dec. No 2005/802/EC 17.10.2005 as last amended by Commission Dec. No 2006/557/EC 08.08.2006 || C 206, 12.7.2011, p. 18.

Urea and ammonium nitrate solutions || Algeria || Commission Reg. (EC) No 617/2000 16.03.2000 || C 373, 21.12.2011, p. 23.

Urea and ammonium nitrate solutions || Russia || Commission Dec. No 2008/649/EC 03.07.2008 || C 373, 21.12.2011, p. 23.

ANNEX N

Measures which expired / lapsed

during the period 1 January – 31 December 2011

(chronological
by date of publication)

A.           Anti-dumping
investigations (chronological by date of publication)

Product || Country of origin || Original measure & OJ Reference || Publication

Footwear with uppers of leather || P.R. China Macau (SAR) (ext.) Vietnam || Council Reg. (EC) No 1472/2006 05.10.2006 (OJ L275, 06.10.2006, p. 1) and extended as concerns China to imports consigned from Macau (SAR) by Council Reg. (EC) No 388/2008 29.04.2008 (OJ L117, 01.05.2008, p. 1) and maintained by Council Impl.Reg. (EU) No 1294/2009 22.12.2009 (OJ L352, 30.12.2009, p. 1) || C 82 16.03.2011 p. 4

Magnesia (deadburned) || P.R. China || Council Reg. (EC) No 716/2006 05.05.2006 (OJ L 125, 12.05.2006, p. 1) || C 146 17.05.2011 p. 12

Magnesia bricks || P.R. China || Council Reg. (EC) No 1659/2005 06.10.2005 (OJ L 267, 12.10.2005, p. 1) || L 166 25.06.2011 p. 1

Coumarin || P.R. China India (ext.) Thailand (ext.) Indonesia (ext.) Malaysia (ext.) || Council Reg. (EC) No 769/2002 07.05.2002 (OJ L 123, 09.05.2002, p. 1) as last amended by Council Reg. (EC) No 1854/2003 20.10.2003 (OJ L 272, 23.10.2003, p. 1) and extended to imports consigned from India and Thailand by Council Reg. (EC) No 2272/2004 22.12.2004 (OJ L 396, 31.12.2004, p. 18) and extended to imports consigned from Indonesia and Malaysia by Council Reg. (EC) No 1650/2006 07.11.2006 (OJ L 311, 10.11.2006, p. 1) and maintained by Council Reg. (EC) No 654/2008 29.04.2008 (OJ L 183, 11.07.2008, p. 1) || L 180 08.07.2011 p. 1

Potassium chloride || Belarus Russia || Council Reg. (EC) No 1050/2006 21.08.2006 (OJ L 191, 12.07.2006, p. 1) || C 206 12.07.2011 p. 18

Silicon carbide || P.R. China || Council Reg. (EC) No 1264/2006 11.07.2006 (OJ L 232, 25.08.2006, p. 1) || C 247 25.08.2011 p. 10

Side-by-side refrigerators (certain) || Korea (Rep. of) || Council Reg. (EC) No 1289/2006 25.08.2006 (OJ L 236, 31.08.2006, p. 11) || C 255 31.08.2011 p. 6

Urea and ammonium nitrate solutions || Algeria Belarus Russia Ukraine || Council Reg. (EC) No 1911/2006 19.12.2006 (OJ L 365, 21.12.2006, p. 26) as last amended by Council Reg. (EC) No 789/2008 24.07.2008 (OJ L 213, 08.08.2008, p. 14) and Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 1251/2009 18.12.2009 (OJ L 338, 19.12.2009, p. 5) || C 373 21.12.2011 p. 23

B.           Anti-subsidy
investigations (chronological by date of publication)

Product || Country of origin || Original measure & OJ Reference || Publication

PET film (polyethylene terephthalate) || India Brazil (ext.) Israel (ext.) || Council Reg. (EC) No 367/2006 27.02.2005 (OJ L68, 08.03.2006, p. 15) as last amended by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 806/2010 15.09.2010 (OJ L242, 15.09.2010, p. 6) and Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 206/2011 28.02.2011 (OJ L58, 03.03.2011, p. 18) || C 68 03.03.2011 p. 6

ANNEX O

Definitive anti-dumping measures in
force on 31 December 2011

A. Ranked by product (alphabetical)

Product || Origin || Measure || Regulation N° || Publication

Aluminium foil || Armenia Brazil P.R. China Brazil || Duties Undertakings || Council Reg. (EC) No 925/2009 24.09.2009 Commission Dec. No 2009/736/EC 05.10.2009 || L 262 06.10.2009 p. 1 L 262 06.10.2009 p. 50

Aluminium road wheels || P.R. China || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 964/2010 25.10.2010 || L 282 28.10.2010 p. 1

Ammonium nitrate || Russia || Duties Undertakings || 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 || 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

|| Ukraine || Duties (2 years) Undertakings || 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 || L 106 24.04.2007 p. 1 L 150 18.06.2010 p. 24 L 185 12.07.2007 p. 43

Barium carbonate || P.R. China || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1175/2005 18.07.2005 corrected by L 181, 04.07.2006, p. 111 || L 189 21.07.2005 p. 15

Bicycles || P.R. China || Duties || 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 and maintained by Council Impl. Reg. (EC) No 990/2011 03.10.2011 || 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 261 06.10.2011 p.2

Bicycle parts (extension to bicycles) || P.R. China || Duties || 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 || L 16 18.01.97 p. 1 L 183 14.07.05 p. 1 L 55 28.02.08 p. 1

Biodiesel || U.S.A. Canada (ext.) || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 599/2009 07.07.2009 and extended to imports consigned from Canada by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 444/2011 05.05.2011 || L 179 10.07.2009 p. 26 L 122 11.05.2011 p. 12

Candles, tapers and the like || P.R. China || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 393/2009 11.05.2009 || L 119 14.05.2009 p. 1

Cargo scanning systems || P.R. China || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 510/2010 14.06.2010 || L 150 16.06.2010 p. 1

Ceramic tiles || P.R. China || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 917/2011 12.09.2011 || L 238 15.09.2011 p. 1

Chamois leather || P.R. China || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1338/2006 08.09.2006 || L 251 14.09.2006 p. 1

Citric acid || P.R. China || Duties Undertakings || Council Reg. (EC) No 1193/2008 01.12.2008, corrected by C 346, 26.11.2011, p. 7 and 8 || L 323 03.12.2008 p. 1

Citrus fruits || P.R. China || Duties || Commission Reg. (EC) No 1355/2008 18.12.2008 || L 350 30.12.2008 p. 35

Coated fine paper || P.R. China || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 451/2011 06.05.2011 || L 128 14.05.2011 p. 1

Coke of coal in pieces with a diameter of more than 80 mm || P.R. China || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 239/2008 17.03.2008 || L 75 18.03.2008 p. 22

Dicyandiamide || P.R. China || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1331/2007 13.11.2007 || L 296 15.11.2007 p. 1

Dihydromyrcenol || India || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 63/2008 21.01.2008 || L 23 26.01.2008 p. 1

Ethanolamines || U.S.A. || Duties (2 years) || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 54/2010 19.01.2010 || L 17 22.01.2010 p. 1

Fasteners (iron or steel) || P.R. China Malaysia (ext.) || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 91/2009 26.01.2009 and extended to such imports consigned from Malaysia by Council Impl. Reg. (EC) No 723/2011 18.07.2011 || L 29 31.01.2009 p. 1 L 194 26.07.2011 p. 6

Fatty alcohols and their blends || India Indonesia Malaysia || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 1138/2011 08.11.2011 || L 293 11.11.2011 p. 1

Ferro-silicon || P.R. China Egypt Kazakhstan F.Y.R.O.M. Russia || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 172/2008 25.02.2008 || L 55 28.02.2008 p. 6

Furfuraldehyde || P.R. China || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 639/2005 25.04.2005 and maintained by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 453/2011 04.05.2011 || L 107 28.04.2005 p. 1 L 123 12.05.2011 p. 1

Glass fibres (certain open mesh fabrics) || P.R. China || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 791/2011 03.08.2011 || L 204 09.08.2011 p. 1

Glass fibre products (continuous filament) || P.R. China || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 248/2011 09.03.2011 || L 67 15.03.2011 p. 1

Graphite electrode systems || India || Duties || 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 || L 295 18.09.2004 p. 10 L 350 30.12.2008 p. 24 L 332 16.12.2010 p. 17

Hand pallet trucks and their essential parts || P.R. China Thailand (ext) || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1174/2005 18.07.2005 as last amended by 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 and maintained by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 1008/2011 10.10.2011 || L 189 21.07.2005 p. 1 L 192 19.07.2008 p. 1 L 151 16.06.2009 p. 1 L 268 13.10.2011 p.1

Ironing boards || P.R. China Ukraine || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 452/2007 23.04.2007, 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 || 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

P.R. China (Since Hardware) || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 1243/2010 20.12.2010 || L 338 22.12.2010 p. 22

Lever arch mechanisms || P.R. China || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1136/2006 24.07.2006 || L 205 27.07.2006 p. 1

Lighters (non-refillable and refillable) || P.R. China Taiwan || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1458/2007 12.12.2007 || L 326 12.12.2007 p. 1

Manganese dioxides || South Africa || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 221/2008 10.03.2008 || L 69 13.03.2008 p. 1

Melamine || P.R. China || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 457/2011 10.05.2011 || L 124 13.05.2011 p. 2

Molybdenum wires || P.R. China || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 511/2010 14.06.2010 || L 150 16.06.2010 p. 17

Monosodium glutamate || P.R. China || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1187/2008 27.11.2008 || L 322 02.12.2008 p. 1

Okoumé plywood || P.R. China || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1942/2004 02.11.2004 and maintained by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 82/2011 31.01.2011 || L 336 12.11.2004 p. 4 L 28 02.02.2011 p. 1

Peroxosulphates || P.R. China Taiwan U.S.A. || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1184/2007 09.10.2007 || L 265 11.10.2007 p. 1

Plastic sacks and bags || P.R. China Thailand || 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 as last amended by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 474/2011 03.05.2011 || L 270 29.09.2006 p. 4 L 76 19.03.2008 p. 8 L 67 12.03.2009 p. 5 L 131 18.05.2011 p. 2

Polyester yarn (high tenacity) || P.R. China || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 1105/2010 29.11.2010 || L 315 01.12.2010 p. 1

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) || India Indonesia Korea (Rep. of) Malaysia Taiwan Thailand India Indonesia || Duties Undertakings || Council Reg. (EC) No 192/2007 22.02.2007 corrected by L 215, 18.08.2007, p. 27 and amended by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 906/2011 02.09.2011 Commission Dec. (EC) No 745/2000 29.11.2000 || L 59 27.02.2007 p. 1 L 232 09.09.2011 p. 19 L 301 30.11.2000 p. 88

|| P.R. China || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1467/2004 13.08.2004 as last amended by Council Reg. (EC) No 2167/2005 20.12.2005 and maintained by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 1030/2010 17.11.2010 || L 271 19.08.2004 p. 1 L 345 28.12.2005 p. 11 L 300 17.11.2010 p. 1

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film || India Brazil (ext.) Israel (ext.) || Duties || 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 and Council Impl. Reg (EU) No 205/2011 28.02.2011 as last amended by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 469/2011 13.05.2011 || L 288 06.11.2007 p. 1 L 6 10.01.2009 p. 1 L 242 15.09.2010 p. 6 L 58 03.03.2011 p. 14 L 129 17.05.2011 p. 1

Powdered activated carbon (PAC) || P.R. China || Duties || 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 || L 155 14.06.2002 p. 1 L 133 29.05.2003 p. 36 L 181 10.07.2008 p. 1

PSC wires and strands || P.R. China || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 383/2009 05.05.2009 || L 118 13.05.2009 p. 1

Ring binders || Thailand || Duties || Council Impl. Reg (EU) No 792/2011 05.08.2011 || L 204 09.08.2011 p.11

Ring binders || P.R. China Vietnam (ext.) Laos (ext.) || Duties || 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 || 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

Saddles (certain) || P.R. China || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 691/2007 18.06.2007 || L 160 21.06.2007 p. 1

Seamless pipes and tubes of iron or steel || Croatia Russia Ukraine || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 954/2006 27.06.2006 as last amended by Council Reg. (EC) No 812/2008 11.08.2008 || L 175 29.06.2006 p. 4 L 220 15.08.2008 p. 1

Seamless pipes and tubes of iron or steel || P.R. China || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 926/2009 24.09.2009 || L 262 06.10.2009 p. 19

Seamless pipes and tubes of stainless steel || P.R. China || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 1331/2011 14.12.2011 || L 336 20.12.2011 p. 6

Silico-manganese || P.R. China Kazakhstan || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1420/2007 04.12.2007 as last amended by Council Reg. (EC) No 865/2008 27.08.2008 || L 317 05.12.2007 p. 5

Silicon metal || P.R. China Korea (Rep. of) (ext.) || Duties || 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 || L 66 04.03.2004 p. 15 L 13 19.01.2007 p. 1 L 131 29.05.2010 p. 1

Sodium cyclamate || P.R. China Indonesia || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 435/2004 08.03.2004 || L 72 11.03.2004 p. 1

Sodium gluconate || P.R. China || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 965/2010 25.10.2010 || L 282 28.10.2010 p. 24

Stainless steel fasteners and parts thereof || P.R. China Taiwan || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1890/2005 14.11.2005 corrected by L 256, 02.10.2007, p. 31 || L 302 19.11.2005 p. 1

Steel ropes and cables || P.R. China South Africa Ukraine Korea (Rep. of) (ext.) Moldova (Rep. of) (ext.) Morocco (ext.) || Duties || 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 corrected by L 332, 15.12.2011 || 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

|| Russia || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1279/2007 30.10.2007 corrected by L 96, 15.04.2009, p. 39 || L 285 31.10.2007 p. 1

Strawberries (frozen) || P.R. China || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 407/2007 16.04.2007 || L 100 17.04.2007 p. 1

Sulphanilic acid || P.R. China India India || Duties Undertakings || 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 || 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

Sweet corn (prepared or preserved, in kernels) || Thailand || Duties || 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 159 20.06.2007 p. 14 L 260 30.09.2008 p. 1 L 246 18.09.2009 p. 1

Synthetic fibre ropes || India || Duties (3 years) || Council Reg. (EC) No 1736/2004 08.10.2004 and maintained by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 1242/2010 20.12.2010 || L 311 08.10.2004 p. 1 L 338 22.12.2010 p. 10

Tartaric acid || P.R. China || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 130/2006 23.01.2006 as last amended by Council Reg. (EC) No 150/2008 18.02.2008 || L 23 27.01.2006 p. 1 L 48 22.02.2008 p. 1

Trichloroisocyanuric acid (TCCA) || P.R. China || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1631/2005 03.10.2005 and maintained by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 1389/2011 || L 261 07.10.2005 p. 1 L 346 30.12.2011 p. 6

Tube and pipe fitting, of iron or steel || P.R. China Thailand Taiwan (ext.) Indonesia (ext.) Sri Lanka (ext.) Philippines (ext.) || 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 || 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

Korea (Rep. of) Malaysia || Duties || 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 || 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

Tungsten carbide and fused tungsten carbide || P.R. China || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 2268/2004 22.12.2004 as last amended by Council Reg. (EC) No 1275/2005 25.07.2005 and maintained by Council Impl. Reg. (EC) No 287/2011 21.03.2011 || L 395 31.12.2004 p. 56 L 202 03.08.2005 p. 1 L 78 24.03.2011 p. 1

Tungsten electrodes || P.R. China || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 260/2007 09.03.2007 || L 72 13.03.2007 p. 1

Welded tubes and pipes, of iron or non-alloy steel || Thailand Ukraine || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1697/2002 23.09.2002 and maintained by Council Reg. (EC) No 1256/2008 19.12.2008 || L 259 27.09.2002 p. 8 L 343 19.12.2008 p. 1

Welded tubes and pipes, of iron or non-alloy steel || Belarus P.R. China Russia || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1256/2008 16.12.2008 || L 343 19.12.2008 p. 1

Wire rod || P.R. China || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 703/2009 27.07.2009 || L 203 05.08.2009 p. 1

Zeolite A powder || Bosnia and Herzegovina || Duties Undertakings || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 464/2011 11.05.2011 Commission Dec. No 2011/279/EU 13.05.2011 || L 125 14.05.2011 p. 1 L 125 14.05.2011 p. 26

B. Ranked by country (alphabetical)

Origin || Product || Measure || Regulation N° || Publication

Armenia || Aluminium foil || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 925/2009 24.09.2009 || L 262 06.10.2009 p. 1

Belarus || Welded tubes and pipes, of iron or non-alloy steel || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1256/2008 16.12.2008 || L 343 19.12.2008 p. 1

Bosnia and Herzegovina || Zeolite A powder || Duties Undertakings || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 464/2011 11.05.2011 Commission Dec. No 2011/279/EU 13.05.2011 || L 125 14.05.2011 p. 1 L 125 14.05.2011 p. 26

Brazil || Aluminium foil || Duties Undertakings || Council Reg. (EC) No 925/2009 24.09.2009 Commission Dec. No 2009/736/EC 05.10.2009 || L 262 06.10.2009 p. 1 L 262 06.10.2009 p. 50

|| PET (polyethylene terephthalate) film (ext.) || Duties (ext.) || 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 and Council Impl. Reg (EU) No 205/2011 28.02.2011 as last amended by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 469/2011 13.05.2011 || L 288 06.11.2007 p. 1 L 6 10.01.2009 p. 1 L 242 15.09.2010 p. 6 L 58 03.03.2011 p. 14 L 129 17.05.2011 p. 1

Canada || Biodiesel (ext.) || Duties (ext.) || Council Reg. (EC) No 599/2009 07.07.2009 and extended to imports consigned from Canada by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 444/2011 05.05.2011 || L 179 10.07.2009 p. 26 L 122 11.05.2011 p. 12

P.R. China || Aluminium foil || Duties Undertakings || Council Reg. (EC) No 925/2009 24.09.2009 Commission Dec. No 2009/736/EC 05.10.2009 || L 262 06.10.2009 p. 1 L 262 06.10.2009 p. 50

|| Aluminium road wheels || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 964/2010 25.10.2010 || L 282 28.10.2010 p. 1

|| Barium carbonate || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 831/2011 16.08.2011 || L 214 19.08.2011 p. 1

|| Bicycles || Duties || 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 and maintained by Council Impl. Reg. (EC) No 990/2011 03.10.2011 || 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 261 06.10.2011 p.2

|| Bicycle parts || Duties || 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 || L 16 18.01.97 p. 1

|| Candles, tapers and the like || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 393/2009 11.05.2009 || L 119 14.05.2009 p. 1

|| Cargo scanning systems || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 510/2010 14.06.2010 || L 150 16.06.2010 p. 1

|| Ceramic tiles || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 917/2011 12.09.2011 || L 238 15.09.2011 p. 1

|| Chamois leather || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1338/2006 08.09.2006 || L 251 14.09.2006 p. 1

|| Citric acid || Duties Undertakings || Council Reg. (EC) No 1193/2008 01.12.2008 || L 323 03.12.2008 p. 1

|| Citrus fruits || Duties || Commission Reg. (EC) No 1355/2008 18.12.2008 || L 350 30.12.2008 p. 35

|| Coated fine paper || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 451/2011 06.05.2011 || L 128 14.05.2011 p. 1

|| Coke of coal in pieces with a diameter of more than 80 mm || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 239/2008 17.03.2008 || L 75 18.03.2008 p. 22

|| Dicyandiamide || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1331/2007 13.11.2007 || L 296 15.11.2007 p. 1

|| Ferro-silicon || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 172/2008 25.02.2008 || L 55 28.02.2008 p. 6

|| Furfuraldehyde || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 639/2005 25.04.2005 and maintained by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 453/2011 04.05.2011 || L 107 28.04.2005 p. 1 L 123 12.05.2011 p. 1

|| Glass fibre products (continuous filament) || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 248/2011 09.03.2011 || L 67 15.03.2011 p. 1

|| Glass fibres (certain open mesh fabrics) || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 791/2011 03.08.2011 || L 204 09.08.2011 p. 1

|| Hand pallet trucks and their essential parts || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1174/2005 18.07.2005 as last amended by Council Reg. (EC) No 684/2008 17.07.2008 and maintained by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 1008/2011 10.10.2011 || L 189 21.07.2005 p. 1 L 192 19.07.2005 p. 1 L 268 13.10.2011 p.1

|| Ironing boards || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 452/2007 23.04.2007 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 || 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

|| Ironing boards (Since Hardware) || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 1243/2010 20.12.2010 || L 338 22.12.2010 p. 22

|| Lever arch mechanisms || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1136/2006 24.07.2006 || L 205 27.07.2006 p. 1

|| Lighters (non-refillable and refillable) || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1458/2007 12.12.2007 || L 326 12.12.2007 p. 1

|| Melamine || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 457/2011 10.05.2011 || L 124 13.05.2011 p. 2

|| Molybdenum wires || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 511/2010 14.06.2010 || L 150 16.06.2010 p. 17

|| Monosodium glutamate || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1187/2008 27.11.2008 || L 322 02.12.2008 p. 1

|| Okoumé plywood || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1942/2004 02.11.2004 and maintained by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 82/2011 31.01.2011 || L 336 12.11.2004 p. 4 L 28 02.02.2011 p. 1

|| Peroxosulphates || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1184/2007 09.10.2007 || L 265 11.10.2007 p. 1

|| Plastic sacks and bags || 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 as last amended by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 474/2011 03.05.2011 || L 270 29.09.2006 p. 4 L 76 19.03.2008 p. 8 L 67 12.03.2009 p. 5 L 131 18.05.2011 p. 2

|| Polyester yarn (high tenacity) || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 1105/2010 29.11.2010 || L 315 01.12.2010 p. 1

|| Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1467/2004 13.08.2004 as last amended by Council Reg. (EC) No 2167/2005 20.12.2005 and maintained by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 1030/2010 17.11.2010 || L 271 19.08.2004 p. 1 L 345 28.12.2005 p. 11 L 300 17.11.2010 p. 1

|| Powdered activated carbon (PAC) || Duties || 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 || L 155 14.06.2002 p. 1 L 133 29.05.2003 p. 36 L 181 10.07.2008 p. 1

|| PSC wires and strands || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 383/2009 05.05.2009 || L 118 13.05.2009 p. 1

|| Ring binders || Duties || 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 || 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

|| Saddles || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 691/2007 18.06.2007 || L 160 21.06.2007 p. 1

|| Seamless pipes and tubes of iron or steel || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 926/2009 24.09.2009 || L 262 06.10.2009 p. 19

|| Seamless pipes and tubes of stainless steel || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 1331/2011 14.12.2011 || L 336 20.12.2011 p. 6

|| Silico-manganese || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1420/2007 04.12.2007 as last amended by Council Reg. (EC) No 865/2008 27.08.2008 || L 317 05.12.2007 p. 5

|| Silicon metal || Duties || 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 || L 66 04.03.2004 p. 15 L 13 19.01.2007 p. 1 L 131 29.05.2010 p. 1

|| Sodium cyclamate || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 435/2004 08.03.2004 and maintained by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 492/2010 03.06.2010 || L 72 11.03.2004 p. 1 L 140 08.06.2010 p. 2

|| Sodium gluconate || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 965/2010 25.10.2010 || L 282 28.10.2010 p. 24

|| Stainless steel fasteners and parts thereof || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1890/2005 14.11.2005 corrected by L 256, 02.10.2007, p. 31 || L 302 19.11.2005 p. 1

|| Steel fasteners (iron or steel) || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 91/2009 26.01.2009 and extended to such imports consigned from Malaysia by Council Impl. Reg. (EC) No 723/2011 18.07.2011 || L 29 31.01.2009 p. 1 L 194 26.07.2011 p. 6

|| Steel ropes and cables || Duties || 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 corrected by L 332, 15.12.2011, p. 26 || 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

|| Strawberries (frozen) || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 407/2007 16.04.2007 || L 100 17.04.2007 p. 1

|| Sulphanilic acid || Duties || 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 || L 196 25.07.2002 p. 11 L 22 26.01.2006 p. 5 L 275 16.10.2008 p. 1

|| Tartaric acid || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 130/2006 23.01.2006 as last amended by Council Reg. (EC) No 150/2008 18.02.2008 || L 23 27.01.2006 p. 1 L 48 22.02.2008 p. 1

|| Trichloroisocyanuric acid || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1631/2005 03.10.2005 and maintained by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 1389/2011 || L 261 07.10.2005 p. 1 L 346 30.12.2011 p. 6

|| Tube and pipe fitting, of iron or steel || 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 || 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

|| Tungsten carbide and fused tungsten carbide || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 2268/2004 22.12.2004 as last amended by Council Reg. (EC) No 1275/2005 25.07.2005 and maintained by Council Impl. Reg. (EC) No 287/2011 21.03.2011 || L 395 31.12.2004 p. 56 L 202 03.08.2005 p. 1 L 78 24.03.2011 p. 1

|| Tungsten electrodes || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 260/2007 09.03.2007 || L 72 13.03.2007 p. 1

|| Welded tubes and pipes, of iron or non-alloy steel || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1256/2008 16.12.2008 || L 343 19.12.2008 p. 1

|| Wire rod || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 703/2009 27.07.2009 || L 203 05.08.2009 p. 1

Croatia || Seamless pipes and tubes of iron or steel || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 954/2006 27.06.2006 || L 175 29.06.2006 p. 4

Egypt || Ferro-silicon || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 172/2008 25.02.2008 || L 55 28.02.2008 p. 6

India || Dihydromyrcenol || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 63/2008 21.01.2008 || L 23 26.01.2008 p. 1

|| Fatty alcohols and their blends || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 1138/2011 08.11.2011 || L 293 11.11.2011 p. 1

|| Graphite electrode systems || Duties || 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 || L 295 18.09.2004 p. 10 L 350 30.12.2008 p. 24 L 332 16.12.2010 p. 17

|| Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) || Duties Undertakings || Council Reg. (EC) No 192/2007 22.02.2007 corrected by L 215, 18.08.2007, p. 27 || L 59 27.02.2007 p. 1

|| Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film || Duties || 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 and Council Impl. Reg (EU) No 205/2011 28.02.2011 as last amended by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 469/2011 13.05.2011 || L 288 06.11.2007 p. 1 L 6 10.01.2009 p. 1 L 242 15.09.2010 p. 6 L 58 03.03.2011 p. 14 L 129 17.05.2011 p. 1

|| Sulphanilic acid || Duties Undertakings || 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 || 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

|| Synthetic fibre ropes || Duties (3 years) || Council Reg. (EC) No 1736/2004 08.10.2004 and maintained by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 1242/2010 20.12.2010 || L 311 08.10.2004 p. 1 L 338 22.12.2010 p. 10

Indonesia || Fatty alcohols and their blends || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 1138/2011 08.11.2011 || L 293 11.11.2011 p. 1

|| Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) || Duties Undertakings || Council Reg. (EC) No 192/2007 22.02.2007 corrected by L 215, 18.08.2007, p. 27 || L 59 27.02.2007 p. 1

|| Sodium cyclamate || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 435/2004 08.03.2004 and maintained by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 492/2010 03.06.2010 || L 72 11.03.2004 p. 1 L 140 08.06.2010 p. 2

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

Israel || Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film (ext.) || Duties (ext.) || 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 and Council Impl. Reg (EU) No 205/2011 28.02.2011 as last amended by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 469/2011 13.05.2011 || L 288 06.11.2007 p. 1 L 6 10.01.2009 p. 1 L 242 15.09.2010 p. 6 L 58 03.03.2011 p. 14 L 129 17.05.2011 p. 1

Kazakhstan || Ferro-silicon || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 172/2008 25.02.2008 || L 55 28.02.2008 p. 6

|| Silico-manganese || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1420/2007 04.12.2007 as last amended by Council Reg. (EC) No 865/2008 27.08.2008 || L 317 05.12.2007 p. 5

Korea (Rep. of) || Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 192/2007 22.02.2007 corrected by L 215, 18.08.2007, p. 27 || L 59 27.02.2007 p. 1

|| Silicon metal (ext.) || Duties (ext.) || 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 || L 66 04.03.2004 p. 15 L 13 19.01.2007 p. 1

|| Steel ropes and cables (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 and extended as concerns China to such imports consigned from Korea (Rep. of) by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 400/2010 26.04.2010 corrected by L 332, 15.12.2011, p. 26 || 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

|| Tube and pipe fittings, of iron or steel || Duties || 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 || L 228 24.08.2002 p. 1 L 114 08.05.2003 p. 1 L 275 16.10.2008 p. 18

Laos || Ring binders (ext.) || Duties (ext.) || 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 || 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

F.Y.R.O.M || Ferro-silicon || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 172/2008 25.02.2008 || L 55 28.02.2008 p. 6

Malaysia || Fasteners (iron or steel) || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 91/2009 26.01.2009 and extended to such imports consigned from Malaysia by Council Impl. Reg. (EC) No 723/2011 18.07.2011 || L 29 31.01.2009 p. 1 L 194 26.07.2011 p. 6

|| Fatty alcohols and their blends || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 1138/2011 08.11.2011 || L 293 11.11.2011 p. 1

|| Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 192/2007 22.02.2007 corrected by L 215, 18.08.2007, p. 27 || L 59 27.02.2007 p. 1

|| || || ||

|| Tube and pipe fittings, of iron or steel || Duties || 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 || 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

Moldova (Rep. of) || Steel ropes and cables (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 corrected by L 332, 15.12.2011, p. 26 || 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

Morocco || Steel ropes and cables (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 and extended as concerns China to such imports consigned from Korea (Rep. of) by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 400/2010 26.04.2010 corrected by L 332, 15.12.2011, p. 26 || 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

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

Russia || Ammonium nitrate || Duties Undertakings || 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 || 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

|| Ferro-silicon || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 172/2008 25.02.2008 || L 55 28.02.2008 p. 6

|| Seamless pipes and tubes of iron or steel || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 954/2006 27.06.2006 as last amended by Council Reg. (EC) No 812/2008 11.08.2008 || L 175 29.06.2006 p. 4 L 220 15.08.2008 p. 1

|| Steel ropes and cables || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1279/2007 30.10.2007 corrected by L 96, 15.04.2009, p. 39 || L 285 31.10.2007 p. 1

|| Welded tubes and pipes, of iron or non-alloy steel || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1256/2008 16.12.2008 || L 343 19.12.2008 p. 1

South Africa || Manganese dioxides || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 221/2008 10.03.2008 || L 69 13.03.2008 p. 1

|| Steel ropes and cables || Duties || 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 corrected by L 332, 15.12.2011, p. 26 || 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

Sri Lanka || Tube and pipe fitting, of iron or steel (ext.) || Duties (ext.) || 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 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

Taiwan || Lighters (non-refillable and refillable) || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1458/2007 12.12.2007 || L 326 12.12.2007 p. 1

|| Peroxosulphates || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1184/2007 09.10.2007 || L 265 11.10.2007 p. 1

|| Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 192/2007 22.02.2007 corrected by L 215, 18.08.2007, p. 27 || L 59 27.02.2007 p. 1

|| Stainless steel fasteners and parts thereof || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1890/2005 14.11.2005 corrected by L 256, 02.10.2007, p. 31 || L 302 19.11.2005 p. 1

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

Thailand || Hand pallet trucks and their essential parts (ext.) || Duties (ext.) || 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 and maintained by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 1008/2011 10.10.2011 || L 189 21.07.2005 p. 1 L 192 19.07.2008 p. 1 L 151 16.06.2009 p. 1 L 268 13.10.2011 p.1

|| Plastic sacks and bags || 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, as last amended by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 474/2011 03.05.2011 || L 270 29.09.2006 p. 4 L 76 19.03.2008 p. 8 L 67 12.03.2009 p. 5 L 131 18.05.2011 p. 2

|| Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 192/2007 22.02.2007, corrected by L 215, 18.08.2007, p. 27 || L 59 27.02.2007 p. 1

|| Ring binders || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 792/2011 05.08.2011 || L 204 09.08.2011 p. 1

|| Sweet corn (prepared or preserved, in kernels) || Duties || 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 159 20.06.2007 p. 14 L 260 30.09.2008 p. 1 L 246 18.09.2009 p. 1

|| Tube and pipe fitting, of iron or steel || 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 || 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

|| Welded tubes and pipes, of iron or non-alloy steel || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1697/2002 23.09.2002 and maintained by Council Reg. (EC) No 1256/2008 19.12.2008 || L 259 27.09.2002 p. 8 L 343 19.12.2008 p. 1

Ukraine || Ammonium nitrate || Duties (2 years) Undertakings || 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 || L 106 24.04.2007 p. 1 L 150 18.06.2010 p. 24 L 185 12.07.2007 p. 43

|| Ironing boards || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 452/2007 23.04.2007 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 || 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

|| Seamless pipes and tubes of iron or steel || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 954/2006 27.06.2006 || L 175 29.06.2006 p. 4

|| Steel ropes and cables || Duties || 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 corrected by L 332, 15.12.2011, p. 26 || 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

|| Welded tubes and pipes, of iron or non-alloy steel || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1697/2002 23.09.2002 and maintained by Council Reg. (EC) No 1256/2008 16.12.2008 || L 259 27.09.2002 p. 8 L 343 19.12.2008 p. 1

U.S.A. || Biodiesel || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 599/2009 07.07.2009 and extended to imports consigned from Canada by Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 444/2011 05.05.2011 || L 179 10.07.2009 p. 26 L 122 11.05.2011 p. 12

|| Ethanolamines || Duties (2 years) || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 54/2010 19.01.2010 || L 17 22.01.2010 p. 1

|| Peroxosulphates || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1184/2007 09.10.2007 || L 265 11.10.2007 p. 1

Vietnam || Ring binders (ext.) || Duties (ext.) || 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 || 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

ANNEX P

Definitive anti-subsidy measures in force on 31 December 2011

A. Ranked by product (alphabetical)

Product || Origin || Measure || Regulation N° || Publication

Biodiesel (AS) || U.S.A. Canada (ext.) || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 598/2009 07.07.2009 and extended to imports consigned from Canada Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 443/2011 05.05.2011 || L 179 10.07.2009 p. 1 L 122 11.05.2011 p. 1

Coated fine paper (AS) || P.R. China || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 452/2011 06.05.2011 || L 128 14.05.2011 p. 18

Graphite electrode systems (AS) || India || Duties || 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 || L 295 18.09.2004 p. 4 L 350 30.12.2008 p. 24 L 332 16.12.2010 p. 1

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) (AS) || India || Duties Undertakings || 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 || L 59 27.02.2007 p. 34 L 340 19.12.2008 p. 1 L 59 27.02.2007 p. 34

|| Iran Pakistan U.A.E. || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 857/2010 27.09.2010 || L 254 29.09.2010 p. 10

Stainless steel bars and rods (AS) || India || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 405/2011 19.04.2011 || L 108 28.04.2011 p. 3

Sulphanilic acid (AS) || India || Duties Undertakings || 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 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

B. Ranked by country (alphabetical)

Origin || Product || Measure || Regulation N° || Publication

Canada || Biodiesel (AS) (ext.) || Duties (ext.) || Council Reg. (EC) No 598/2009 07.07.2009 and extended to imports consigned from Canada Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 443/2011 05.05.2011 || L 179 10.07.2009 p. 1 L 122 11.05.2011 p. 1

P.R. China || Coated fine paper (AS) || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 452/2011 06.05.2011 || L 128 14.05.2011 p. 18

India || Graphite electrode systems (AS) || Duties || 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 || L 295 18.09.2004 p. 4 L 350 30.12.2008 p. 24 L 332 16.12.2010 p. 1

|| Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) (AS) || Duties Undertakings || Council Reg. (EC) No 193/2007 22.02.2007 as last amended by Council Reg. (EC) No 1286/2008 19.12.2008 Council Reg. (EC) No 193/2007 22.02.2007 corrected by L 215, 18.08.2007, p. 27 || L 59 27.02.2007 p. 34 L 340 19.12.2008 p. 1 L 59 27.02.2007 p. 34

|| Stainless steel bars and rods (AS) || Duties || Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 405/2011 19.04.2011 || L 108 28.04.2011 p. 3

|| Sulphanilic acid (AS) || Duties Undertakings || 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 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

Iran || Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) (AS) || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1289/2006 277.08.2006 || L 254 29.09.2010 p. 10

Pakistan || Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) (AS) || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1289/2006 277.08.2006 || L 254 29.09.2010 p. 10

U.A.E. || Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) (AS) || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 1289/2006 277.08.2006 || L 254 29.09.2010 p. 10

U.S.A. || Biodiesel (AS) || Duties || Council Reg. (EC) No 598/2009 07.07.2009 and extended to imports consigned from Canada Council Impl. Reg. (EU) No 443/2011 05.05.2011 || L 179 10.07.2009 p. 1 L 122 11.05.2011 p. 1

ANNEX Q

Undertakings in force on 31 December 2011

A. Ranked by product (alphabetical)

Product || Origin || Measure || Regulation N° || Publication

Aluminium foil || Brazil || Undertakings || Commission Dec. No 2009/736/EC 05.10.2009 || L 262 06.10.2009 p. 50

Ammonium nitrate || Russia Ukraine || Undertakings || Commission Dec. No 2008/577/EC 04.07.2008 corrected by L 339, 22.12.2009, p. 59 || L 185 12.07.2008 p. 43

Citric acid || P.R. China || Undertakings || Commission Dec. No 2008/899/EC 02.12.2008 corrected by C 346, 26.11.2011, p. 8 || L 323 03.12.2008 p. 62

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) || India Indonesia || Undertakings || Council Reg. (EC) No 192/2007 22.02.2007 || L 59 27.02.2007 p. 1

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) (AS) || India || Undertakings || Council Reg. (EC) No 193/2007 22.02.2007 corrected by L 215, 18.08.2007, p. 27 || L 59 27.02.2007 p. 34

Sulphanilic acid (AD + AS) || India || Undertakings || Commission Dec. No 2006/37/EC 05.12.2006 || L 22 26.01.2006 p. 52

Zeolite A powder || Bosnia and Herzegovina || Undertakings || Commission Dec. No 2011/279/EU 13.05.2011 || L 125 14.05.2011 p. 26

B. Ranked by country (alphabetical)

Origin || Product || Measure || Regulation N° || Publication

Bosnia and Herzegovina || Zeolite A powder || Undertakings || Commission Dec. No 2011/279/EU 13.05.2011 || L 125 14.05.2011 p. 26

Brazil || Aluminium foil || Undertakings || Commission Dec. No 2009/736/EC 05.10.2009 || L 262 06.10.2009 p. 50

P.R. China || Citric acid || Undertakings || Commission Dec. No 2008/899/EC 02.12.2008 corrected by C 346, 26.11.2011, p. 8 || L 323 03.12.2008 p. 62

India || Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) || Undertakings || Council Reg. (EC) No 192/2007 22.02.2007 || L 59 27.02.2007 p. 1

|| Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) (AS) || Undertakings || Council Reg. (EC) No 193/2007 22.02.2007 corrected by L 215, 18.08.2007, p. 27 || L 59 27.02.2007 p. 34

|| Sulphanilic acid (AD + AS) || Undertakings || Commission Dec. No 2006/37/EC 05.12.2006 || L 22 26.01.2006 p. 52

Indonesia || Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) || Undertakings || Council Reg. (EC) No 192/2007 22.02.2007 || L 59 27.02.2007 p. 1

Russia || Ammonium nitrate || Undertakings || Commission Dec. No 2008/577/EC 04.07.2008 corrected by L 339, 22.12.2009, p. 59 || L 185 12.07.2008 p. 43

Ukraine || Ammonium nitrate || Undertakings || Commission Dec. No 2008/577/EC 04.07.2008 corrected by L 339, 22.12.2009, p. 59 || L 185 12.07.2008 p. 43

ANNEX R

Anti-dumping & anti-subsidy
investigations pending

on 31 December 2011

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

Product || AD/AS || Origin || Type || Publication

Aluminium foil || AD.582 || P.R. China || Initiation || C 371 20.12.2011, p. 4

Aluminium radiators || AD.578 || P.R. China || Initiation || C 236 12.08.2011, p. 18

Bioethanol || AD.580 || U.S.A. || Initiation || C 345 25.11.2011, p. 7

Bioethanol (AS) || AS.581 || U.S.A. || Initiation || C 345 25.11.2011, p. 13

Citrus fruits || AD.524a || P.R. China || Initiation || C 353 03.12.2011, p. 15

Organic coated steel products || AD.584 || P.R. China || Initiation || C 373 21.12.2011, p. 16

Oxalic acid || AD.568 || India P.R. China || Initiation Prov. Duty || C 24 26.01.2011, p. 8 L275 20.10.2011, p. 1

Seamless pipes and tubes of iron or steel (certain) || AD.575 || Belarus || Initiation || C 187 28.06.2011, p. 22

Sodium Cyclamate || AD.571 || P.R. China || Initiation || C 50 17.02.2011, p. 9

Soy protein products (certain concentrated) || AD.572 || P.R. China || Initiation || C 121 19.04.2011, p. 71

Stainless steel fasteners || AD.573 || India || Initiation || C 142 13.05.2011, p. 30

Stainless steel fasteners (AS) || AS.574 || India || Initiation || C 142 13.05.2011, p. 36

Tartaric acid || AD.577 || P.R. China || Initiation || C 223 29.07.2011, p. 11

Tube and pipe fittings of iron or steel || AD.579 || Russia Turkey || Initiation || C 320 01.11.2011, p. 4

Vinyl acetate || AD.566 || U.S.A. || Initiation || C 327 04.12.2010, p. 23

White phosphorous || AD.583 || Kazakhstan || Initiation || C 369 17.12.2011, p. 19

Woven and/or stitched glass fibre fabrics || AD.576 || P.R. China || Initiation || C 222 28.07.2010, p. 12

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

Product || R. No || Origin || Type of review || Publication

Chamois leather || R.532 || P.R. China || Expiry review || C 270 13.09.2011, p. 6

Ferro-silicon || R.514 || Russia || Partial interim review || C 290 27.10.2010, p. 15

Furfuraldehyde || R.526 || P.R. China || Full interim review || C 196 05.07.2011, p. 9

Glass fibres (certain open mesh fabrics) || R.539 || P.R. China || Circumvention review || L 204 09.08.2011, p. 1

Iron or steel fasteners || R.540 || Malaysia || New exporter review || L 297 16.11.2011, p. 53

Lever arch mechanisms || R.530 || P.R. China || Expiry review || C 217 23.07.2011, p. 35

Molybdenum wires || R.525 || P.R. China || Circumvention review || L 131 18.05.2011, p. 14

Plastic sacs and bags (certain) || R.510 || P.R. China || Partial interim review || C 253 21.09.2010, p. 2

Plastic sacs and bags (certain) || R.536 || P.R. China Thailand || Expiry review || C 283 27.09.2011, p. 11

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) || R.523 || India || Partial interim review || C 102 02.04.2011, p. 18

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) (AS) || R.524 || India || Partial interim review || C 102 02.04.2011, p. 15

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film || R.513 || India || Partial interim review || C 294 29.10.2010, p. 10

PSC wires and strands || R.534 || P.R. China || Partial interim review || C 291 04.10.2011, p. 6

Seamless pipes and tubes of iron or steel || R.528 || Croatia Russia Ukraine || Expiry review || C 187 28.06.2011, p. 16

Seamless pipes and tubes of iron or steel || R.537 || Russia || Partial interim review || C 303 14.10.2011, p. 11

Seamless pipes and tubes of iron or steel || R.531 || Ukraine || Partial interim review || C 223 29.07.2011, p. 8

Sodium cyclamate || R.522 || P.R. China || Partial interim review || C 50 17.02.2011, p. 6

Stainless steel fasteners and parts thereof || R.518 || P.R. China Taiwan || Expiry review || C 315 19.11.2010, p. 7

Steel ropes and cables || R.517 || P.R. China South Africa Ukraine || Expiry review || C 309 13.11.2010, p. 6

Steel wire ropes and cables (SWR) || R.533 || Korea (Rep. of) || New exporter review || L 254 30.09.2011, p. 7

Tartaric acid || R.521 || P.R. China || Expiry review || C 24 26.01.2011, p. 14

Tartaric acid || R.529 || P.R. China || Partial interim review || C 223 29.07.2011, p. 16

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

Origin || Product || Type || Publication

Belarus || Seamless pipes and tubes of iron or steel (certain) || New investigation || C 187 28.06.2011, p. 22

P.R. China || Aluminium foil || New investigation || C 371 20.12.2011, p. 4

|| Aluminium radiators || New investigation || C 236 12.08.2011, p. 18

|| Chamois leather || Expiry review || C 270 13.09.2011, p. 6

|| Citrus fruits || New investigation || C 353 03.12.2011, p. 15

|| Furfuraldehyde || Full interim review || C 196 05.07.2011, p. 9

|| Glass fibres (certain open mesh fabrics) || Circumvention review || L 204 09.08.2011, p. 1

|| Lever arch mechanisms || Expiry review || C 217 23.07.2011, p. 35

|| Molybdenum wires || Circumvention review || L 131 18.05.2011, p. 14

|| Organic coated steel products || New investigation || C 373 21.12.2011, p. 16

|| Oxalic acid || New investigation || C 24 26.01.2011, p. 8

|| Plastic sacs and bags (certain) || Partial interim review || C 253 21.09.2010, p. 2

|| Plastic sacs and bags (certain) || Expiry review || C 283 27.09.2011, p. 11

|| PSC wires and strands || Partial interim review || C 291 04.10.2011, p. 6

|| Sodium cyclamate || New investigation || C 50 17.02.2011, p. 9

|| Sodium cyclamate || Partial interim review || C 50 17.02.2011, p. 6

|| Soy protein products (certain concentrated) || New investigation || C 121 19.04.2011, p. 71

|| Steel ropes and cables || Expiry review || C 309 13.11.2010, p. 6

|| Stainless steel fasteners and parts thereof || Expiry review || C 315 19.11.2010, p. 7

|| Tartaric acid || New investigation || C 223 29.07.2011, p. 11

|| Tartaric acid || Partial interim review || C 223 29.07.2011, p. 16

|| Tartaric acid || Expiry review || C 24 26.01.2011, p. 14

|| Woven and/or stiched glass fibre fabrics || New investigation || C 222 28.07.2010, p. 12

Croatia || Seamless pipes and tubes of iron or steel || Expiry review || C 187 28.06.2011, p. 16

India || Oxalic acid || New investigation || C 24 26.01.2011, p. 8

|| Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) || Partial interim review || C 102 02.04.2011, p. 18

|| Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) (AS) || Partial interim review || C 102 02.04.2011, p. 15

|| Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film || Partial interim review || C 294 29.10.2010, p. 10

|| Stainless steel fasteners || New investigation || C 142 13.05.2011, p. 30

|| Stainless steel fasteners (AS) || New investigation || C 142 13.05.2011, p. 36

Kazakhstan || White phosphorous || New investigation || C 369 17.12.2011, p. 19

Korea (Rep. of) || Steel wire ropes and cables || New exporter review || L 254 30.09.2011, p. 7

Malaysia || Iron or steel fasteners || New exporter review || L 297 16.11.2011, p. 53

Russia || Ferro-silicon || Partial interim review || C 290 27.10.2010, p. 15

|| Seamless pipes and tubes of iron or steel || Expiry review || C 187 28.06.2011, p. 16

|| Seamless pipes and tubes of iron or steel || Partial interim review || C 303 14.10.2011, p. 11

|| Tube and pipe fittings of iron or steel || New investigation || C 320 01.11.2011, p. 4

South Africa || Steel ropes and cables || Expiry review || C 309 13.11.2010, p. 6

Taiwan || Stainless steel fasteners and parts thereof || Expiry review || C 315 19.11.2010, p. 7

Thailand || Plastic sacs and bags (certain) || Expiry review || C 283 27.09.2011, p. 11

Turkey || Tube and pipe fittings of iron or steel || New investigation || C 320 01.11.2011, p. 4

Ukraine || Seamless pipes and tubes of iron or steel || Expiry review || C 187 28.06.2011, p. 16

|| Seamless pipes and tubes of iron or steel || Partial interim review || C 223 29.07.2011, p. 8

|| Steel ropes and cables || Expiry review || C 309 13.11.2010, p. 6

U.S.A. || Bioethanol || New investigation || C 345 25.11.2011, p. 7

|| Bioethanol (AS) || New investigation || C 345 25.11.2011, p. 13

|| Vinyl acetate || New investigation || C 327 04.12.2010, p. 23

ANNEX S

Court cases

A. Court cases
pending before the Court of Justice of the European Union and the General Court
on 31 December 2011

Court of Justice

Case C-191/09 P || Council v. Interpipe Niko. Tube & Interpipe NTRP (appeal against judgement in case T-249/06)

Case C-200/09 P || Commission v. Interpipe Niko. Tube & Interpipe NTRP (appeal against judgement in case T-249/06)

Case C-337/09 P || Council v. Zheijiang Chemical (appeal against judgement in case T-498/04)

Case C-247/10 P || Zhejiang Aokang Shoes Ltd. v. Council (appeal against judgment in case T-407/06)

Case C-249/10 P || Brossman Footwear (HK) and others v. Council (appeal against judgment in case T-401/06)

Case C-338/10 || GLS Grünwald Logistik Service GmbH (Reference for a preliminary ruling)

Case C-552/10P || 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 C-195/11 P || Commission v. Zhejiang Xinshiji Foods and Hubei Xinshiji Foods (appeal against judgement in case T-122/09)

Case C-348/11 || Thomson Sales Europe (Reference for a preliminary ruling)

Case C-638/11 P || Council v. Gul Ahmed Textile Mills (appeal against judgement in case T-199/04)

General Court

Case T-113/06 || Fjord Seafood Norway AS et al v. Council

Case T-115/06 || Fiskeri og Havbruksnaeringens et al v. Council

Case T-84/07 || Eurochem v. Council

Case T-469/07 || Philips Lighting Poland SA and Philips Lighting BV v Council

Case T-459/07 || Hangzhou Duralamp Electronics Co,. Ltd v Council

Case T-234/08 || EuroChem Mineral and Chemical Company OAO (EuroChem MCC) v. Council

Case T-235/08 || Acron OAO and Dorogobuzh OAO v. Council

Case T-459/08 || EuroChem Mineral and Chemical Company OAO (EuroChem MCC) v. Council

Case T-536/08 || Huvis v. Council

Case T-537/08 || Cixi Jiangnan Chemical Fiber and others v. Council

Case T-150/09 || Ningbo Yonghong Fasteners v. Council

Case T-162/09 || Würth and Fasteners (Shenyang) v. Council

Case T-170/09 || Shanghai Biaowu High-Tensile Fastener and Shanghai Prime Machinery v. Council

Case T-172/09 || Gem-Year and Jinn-Well Auto-Parts (Zhejiang) v. Council

Case T-512/09 || Rusal Armenal v. Council

Case T-528/09 || Hubei Xinyegang v. Council

Case T-118/10 || Acron OAO v. Council

Case T-134/10 || FESI v. Council

Case T-153/10 || Schneider Espana de Informatica SA v. Commission

Case T-158/10 || The Dow Chemical Company v. Council

Case T-191/10 || Greenwood Houseware (Zhuhai) Ltd and Others v. Council

Case T-269/10 || LIS GmbH Licht Impex Service GmbH v. Commission

Case T-555/10 || JBF RAK v. Council

Case T-556/10 || Novatex Ltd, Karachi v. Council

Case T-582/10 || Acron OAO and Dorogobuzh v. Council

Case T-156/11 || Since Hardware (Guangzhou) CO., LTD, v. Council

Case T-304/11 || Alumina d.o.o. v. Council

Case T-385/11 || BP Products North America, v. Council

Case T-407/11 || SRF Ltd. V. Council

Case T-443/11 || Gold East Paper (Jiangsu) and Gold Huasheng Paper (Suzhou Industrial Park) / Council

Case T-444/11 || Gold East Paper (Jiangsu) and Gold Huasheng Paper (Suzhou Industrial Park) / Council

Case T-445/11 || Charron Inox and Almet v. Commission

Case T-551/11 || BSI v. Council

Case T-557/11 || Elsid and others v. Commission

Case T-596/11 || Bricmate AB v. Council

Case T-633/11 || Guangdong Kito Ceramics and others v. Council

Case T-643/11 || Crown Equipment (Suzhou) and Crown Gabelstapler v. Council

B.         Judgments,
orders or other decisions rendered in 2011.

Court of Justice

Case C-511/09 P || Dongguan Nanzha Leco Stationery Mfg. (v. Council) (appeal against judgement in case T-296/06)

Case C-2/11 (PI) || Gesamtverband der deutschen Textil- und Modeindustrie and others / Council

Case C-3/11 (PI) || Gesamtverband der deutschen Textil- und Modeindustrie and others / Council

General Court

Case T-122/09 || Zhejiang Xinshiji Foods and Hubei Xinshiji Foods v. Council

Case T-167/07 || Far Eastern Textile Ltd. v. Council

Case T-259/08 || Global Digital Disc GmbH & Co. KG v. Commission

Case T-199/04 || Gul Ahmed Textile Mills Ltd. v. Council

Case T-190/08 || Chelyabinskij electrometalurgicheskij kombinat and Kuznetskie Ferrosplavy v. Council and Commission

Case T-192/08 || TNK Kazchrome and ENRC Marketing v. Council

Case T-274/07 || Zhejiang Harmonic Hardware Products v. Council

Case T-297/10 || DBV – Deutscher Brennstoffvertrieb Würzburg GmbH v. Commission

Case T-107/08 || TNC Kazchrome and ENRC Marketing AG v Council and Commission

Case T-423/09 || Dashiqiao Sanqiang Refractory Materials v. Council

ANNEX T

Safeguard and surveillance measures in
force on 31 December 2011

A. Safeguard measures

List of safeguard measures in force

Product || Country of origin || Regulation/Decision N° || OJ Reference

None || - || - || -

B. Surveillance measures

List of surveillance measures in force

Product || Country of origin || Regulation/Decision N° || OJ Reference

Steel products (surveillance) || Erga omnes || Commission Reg. (EC) No 76/2002 17.01.2002 as last amended by Commission Reg. (EU) No 1241/2009 16.12.2009 || L 16 18.01.2002 p. 3 L 332 17.12.2009 p. 54

[1]               OJ C 11, 18.1.1982, p. 37.

[2]               PE 141.178/fin of 30.11.1990, reporter Mr Gijs DE
VRIES.

[3]               OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p.51 Codified version

[4]               OJ L 188, 18.07.2009, p. 93 Codified Version

[5]               OJ L 349, 31.12.94, p. 53, as last amended by
Regulation (EC) No 2200/2004
(OJ L 374, 22.12.2004, p. 1).

[6]               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)

[7]               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)

[8]               OJ L 67, 10.3.94, p. 1, as last amended by Regulation
(EC) No 1786/2006
(OJ L 337, 5.12.2006, p. 12).

[9]               OJ L 162, 30.4.2004, p. 1

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

[11]             OJ L 107, 19.04.2012, p.5

[12]             The measures are counted per product and country
concerned.

[13]             Source Comext.

[14]             The initiation of a case concerning several countries
is accounted as separate investigations/proceedings per country involved.

[15]             Investigations might be terminated for reasons such as
the withdrawal of the complaint, de minimis dumping or injury, etc.

[16]             The initiation of a case concerning several countries
is accounted as separate investigations/proceedings per country involved.

[17]             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.

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

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

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

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

[23]             AD = anti-dumping, AS = anti-subsidy, UT = undertaking.

[24] COM (2012) 41 Final

[25] O.J. L237, 03.09.2012

[26]             Partial reopening of the anti-dumping investigation

[27]             Partial reopening of the anti-dumping investigation

[28]             Adjustment of the anti-dumping duty rates following the
expiry of the countervailing duty

[29]             New Exporting Producer Treatment.

[30]             Decision updating the list of parties under examination
for exemption from extended duties

[31]             Termination of the partial reopening of the
anti-dumping interim review investigation

[32]             New Exporting Producer Treatment.

[33] Clarifying the scope of the definitive anti-dumping duties

[Top](#document1)