CELEX: 51989PC0465
Language: en
Date: 1989-09-25
Title: PROPOSAL FOR A COUNCIL REGULATION ( EEC ) ACCEPTING UNDERTAKINGS AND IMPOSING A DEFINITIVE ANTI-DUMPING DUTY ON IMPORTS OF FERRO-SILICON ORIGINATING IN ICELAND, NORWAY, SWEDEN, VENEZUELA OR YUGOSLAVIA, EXCEPT THOSE SOLD FOR EXPORT TO THE COMMUNITY BY COMPANIES WHOSE UNDERTAKINGS HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
                                          C0MC89) 465 final
                                          Brussels,  25 September 1989
                          Proposal for a
                     £2yN£Ik-5I§yk£IION-.(§§£2
  accepting undertakings and Imposing a definitive ant I-dumping
         duty on imports of ferro-s!I Icon originating In
     Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Venezuela or Yugoslavia, except
             those sold for export to the Community by
         companies whose undertakings have been accepted
                    (presented by the Commission)
 ---pagebreak---                                                             Crikey
                           BgLfflftTOKT rflftTTRrWrai
1. In a notioe published in the Official, Journal of the European
Communities (No C 145 of 2 «Tune 19Ô8), the Commission announoed a review,
under Article 15 of Regulation (BBC) No 2423/88, of the current anti-
dumping measures regarding Imports Into the Ctaramunity of ferro-silicon
originating in Norway. Sweden, Iceland, Yugoslavia and Venezuela.
2. The Commission's Investigation covered the period from 1 June 1987 to
31 Way 1988.
3. The normal value of the dumped product was established:
-  for Norway, Iceland and Yugoslavia, on the basis of a constructed value
   determined by arVltng together production costs and a reasonable profit
   margin. The dumping margin established was around 7.8% for Norway and
   Iceland and between 31.5% and 43.9% for Yugoslavian producers;
-  for Sweden and Venezuela, on the basis of the prices charged on the
   domestic market by the producers concerned. The dumping margin
   established was 4.1% for Sweden and 28.1% for Venezuela.
4. As regards injury, exports originating In the countries in question have
risen, while Oommunity production capacity has fallen. Consumption in the
Community has remained constant.
Many oases were found in which the selling prices charged for the imports
were lower than those charged by Oommunity producers; in any event, the
prices of the said Imports were too low to have covered the Oommunity
producers' costs and allowed them a reasonable profit.
 ---pagebreak---                         - 2 -
Moreover, with regard to the threat of injury, the oountries under scrutiny
are maintaining very high production capacity and export levels. The
Community is a neighbouring market with attractive price levels.
5. In these circumstances, it would seem appropriate to maintain anti-
dumping measures in the form of price undertakings offered by the
producers/exporters concerned and considered acceptable *
6. To avoid any loopholes and to prevent the recurrence of the events which
led to the initiation of this review, an anti-dumping duty should be
imposed on imports of products sold to the Community by exporters other
than those referred to at 5. This duty is 4.1% for Sweden, 7.8% for Norway
and Iceland, 27.1% for Venezuela and 33.2% for Yugoslavia.
                                                                            1c
 ---pagebreak---                      OCaOL RHOTAnCN (BBC) No          /89
                               Of          1969
   accepting undertakings and Imposing a definitive ant I-dumping
          duty on imports of ferro-siI Icon originating In
      Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Venezuela or Yugoslavia, except
              those sold for export to the Community by
          companies whose undertakings have been accepted
THE COUNCIL     OF THE EUROPEAN OGMMTINITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Boonomio Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88 of 11 July 1988 on
protection against dumped or subsidized Imports from countries not members
of the European Economic Community,1 and in particular Article 10 thereof,
After consultation with the Advisory Committee as provided for in the above
Regulation,
Whereas:
                                 A. PRXH3DRE
1. Commission Decision 83/93/EBC of 1 March 19832 accepted rodertaldngs
    offered in connection with the anti-stamping proceeding concerning
    imports of ferro-si 11 con originating in Iceland, Norway, Sweden,
    Venezuela or Yugoslavia and terminated the proceeding.
1   0J NO 209, 2.8.1968, p. 1.
2   OJ NO 57, 4.3.1983, p. 20.
                                                                            4i
 ---pagebreak---                                    - <L
2. Following the publication in the Official Journal of tha European
   Communities in November 1987 of a notice of expiry of the measures in
   force,3 the Commission was asked in December 1987 by the Comité de
   Liaison des Industries de Ferro-alliages de la Communauté Economique
   Européenne, on behalf of producers representing almost all Community
   production, to review the said measures. The oomplaint contained
   evidence showing that expiry of the measures would result In further
   injury or threat of injury, and this évidence was deemed sufficient to
   Justify the initiation of an Investigation. In a notice published in
   the Official Journal of the European ComnunitiaB,4 the Commission
   accordingly anncnmoed a review of the antidumping measures in force.
3. Because the Commission failed to announce its Intention to review the
   measure before the expiry of the relevant five-year period, an exporter
   contested the legal basis of the new investigation.
   The Commission notes that Article 15(1) of Council Regulation (EEC)
   No 2176/84 of 23 July 19645 does not lay down any particular
   formalities for it to announce its intention to review a measure before
   the expiry of the relevant five-year period; on the other hand,
   Article 15(2) lays down that when anti-dumping or countervailing duties
   and undertakings lapse, five years after the date on which they entered
   into force or were last amended, the Commission must publish a notice
   to that effect.
   Since an interested party provided évidence in December 1987 that the
   expiry of the measures would result in further injury, the Commission,
   under Article 15(2) of Regulation (EEC) NO 2176/84, was no longer bound
   to publish a notice announcing the lapse of the measures then in force;
   those measures therefore remained in force pending the outcome of the
   review published in June 1988.
3  OJ No C 317, 28.11.1967, p. 4.
4  OJ No C 148, 2.6.1988, p. 4.
5  OJ NO L 201, 30.7.1984, p. 1.
 ---pagebreak---                                   - 5 -
   Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88 did not enter into force until 5 August
   1988, i.e. two months after the publication of the notice of review of
   this proceeding.
   The argument that there is no legal basis is therefore without
   foundation.
4. The product oonoemed is ferro-silioon containing between 20% and 96%
   of silicon in weight and falling within CN codes 7202 21 10, 7202 21 90
   and 7202 29 00.
5. The Commission officially advised both the exporters and importers
   xnown to be concerned and the complainants and gave the parties
   concerned an opportunity to make known their views in writing and
   request a hearing.
6. All exporters and Community producers and some importers have made
   known their views in writing.
7. Some exporters, importers and consumers of ferro-silioon in the
   Community requested and were granted oral hearings.
8. Several exporters asked for and were provided with information on the
   principal facts and considérations which would serve as the basis for
   recommending the Imposition of definitive measures.
9. The Commission sought and verified all the information it deemed
   necessary for the purposes of determining dumping, injury and the
   threat of injury and carried out inspections at the premises of:
 ---pagebreak---                                      - A -
    - Community producers:
      Fechiney ELeotrometal 1 urgie               France
      Industria ELettrioa Indel                  Italy
      Carburos Metalicos S.A.                    Spain
      Uel-Dtilizzazioni ELettro-Industriali      Italy
      Off loi ne Elettrcchimiohe Trentine        Italy
    — Community importers:
      Euroleghe                                 Italy
      Metallla                                  Italy
      producers/exporters in nonHnember countries:
      Elkem A/S                                 Norway
      BJblvef ossen AS                          Norway
      Salten Verk                               Norway
      Ioelandio Alloys                          Iceland
      Fesll KS                                  Norway
      Flnnfjord Smelteverk                      Norway
      Haf slund Metal AS                        Norway
      H a og Lilleby Smelteverker               Norway
      Vargbn Alloys                              Sweden
      CVCr-Fesilven                             Venezuela
      Tovarna Dusika Ruse                       Yugoslavia
      Jugohrom                                  Yugoslavia
      ELektrobosna                              Yugoslavia
10. The Commission did not carry out inspections on the premises of the
    following producers in non-member countries:
    Bremanger Smelteverk                        Norway
    Thamshavn Smelteverk                        Norway
    The entire production of these two pompantes Is exported by Elkem A/S,
    which in its registered office in Oslo provided the data used by the
    Commission in its calculations.
 ---pagebreak---                                     _ b -
11. The Commission received and used information from the following
    Importers:
      Elkem Alloys Ltd                          united Kingdom
      Elkem S.r.l.                              Italy
      Elkem GnfcH                               FHS
      Elkem Danemark                            Denmark
      Elkem France                             ftranoe
      Intalimet                                 France
      Fesil Metaux                              France
      Fesil Legierungshandel                   FRG
      S.A. des Minerals                         Luxembourg
      Ccopagnie des Mines et Metaux             Luxembourg
12. The Commission received and used Information from the Community
    producer S.K.Trostberg (Federal Republic of Germany).
13. The Commission's dumping investigation lasted for twelve months, from
    June 1987 to May 1988.
                                 B. DUMPING
Norway and Toelanrt
(a) Normal value.
14. In no oase did the volume of sales of a like product on the exporter's
    domestio market exceed the threshold of 8% of the volume of exports of
    the product to the Community, set by the Commission in previous oases.
    This meant that normal value had to be oalmlatert by other means.
 ---pagebreak---                                     _ 6 _
15. The Norwegian companies suggested using the prices of exports to third
    countries. The Commission rejected this suggestion sijaoe it could not
    confirm that exports to markets outside the Community were not also
    being dumped. Moreover, the period covered by the investigation saw a
    number of international currency fluctuations, which would have made it
    even more difficult to choose an export market in a third country
    appropriate for calculating normal value.
16. For those reasons, normal value was constructed on the basis of fixed
    and variable raw material and manufacturing costs for the standard
    product exported to the Community, together with the selling costs,
    administrative expenditure and other general costs. Since two
    Norwegian companies accounted for exports to the Community of almost
    all the ferro-silioon produced in Norway and Iceland during the
    investigation period by several producers linked with one or other of
    the exporters, -Use constructed value was based on weighted average
    costs of materials and manufacture of each group of producers,
    Including general costs, to which were added the operating costs of
    each of the exporters. Allowance was also made for a reasonable profit
    margin of 6%.
17. Production costs included the cost of ncn-reoonstitutable waste. In
    some oases, where producers failed to produce evidence of such costs,
    their production costs were supplemented by a percentage deemed
    reasonable in the light of all the financial data verified during the
    investigation with other producers which did provide such evidence.
 ---pagebreak---   18. Normal value was reduced by the oost of a by-product of the manufacture
      of ferro-silioon. In view of the large number of producers concerned
      and the wide range of market prices fetched by the by-product, the
      Commission felt it was reasonable to calculate an average production
      oost for the by-product and to deduct it from the production oost of
      the i^fM" product.
  19. In view of the fact that a pertain amount of the ferro-silioon produced
      is of inferior quality, the Commission calculated a percentage of the
      production oost of the main product representing the oost of the
      materials used in the lower quality product, which it then subtracted
      from the overall production oost.
  20. The Commission did not accept the adjustments to production costs
      requested by several companies in respect of financial revenue from
      short-term hank investments and/or transferable securities, since such
      revenue came from financial operations unconnected with the production
      process. Similarly, the Commission did not consider adjustments for
      exchange gains or losses, since these were financial operations
      unconnected with the production process and dearly had no place in a
      calculation of normal value.
  21. The Norwegian exporters contested the Commission's 6% profit margin,
      which they considered excessive in view of their high level of debt,
      enabling them to make a proper return on their capital with a much
      lower yield. They also pointed out that a profit margin of only 3% had
      been applied in the previous investigation. The Commission rejected
      their argument since both exporters had enjoyed an Improvement in
      profitability during the investigation period.
x
 ---pagebreak---      In these circumstances there were no grounds for considering such a low
    margin as a sufficient return in a high-debt situation.
(b) Export price,
22. Export prices were determined on the basis of prices actually paid or
    payable for the products sold for export to the Community.
    Where exports were made to subsidiary companies in the Community,
    export prices were calculated on the basis of the price at which the
    imported product was first sold to an independent purchaser in the
    Community, making suitable allowance for all costs borne between
    Importation and resale of the products concerned in the investigation,
    and for a reasonable profit margin of 3%, calculated on the basis of
    the profit margin of independent importers of the product.
(c) Ctanparjson,
23. In comparing normal value with export prices on a transaction-by-
    transaction basis, the Commission took account, when appropriate and
    where sufficient evidence was provided, of differences affecting the
    comparability of prices; such adjustments were concerned mainly with
    payment and delivery terms, transport and insurance costs and different
    forms of presentation and packing.
    All comparisons were made at the ex-works stage.
 ---pagebreak---                                         -  9
   (d) romping Bftrglnfl
   24. Comparison of normal value with the export prices for the period from
         June 1987 to May 1988 showed that imports from both Norway and Iceland
         were being dumped, the dumping margin being equal to the difference
         between the normal value and the export price to the Community.
         On the basis of the free-at-Community frontier price, the weighted
         average margins were as follows:
         - for Fesll KS, Oslo (representing the exports of the Norwegian
           producers Hafslund, Finnfjord and lia og Lilleby): 7.79%;
         - for Elkem AS (representing the exports of the Norwegian producers
           Salten Verk, Bjblvefossen, Thamshavn and Bremanger and those of the
           Icelandic producer Ioelandio Alloys): 7.84%.
   ( a ) NorjaaJ^vjalUo
   25. Normal value was generally calculated by month on the basis of prices
         charged on the domestic market by the producer Vargbn Alloys AB, which
         exported to the Community and which provided satisfactory évidence.
I
À.
 ---pagebreak---                                    - 10
(b) Export prices
26. Export prices were determined on the basis of prices actually paid, or
    payable for the products sold for export to the Community.
(c) Comparison
27. The normal value of the product was compared each month on a
    transactLon-by-transaction basis with the export price of the
    corresponding type of product. The Commission took account, when
    appropriate and where sufficient evidence was provided, of the
    differences referred to in point 23.
    All comparisons were made at the ex-works stage.
28. Comparison of normal value with the export prices for the period from
    June 1987 to May 1988 showed that Imports from Sweden were being
    dumped, the dumping margin being equal to the difference between the
    normal value and the export price to the Community.
    On the basis of the free-at-Communlty frontier price, the weighted
    average margin for Vargbn Alloys was 4.12%.
 ---pagebreak---                                    -11-
Venezuela
(a) N^TTO1 Vftluft
29. Normal value was generally calculated by month on the basis of prices
    charged to independent customers In normal commercial operations on the
    domestic market by the producer CVG-Fesllven, which exported to the
    Community and which provided satisfactory evidence.
(b) Export prices
26. Export prices were determined on the basis of prices actually paid or
    payable for the products sold for export to the Community.
(o) Comparison
27. The normal value of the product was compared for the same months on a
    transaotion-by-transaction basis with the export price of the
    corresponding type of product. The Commission took account, when
    appropriate and where sufficient evidence was provided, of the
    differences referred to in point 23.
    All comparisons were made at ttoe ex-works stage.
 ---pagebreak---                                      -12  -
( d ) rUTTflrirg nw.Tgi™a
32. Comparison of normal value with the export prioes for the period from
      June 1987 to May 1988 showed that Imports from Venezuela were being
      dumped, the dumping margin being equal to the difference between the
      normal value and the export price to the Community.
      On the basis of the free-at^tammunlty frontier price, the weighted
      average margin for CvG-Fesilven was 28.1%.
Yugoslavia
(a) Normal value.
33. Since a product comparable to that sold for export to the Community was
      sold on the domestic market at prioes which In ordinary commercial
      transactions during the reference period could not have covered the
      full cost of production given any reasonable allocation of such costs,
      monthly normal value was determined on the basis of the constructed
      value of the product concerned, Including the fixed and variable raw
      material and manufacturing costs for the standard product exported to
 ---pagebreak---                                     -13 -
    the Community plus sales costs, administrative expenditure and other
    general costs and a reasonable profit margin of 6%. In the case of one
    exporter, who failed to supply information essential to the calculation
    of the constructed value, monthly normal value was determined on the
    basis of information available from other Yugoslavian
    producers/exporters.
(b) Export prices:
34. Export prices were determined on the basis of prices actually paid or
    payable for the products sold for export to the Community.
(o) Comparison
35. The normal value of the product was compared for the same months on a
    transacrtd.on-by-transaotion basis with the export price of the
    corresponding type of product. The Commission took account, when
    appropriate and where sufficient evidence was provided, of the
    differences referred to in point 23.
    All comparisons were made at the ex-works stage.
 ---pagebreak---                                    -u -
(d) nimjpiTig ma.Tprr*
36. Comparison of normal value with the export prices for the period from
    June 1987 to May 1988 showed that Imports from Yugoslavia were being
    dumped, the dumping margin being equal to the difference between the
    normal value and the export price to the Community.
    On the basis of the free-at-Community frontier price, the weighted
    average margin was:
    31.8% for Jugohrcm
    37.1% for ELektrobosna
    43.9% for Tovarna Duslka Ruse
                                 C. INJUR*
37. The Commission's task was to determine whether the expiry of the
    measures in force would result in further Injury or threat of injury.
l. Volume, and price of importa
38. Exports to the Community originating In the five countries oonoerned
    have risen slightly since the anti-dumping measures entered into force,
    from 250 000 tonnes in 1963 to 289 000 tonnes in 1988.
 ---pagebreak---                                               -15 -
    The aggregate market share of those countries rose from 56% in 1963 to
    50% in 1988. The absolute volume and market share of imports
    originating in each of the exporting countries separately, except for
    Venezuela, also rose slightly.
39. The Commission also established that while during the reference period
    the resale prices of the Imports in question were Improved by the anti-
    dumping measures, many oases were found in which they remained lower
    than the prices charged by Community producers.
2.  Tnflw/rt: nm flnrnmmHty I n r i n g h r y
    The Commission took note of the following Information:
    a. Community capacity and production
40. Between 1983 and 1988 Community production capacity fell from 370 000
    tonnes to 230 000 tonnes; In reducing its capacity, the Community
    industry specialized to some extent in an attempt to limit its losses
    in the face of the downward pressure exerted by non-member countries on
    the price of standard products in the Community.
 ---pagebreak---                                    -16 _
41. Community production remained virtually unchanged, rising from 180 000
    tonnes in 1983 to 184 000 tonnes In 1988.
    b. Market share and consumption
42. Between 1983 and 1988 the Community Industry's market share stabilized
    around 32%, while consumption rose from 450 000 tonnes in 1983 to
    491 000 tonnes in 1988. The 9% Increase in consumption obviously
    benefited Imports from the countries under investigation.
    c. Prices
43. In almost all oases, the resale prices charged for dumped Imports
    during the reference period would not have covered the costs of
    Community producers and allowed them a reasonable profit; In an attempt
    to preserve their sales and their market share in the Community, the
    Community producers were forced to sell their products at ever lower
    prices until they could not even cover their costs.
    d. Profits
44. The financial performance of the Community Industry was negative from
    1985 to 1987. Only in 1988 did a number of companies make a small
    profit. This improvement was modest, despite the upturn In the steel
    industry, which is the main customer for the product concerned, and
 ---pagebreak---                                            -17. -
      despite restructuring, which allowed better, though not satisfactory,
      capacity utilization. Similarly, the current anti-duimplng measures
      curbed companies' losses at a time when prices were falling.
  45. In order to establish the impact of dumping on the Community industry,
      the Commissi on considered whether or not to examine the cumulative
      impact of imports originating in the countries under investigation.
      It established that the imported products are comparable in terms of
      physical characteristics and price levels and compete both with one
      another and with similar Community products.
      m view of the above, the Commission concluded that all the imports of
      fexTo-silioon involved should be aggregated. The Council confirms this
      conclusion.
  4.  Cmiflft ftJYl ftffeot anl othflr fftOtCffl
  46. The simultaneous Increase in imports originating in the five countries
      in question, the increase in their market share, the pressure caused by
I
 ---pagebreak---                                    -tô  -
    the prices of those imports and the worsening situation in the
    Community industry despite the restructuring undertaken by the
    Community producers show that these imports are continuing to cause
    injury to the Community Industry despite the current anti-dumping
    measures.
47. The Commission examined whether other factors could be behind the
    Injury caused to the Community industry, such as Imports of products
    originating in other non-member countries.
    It established that the market, share of other non-member countries fell
    from 12% in 1983 to 9% in 1988. Moreover, there was no cause to think
    that these imports were being dumped.
48. The Commission accordingly concluded, on the basis of the above, that
    imports of products from the countries concerned In this proceeding
    were, by themselves, a cause of major Injury to the Community industry
    concerned, in spite of the current antidumping measures. The Council
    confirms this conclusion.
II. Threat of injury
49. The exporting countries concerned have some 800 000 tonnes of
    production capacity, a large proportion of the world's total.
 ---pagebreak---                                    -19 -
    Their aggregate production is currently around 700 000 tonnes, while
    their domestic consumption Is about 100 000 tonnes. This gap leaves
    very sizeable quantities available for export.
    Moreover, in view of the development of new production units or the
    enlargement of existing units, particularly in Norway and Venezuela, it
    is realistic to expect an Increase in those two countries' exports to
    the Community, even if, as certain of their exporters have claimed,
    this capacity is Intended to serve the American and Japanese markets.
    In addition, current production oould be stepped up, if so desired, by
    making greater use of the present facilities.
50. As regards the possibility of these countries adopting a more active
    export policy should the anti-dumping measures expire, it should be
    borne in mind that the Community Is a very attractive market by virtue
    of its price levels; for most of the exporters concerned it Is also a
    neighbouring market.
51. In these circumstances, the Commission concluded that to abolish the
    anti-dumping measures would lead to further material Injury for
    Community producers. The Council confirms this conclusion.
 ---pagebreak--- -IP.14 '39 12:45 3RUX SDTA3 KI38 FAX 32-2-2357776                          P.02
                                     D. (xmnxnx   BEESKBST
        53. The representatives of Community manufacturing Industries and of
            individual oompaniee argued that it would be against the Community's
            interest to keep the protective measures in force, since they were
            weakening campetitivenees against imports of finished products
            originating in non-member countries.
        53. As is the case for any raw material, it is probable ttpt price rises
             influence the costs of the manufacturing industries. However, no
            company provided the Commission with convincing evidence of a specifio
            effect of an increase in the price of ferro-silioon on its production
             costs; nor was evidence supplied of the possible impact of an increase
             in manufacturers1 prices on their total sales. The Commission
            considers that any impact would be slight, particularly in view of the
            low percentage of ferro-eilioon used in the production of a tonne of
            steel. Moreover, having heard the representatives of the manufacturing
            Industry, and In view of the fact that current market prices for ferro-
            silioon are vngham than that which, would result from the proposed
            measures (see point 84), the Commission considers that tfrssse i&ôs&ures
            will not contribute to an actual rise in prices.
            Having carefully compared the above arguments and the particularly
            serious problems faced by the Community ferro-silioon industry which
            can be attributed to the imports in question, the Coxcoission concluded
             that it was In the Oxtvounity's interest to maintain measures against
             the dumping of ferro-eiHoon. The Council confirms this conclusion-
 ---pagebreak---                                           -21 -
                                 B. U U D B R C A Q H J S
54. The representatives of the producers/exporters of Norway, Sweden,
    Iceland, Yugoslavia and Venezuela (viz. Elkem A/S, Bjblvefossen AS,
    Salten Verk, Fesil KS, Flnnf jord Smelteverk, Hafslund Metal AS, lia og
    Lilleby Smelteverker, Bremanger Smelteverk and Thamshavn Smelteverk In
    Norway, Ioelandic Alloys in Iceland, Vargbn Alloys in Sweden, CUG-
    Fesilven for Venezuela and Tovarna Duslka Ruse, Jugohrom and
    ELektrobosna in Yugoslavia) were Informed of the results of the
    investigation and presented their comments. They then offered
    satisfactory price undertakings to bring the revised prices of ferro-
    silioon exports to the Community up to a level considered sufficient to
    eliminate the injury established in the investigation In respect of
    exports originating in Yugoslavia or Venezuela, where the margin of
    injury was lower than the dumping margins established, and to eliminate
    dumping in respect of Imports originating In Norway, Iceland and
                                                                               v
    Sweden.
    In view of the above, and bearing in mind that the circumstances of
    this case justify the application of such measures, the undertakings
    offered by the producers/exporters mentioned above are considered
    acceptable by the Commission and the investigation can accordingly be
    terminated without the imposition of anti-dumping duties on Imports
    from the above-mentioned producers/exporters originating in the five
    countries concerned. T h e C o n s e J | c o n f | r m s t M 8 conclusion.
 ---pagebreak---                                     - 'd'd -
                                  F. DUTIES
55. In order not to leave any loopholes and to prevent a recurrence of the
    events which led to the initiation of this review, an anti-dumping duty
    should be Imposed on imports of products sold to the Community by
    exporters other than those referred to at 5; this duty would apply to
    all imports of the products concerned originating in Iceland, Norway,
    Sweden, Venezuela or Yugoslavia sold for export to the Community by
    companies other than those whose price undertakings have been accepted.
    TO facilitate customs clearance the Commission considers that the duty
    should take the form of an ad valorem anti-dumping duty. The Council
    confirms this conclusion.
56. The rates of duty to be Imposed in respect of the countries concerned
    have been déterminai for Norway, Sweden and Iceland on the basis of the
    Highest dumping margin established, because for these three countries
    the dumping margin.was.Less than the injury threshold, *nri for Yugoslavia
    arid Venezuela on the basis of the highest established injury caused by
    imports originating in those countries as for these countries the injury
    threshold was less than the dumping margin. The injury threshold was
    calculated on the basis of the most efficient Community producers plus
    a reasonable profit margin of 6%. In no case do these amounts exceed
    the established dumping margins.
 ---pagebreak---                                    -2i  -
    Expressed as a percentage of the net free-at-Ooramunity-frentier price
    of the product before duty, the raises of duty are:
    - Sweden                    4.1%
    - Norway                    7.8%
    - Iceland                   7.8%
    - Venezuela                 27.1%
    - Yugoslavia                33.2%,,
HAS ADOPTED TELS RBOTATICN:
                                 Article 1
1. A definitive anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on imports of ferro-
    silioon falling within CN codes 7202 21 10, 7202 21 90 and 7202 29 00
    and originating in Norway, Sweden, Iceland, Yugoslavia or Venezuela.
2. The duty, expressed as a percentage of the net free^tK3ommunity-
    frontler price of the product before duty, shall be:
      Sweden                   4.1%
      Norway                   7.8%
      Iceland                  7.8%
      Venezuela                27.1%
      Yugoslavia               33.2%
 ---pagebreak---                                        24 -
      Fiee-at-Community-fixmtier prices shall be net if the conditions of
      sale provide for payment within thirty days of consignment. They shell
      be Increased or reduced by 1% for each month's Increase or decrease in
      the period of payment.
  3. The duty shall not apply to the products referred to in paragraph 1
      produced and/or exported direct to the Community by:
        ELkem A/S                                  Norway
        Bjdlvefossen AS                            Norway
        Sal ten Verk                               Norway
        Icelandic Alloys                           Iceland
        Fesil KS                                   Norway
        Finnfjord Sraelteverk                      Norway
        Hafslund Metal AS                          Norway
        Thamshavn Smelteverk                       Norway
        Ila og Lilleby Smelteverker                Norway
        Bremanger Smelteverk                       Norway
        Vargbn Alloys                              Sweden
        Cvrjr-Fesilven                             Venezuela
        Tovarna Duslka Ruse                        Yugoslavia
        Jugohrom                                   Yugoslavia
        ELektrobosna                               Yugoslavia
      whose price undertakings are acoepted m
4. The Investigation In connection with the ant I-dumpings proceeding
    referred to In article 1 (3) is hereby terminated.
5. The provisions In force concerning customs duties shall apply.
 ---pagebreak---                                    -25 -
                                 Article i
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication
in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable In
all Member States.
Done at Brussels,
                                        For the Council
 ---pagebreak---                                                                       ISSN 0254-1475
                                                               COM(89) 465 final
                                                      DOCUMENTS
EN                                                                               11
                                 Catalogue number : CB-CO-89-421-EN-C
                                                             ISBN 92-77-53147-9
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities
b-2985 Luxembourg