CELEX: 51996PC0083
Language: en
Date: 1996-03-01
Title: Proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain tube or pipe fittings, of iron or steel, originating in the People' s Republic of China, Croatia and Thailand, and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
     ft ft
     ft ft
  *        ft
    ft*ft                                       Brussels, 10* 10%
                                                COM(%) 8^ final
                                      Proposal for a
                            COUNCIL REGULATION (EC)
 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain tube or pipe fittings,
of iron or steel, originating in the People's Republic of China, Croatia and Thailand,
               and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed
                             (presented by the Commission)
 ---pagebreak---  ---pagebreak---                         KX PIAN A I OK Y M KMOR A INI) 11M
Commission Regulation (EC) No 23 18/95(,) imposed provisional anti-dumping duties on
imports of certain tube or pipe fittings, of iron or steel, originating in the
People's Republic of China, Croatia and Thailand.
Council Regulation (EC) No 149/96(2) extended the validity of this duty for a period of
two months expiring on 4 April 1996.
Interested parties who so requested were granted hearings and the opportunity to make
known their views on the provisional and definitive findings
In their written submission, the cooperating Chinese exporters contested some of the
preliminary findings of the Commission, in particular, with regard to the like product,
the choice of Thailand as suitable analogue country to determine normal value, the
definition of the Community industry, cumulation of the dumped imports, cause of
injury and Community interest. These comments were examined and, where appropriate,
taken into account in the final conclusion. However, the arguments put forward by the
Chinese exporters were not considered to warrant any change in the method used to
make the provisional assessment of dumping, injury, causation and Community interest.
In the absence of further evidence from any of the other parties concerned in this
proceeding, the preliminary findings as set out in Regulation (EC) No 2318/95 are
confirmed and it is therefore considered in the Community interest to impose definitive
anti-dumping measures and to collect definitively the provisional duty imposed.
Provisional measures took the form of anti-dumping duties, imposed in accordance with
the "Lesser duty rule" at rates based either on the injury or the dumping margin
established. The provisional duty calculation method being confirmed, definitive anti-
dumping duties should be the same as the amounts of the provisional duties.
Having been informed of the final results of the investigation, the Croatian and
Thai producers/exporters offered undertakings within the meaning of Article 10(2)(b) of
Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88. The Commission considers the undertakings as
acceptable since they would eliminate the injurious effects of the dumped imports and
could be satisfactorily monitored.
The Chinese exporters informed the Commission of their intention to propose
undertakings together with, allegedly, an offer of the Chinese authorities (MOFTEC) to
control the exports to the Community. Since no concrete offers by MOFTEC nor by the
exporters were subsequently received, the Commission considered that it had no
alternative but to propose the imposition of definitive anti-dumping duties on the
Chinese products, and informed the exporters concerned accordingly.
When the Advisory Committee was consulted on the acceptance of the undertakings
offered by Croatian and Thai exporters, one Member State raised objections. Therefore,
in accordance with Articles 9 and 10(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88, the
Commission sent a report to the Council on the results of the consultations and a
proposal that the investigation be terminated by the acceptance of undertakings. Unless
the Council decides otherwise within one month, it will be possible to adopt the decision
accepting the undertakings from the exporters concerned.
OJ No L 234, 3.10.1995, p. 4.
OJ No L 23, 30.1.1996, p. 1.
 ---pagebreak--- In these circumstances, the Commission, pursuant to Article 12 of Regulation (EEC)
No 2423/88, proposes to the Council to impose residual definitive anti-dumping duties
on imports from Croatia and Thailand effected by companies other than those having
offered undertakings. The rates applicable should be 38.4°» foi Croatia and 58 9% for
Thailand. For the People's Republic of China, a definitive anti-dumping duty at a rate
of 58.6% should be imposed for all producers and exporters
The amounts secured by way of the provisional anti-dumping duty pursuant to
Regulation (EC) No 2318/95 are proposed to be definitively collected in full.
The Commission intends, subject to the outcome of the procedure mentioned in point 9
above, to publish the Decision accepting the undertakings offered by the Croatian and
Thai exporters at the same time as the Council Regulation.
 ---pagebreak---                                           Proposal for a
                                ÇQUNCJÏ^RlïGUlATJON (EC)
     imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain tube or pipe fittings,
    of iron or steel, originating in the People's Republic of China, Croatia and Thailand,
                    and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 3283/94 of 22 December 1994 on protection
against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community0*, as last
amended by Regulation (EC) No 1251/95(2), and in particular Article 23 thereof,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88 of 1 I July 1988 on protection
against dumped or subsidized imports from countries not members of the
European Economic Community(3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 522/94(4), and in
particular Article 12 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal submitted by the Commission after consulting the
Advisory Committee,
Whereas:
                                A. PROVISIONAL MEASURES
(1)   The Commission, by Regulation (EC) No 2318/95rS|, hereinafter referred to as
       "the provisional duty Regulation", imposed a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports
      into the Community of certain tube or pipe fittings, of iron or steel, originating in the
       People's Republic of China, Croatia and Thailand.
      By Regulation (EC) No 149/96(6), the Council extended the validity of this duty for a
      period of two months expiring on 4 April 1996.
                                B. SUBSEQUENT PROCEDURE
(2)    Subsequent to the imposition of the provisional anti-dumping duty, the interested parties
      who so requested were granted an opportunity to be heard by the Commission. Some
      of these parties also presented written submissions making known their views on the
      provisional findings.
<u     OJ  No  L 349, 31.12.1994, p. 1
      OJ   No  L 122, 2.6.1995, p.l.
       OJ  No L 209, 2.8.1988, p. 1.
       OJ  No  L 66, 10.3.1994, p. 10.
       OJ  No  L234, 3.10.1995, p. 4.
       OJ  No  L 23, 30.1.1996, p. 1.
 ---pagebreak--- (3) The Commission continued to seek and verify all information it deemed to be necessary
    for its definitive findings. Upon request, parties were informed of the essential facts and
    considerations on the basis of which it was intended to recommend the imposition of
    a definitive duty and the definitive collection of amounts secured by way of a
    provisional duty. They were also granted a period within which to make representations
    subsequent to the disclosure.
(4) The oral and written comments submitted by the interested parties were examined and,
    where appropriate, were considered in the Commission's definitive findings.
(5) Owing to the complexity of the investigation and the large volume of data and
    submissions received from the parties concerned, resulting in numerous requests for
    extension of deadlines, which were granted by the Commission when justified by the
    circumstances, the investigation could not be concluded within the period specified in
    Article 7(9) of Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88.
           C. PRODUCT UNDER CONSIDERATION AND LIKE PRODUCT
(6) Having excluded stainless steel fittings from the scope of the proceeding for the reasons
    stated in recitals (9) and (10) of the provisional duty Regulation, the Commission had,
    for the purpose of the preliminary findings, determined that all other steel fittings under
    consideration originating in the exporting countries concerned were identical to, or
    closely resembled, those produced and sold in the Community and were to be
    considered "like products" within the meaning of Article 2(12) of Regulation (EEC)
    No 2423/88.
(7) The two cooperating Chinese exporters and one independent importer of the
    Chinese product (hereinafter called "the Chinese parties") claimed that fittings
    originating in China were, due to their inferior quality, not like products to the fittings
    produced in the Community. Furthermore, it was argued that the range of uses for the
    Chinese product was limited, in that it was often rejected by customers and that it had
    to be reworked in some cases before resale.
(8) With respect to these arguments, the Commission has established during the
    investigation that while there are some quality differences between the Chinese fittings
    and the Community products, all fittings are manufactured using basically the same
    production technology and in accordance with internationally recognized standards and
    specifications, resulting in products which are alike in their essential physical and
    technical characteristics. It was also established that the Chinese fittings are marketed
    through similar distribution channels, that their basic application and use are identical
    and that there is a high degree of interchangeabilité with the fittings marketed in the
    Community by other operators. Thus, the investigation has shown that the
    Chinese fittings compete with the fittings imported into the Community from Croatia
    and Thailand and with those produced and sold by the Community industry. This applies
    also to those fittings which are resold after reworking. Therefore, the allegations made
    by the Chinese parties with regard to the "like product" issue are rejected.
(9) As no comments have been presented by the other parties regarding the product under
    consideration and the like product, the findings set out in recitals (7) to (12) of the
    provisional duty Regulation are confirmed.
 ---pagebreak---                                           D. DUMPING
      1.     Normal value
      (a)    Choice of analogue country
(10) One of the cooperating Chinese exporters contested the choice of Thailand as a suitable
      analogue market economy, alleging that the cost of production for the tube or pipe
      fittings concerned in Thailand and in the People's Republic of China were not
      comparable. It was argued that Thailand had no domestic production of steel tubes,
      which are the basic raw material for the manufacture of the fittings in question, and had
      therefore to rely exclusively on imported steel tubes. It was alleged that China, however,
      had a large domestic capacity and production of these steel tubes and that the
      input costs of the Chinese fittings producers for the basic raw material were therefore
      significantly lower compared to those of the Thai producers
(11) It should first be noted that the Chinese exporter did not produce any evidence to
      substantiate its claim. In addition, no suggestions as to the choice of a more appropriate
      analogue country has been received, neither from the Chinese exporter in question nor
      from any of the other parties concerned.
(12) Furthermore, it has to be pointed out that the People's Republic of China is a
      non-market economy country, i.e. a country where the means of production, in full or
      in part, belong to or depend on the State. This involvement prevents the establishment
      of reliable domestic prices and costs, which cannot therefore be used for establishing
      normal value.
(13) As regards more specifically the determination of normal value in Thailand, the
      Commission, at the stage of provisional findings, had already taken account of the
      particular situation of the Thai producers with regard to their supply of steel tubes used
      as the basic raw material for the production of the fittings concerned. In fact, since there
      is no production of steel tubes in Thailand, the entire raw material in the form of steel
      tubes was imported by the Thai producers, and purchased at world market prices.
      The verification on-spot revealed that import charges and indirect taxes were assessed
      on all imported steel tubes. It was found, however, that the charges were refunded in
      respect of those fittings which were exported to the Community. For the purpose of
      ensuring a fair comparison, therefore, and in accordance with Article 2(10)(b) of
      Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88, normal value in Thailand was reduced by an amount
      corresponding to import charges and indirect taxes levied on the steel tubes used to
      manufacture the tube fittings concerned which were sold on the domestic market
      in Thailand.
      (b)    Final findings on normal value
(14) As no new evidence has been submitted by the other parties since the imposition of the
      provisional duty, the findings on normal value with regard to all exporting countries
      concerned as set out in recitals (13) to (27) of the provisional duty Regulation are
      therefore considered to be definitive.
      2.     Export price
( 15) Export prices for all producers and exporters of the countries concerned were determined
      as explained in recitals (28) to (31) of the provisional duty Regulation and are, in the
      absence of any relevant new arguments, considered definitive
 ---pagebreak---      3.     Comparison
(16) Normal values, by product type, were compared at an ex-factory level with the export
     price for the corresponding type at the same level of trade, based on a weighted average
     for the entire investigation period. Adjustments were made, where appropriate, in respect
     of differences affecting price comparability, i.e. import charges and indirect taxes,
     transport, insurance, handling and ancillary cost as well as packing, payment terms and
     salesmen's salaries. Since no relevant new information was provided, the findings and
     conclusions as set out in recital (32) of the provisional duty Regulation are therefore
     confirmed.
     4.    Dumping margin
(17) The weighted average dumping margins definitively established for the countries and
     companies in question, expressed as percentages of the CIF Community frontier prices,
     customs duty unpaid, are the following:
     People's Republic of China:                                    58.6%
     Croatia:                                                       58.6%
     Thailand:
     - Awaji:                                                       39.5%
     - Benkan:                                                      51.3%
     - TTU:                                                         63.4%
(18) With regard to the dumping margins for producers and exporters of the countries
     concerned which did not cooperate in this proceeding, the findings to apply the highest
     dumping margin found for an exporter in the country concerned as set out in recital (36)
     of the provisional duty Regulation are, in the absence of any new arguments, hereby
     confirmed.
                                E. COMMUNITY INDUSTRY
(19) The Chinese parties challenged the Commission's finding in recital (40) of the
     provisional duty Regulation that the complainant producers represented a major
     proportion of Community production of the fittings in question, and could therefore be
     considered to be the Community industry within the meaning of Article 4(5) of
     Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88. They argued, in particular, that following the exclusion
     of stainless steel fittings and one Italian producer from the scope of the investigation,
     the remaining producers could not be considered sufficiently representative of the
     Community industry. They claimed further that the sales of the complainant producers
     largely comprised purchased fittings from other producers
(20) With regard to the first argument, the investigation revealed that fittings of stainless
     steel accounted only for a small proportion and were found not to exceed 1% of the
     total production of the complainant producers.
(21) As far as the exclusion of one complainant producer is concerned, it is confirmed
     that the Italian producer Tectubi, mentioned in recital (5) of the provisional duty
     Regulation, withdrew from the complaint on the grounds that the products it
     manufactured were outside the scope of the investigation and were not imported into the
      Community from the exporting countries concerned. When the Commission determined
     whether the production of the five remaining producers constituted a major proportion
     of the total Community production, the output of this producer was indeed excluded.
      On this basis, the remaining producers supporting the complaint and having cooperated
      represented 85% of the total Community production of the products in question during
     the investigation period.
 ---pagebreak--- (22) With regard to the purchase of fitting types by complainant producers, it should be
     recalled that almost all producers in this particular branch of the industry rely to a
     certain degree on the purchase of certain fitting types for the reasons set out in
     recital (38) of the provisional duty Regulation. In this respect, the investigation revealed
     that, for each of the complainant producers, the volume of purchased fittings for resale
     represented less than 5% of their total production of the products concerned. This clearly
     corresponded to the usual commercial behaviour of producers which had to supplement
     the range of products manufactured by them with a small proportion of imports in order
     to satisfy the requirement of the customers and to compete in the Community market.
(23) In consideration of the above, the findings laid down in recitals (37) to (40) of the
     provisional duty Regulation with regard to the definition of Community industry are
     confirmed.
                                           F. INJURY
     1.     Cumulation of dumped imports
(24) The Chinese parties contested the Commission's findings on cumulation of the dumped
     imports and claimed that, due to their inferior quality, fittings from China did not
     compete in the Community market either with fittings manufactured by Community
     producers, or with those imported from Croatia and Thailand. The first aspect of this
     argument has already been dealt with in recitals (7) and (8).
(25) It was found during the investigation that the products in question imported from China,
     Croatia and Thailand were, on a type-by-type and dimension-by-dimension basis, alike
     in all respects, interchangeable and marketed in the Community within a comparable
     period and under similar commercial policies. The import volumes from each of these
     countries during the period under consideration were significant and the price trends
     similar.
(26) Under these circumstances and in the absence of any new relevant information, the
     conclusions laid down in recitals (41) to (44) of the provisional duty Regulation with
     regard to cumulation of the dumped imports are confirmed.
     2.     Prices of the dumped imports
(27) Prices of the dumped imports from the exporting countries concerned were found to be
     significantly below the prices charged by the Community producers on the Community
     market during the investigation period. The prices of the exporters concerned were
     compared with the sales prices on the Community market charged by the complainant
     producers, on a per-product-type basis and on the basis of weighted average prices at
     the same level of trade.
(28) The Chinese parties claimed adjustments in respect of differences in quality between
     their products exported to the Community and those sold by the complainant producers.
(29) It should be stressed that, as is set out in recital (50) of the provisional duty Regulation,
     the import prices were, for the purpose of a fair comparison at a comparable level of
      trade, adjusted by an importer's mark-up which -was established at 12% in respect of the
      product imported from Croatia and Thailand. In the case of the Chinese product,
     however, an additional adjustment of 7%, estimated on the basis of evidence provided
      regarding the reworking cost of rejected fittings, was granted for such material
      differences and had already been taken into account in establishing the price
      undercutting margins referred to in recital (51) of the provisional duty Regulation.
(30) The claim made by the Chinese parties has therefore to be rejected and the margins of
     price undercutting established provisionally for all exporting countries are confirmed.
 ---pagebreak---      3.     Situation of the Community industry
(31) It was claimed by the Chinese parties that the Community producers were profitable
     during the years 1990, 1991 and 1992 and therefore suffered no injury.
(32) With regard to this claim the investigation has shown that all the producers concerned
     were either'in a situation of minimal and reducing profits or recurring losses, with an
     aggravation of these trends during the period of investigation.
     4.     Final conclusion on injury
(33) In the light of the above and in the absence of any other arguments, the conclusions as
     set out in recitals (59) and (60) of the provisional duty Regulation, namely that the
     Community industry has suffered material injury within the meaning of Article 4(1) of
     Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88, are confirmed.
                                  G. CAUSE OF INJURY
(34) In the provisional duty Regulation, the Commission concluded that the dumped imports
     from the exporting countries in question caused material injury to the Community
     industry, on the grounds that the Community producers had lost 11.5% of the
     Community market between 1989 and the investigation period, while the dumped
     imports had gained 11.8% of the market in the same period. Moreover, almost all
     economic indicators of the Community industry were negative and there was a clear
     coincidence between the increase in dumped imports at low prices undercutting the
     Community producers' prices and the deterioration of the situation of the Community
     industry.
(35) The Chinese parties claimed that the fittings imported from China could not have caused
     injury to the Community industry because such fittings are, due to their inferior quality,
     not a "like product" within the meaning of Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88. It was also
     claimed that the significant increase in imports of certain fittings of the products
     concerned from other third countries not covered by this proceeding, such as Austria
     and Switzerland, should have been taken into consideration when injury was
     being determined.
(36) With regard to the first argument, the Chinese fittings and those produced and sold in
     the Community are to be regarded as a like product, as was definitively established in
     recitals (6) to (9). The argument is therefore to be rejected.
(37) With regard to the increase of certain imports from Austria and Switzerland, it was
     found during the investigation that total imports of the fittings under consideration from
     Switzerland had declined from 2.813 tonnes in 1989 to 2.153 tonnes in 1993, and that
     those originating in Austria were relatively stable at 6.251 tonnes in 1989 and
     6.641 tonnes in 1993. Compared to the evolution of imports from the above countries,
     imports from China had jumped from 451 tonnes in 1989 to 4 146 tonnes in 1993, that
     is to say, by more than 800%.
(38) Moreover, according to Eurostat data, average prices of imports of the like product from
     Switzerland and Austria and from most of the other third countries not subject to the
     proceeding were found to be significantly higher than those of the dumped imports, and
     there was no indication that the imports from these countries were dumped. It is
     therefore considered unlikely that the imports from other third countries have caused
     injury to the Community industry. In any event, even if they had contributed to the
     injury suffered by the Community industry, the fact remains that the dumped imports
     from the three exporting countries concerned have, taken m isolation, caused material
     injury to the Community industry.
     The preliminary findings with regard to causation as set out in recitals (61) to (69) of
     the provisional duty Regulation are therefore confirmed.
 ---pagebreak---                                  H. COMMUNITY INTEREST
(39) As was stated in recital (70) of the provisional duty Regulation, in assessing the
      Community interest, the need to eliminate the trade distorting effects of injurious
      dumping and to restore effective competition should be given special consideration. In
      recital (71) to (75) of the provisional duty Regulation, the Commission, for the purpose
      of the provisional findings, had determined that, in accordance with Article 11 of
      Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88, the imposition of provisional anti-dumping measures was
      in the interests of the Community.
(40) The Chinese parties argued that the adoption of anti-dumping measures would not be
      in the interests of the Community user industry. This claim was not substantiated by any
      relevant evidence. In addition, no observations were received from any Community user
      of the product concerned imported from China, Croatia or Thailand following the
      imposition of provisional anti-dumping duties.
(41) In the absence of any further substantiated evidence, the conclusion reached in
      recital (75) of the provisional duty Regulation, that it is in the Community interest to
      impose anti-dumping measures to eliminate the injurious effects of the dumped imports
      under consideration, is confirmed.
                                       L UNDERTAKING
(42) Having been informed of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of which it
      was intended to recommend the imposition of definitive anti-dumping duties, the
      Croatian producer and the three Thai producers which had cooperated in this
      investigation offered undertakings concerning their exports of the products in question
      to the Community. After examination of these offers, the Commission considered the
      undertakings acceptable since they would eliminate the injurious effects of dumping in
      accordance with Article 10(2)(b) of Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88 and could be
      satisfactorily monitored.
(43) The Commission consulted the Advisory Committee on the acceptance of these
      undertakings and, since some objections were raised, sent a report on the consultations
      to the Council. In accordance with Articles 9 and 10 (1) of Regulation (EEC)
      No 2423/88, the undertakings offered were accepted by Commission Decision
      96/..../EC(7).
(44) Notwithstanding the acceptance of the undertakings offered by the Croatian and
      Thai exporters, a residual duty should be imposed on imports of the products concerned
      originating in Croatia and Thailand, in order to underpin the undertakings by avoiding
      their circumvention.
(45) As far as the People's Republic of China is concerned, the two cooperating
      Chinese exporters informed the Commission, following the disclosure of definitive
      findings, of their intention to propose an offer of an undertaking together with,
      allegedly, an offer from the Chinese authorities (MOFTEC) with regard to the control
      of the exports to the Community. However, no concrete offer from the Chinese
      exporters concerned nor any proposal from the Chinese authorities with a view to
      establishing an export control system was received by the Commission.
    ' In these circumstances, it has been concluded that definitive measures with regard to the
      People's Republic of China should be imposed in the form of ad valorem anti-dumping
      duties
(?)
      See page       of this Official Journal
                                                10
 ---pagebreak---                                             J. DUTY
(46) Provisional measures took the form of ad valorem anti-dumping duties. They were,
     depending on the country concerned, imposed m accordance with the "Eesser duty rule"
     at rates based either on the injury elimination margin or the dumping margin established
     Where the injury margin was lower than the respective dumping margin found, the duty
     was based on this lower level. In all other cases the provisional duty was limited to the
     dumping margin. Since no change was made to the dumping and injury findings, the
     provisional findings as set out in recitals (76) to (82) of the provisional duty Regulation
     are hereby confirmed.
(47) For exporters in each of the exporting countries concerned who neither replied to the
     Commission's questionnaire nor otherwise made themselves known and in the absence
     of any comments on the approach outlined in recital (81) of the provisional duty
     Regulation, the highest level of duty established for an exporter in the country
     concerned should apply.
(48) For the reasons outlined in recital (34) of the provisional duty Regulation, a single duty
     has been established for all producers and exporters concerned of the People's Republic
     of China.
(49) On this basis, definitive anti-dumping duties, in the form of ad valorem duties, should
     be imposed as follows:
                                                                       Rate of duty
     - People's Republic of China:                                      58.6%
     - Croatia.                                                         38.4%
     - Thailand:                                                        58.9%.
     These duties should not apply to imports of the products concerned manufactured and
     exported to the Community by the Croatian and Thai exporters from which undertakings
     have been accepted.
                        K. COLLECTION OF PROVISIONAL DUTY
(50) In view of the level of dumping margins found and the seriousness of the injury caused
     to the Community industry, it is considered necessary that the amounts secured by way
     of the provisional anti-dumping duty for all companies should be definitively collected
     in full,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
                                             Article
     A définitive anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on imports of tube or pipe fittings
     (other than cast fittings, flanges and threaded fittings), of iron or steel (not including
     stainless steel), with a greatest external diameter not exceeding 609.6 mm, of a kind
     used for butt-welding or other purposes, falling within CN codes ex 7307 93 1 I
     (Taric code 7307 93 11 *90), ex 7307 93 19 (Taric code 7307 93 19*90), ex 7307 99 30
     (Taric code 7307 99 30*91) and ex 7307 99 90 (Taric code 7307 99 90*91) and
     originating in the People's Republic of China, Croatia and Thailand
                                                 11
 ---pagebreak--- 2.    The rate of duty applicable to the net, free-at-Community-frontier price, before duty
      shall be as follows:
                                                  Rate of duty      Taric additional code
      People's Republic of China                     58.6%
      Croatia                                        38.4%                 8881
      Thailand                                       58.9%                 8851
      with the exception of imports of the products concerned which are manufactured and
      sold for export to the Community by the following companies from which undertakings
      have been accepted:
      (a)   Croatia (Taric additional code 8880):
            - Zeljezara Sisak, Zagreb,
      (b)   Thailand (Taric additional code 8850):
            - Awaji Sangyo (Thailand) Co. Ltd., Samutprakarn,
            - Thai Benkan Co. Ltd., Prapadaeng-Samutprakarn,
            - TTU Industrial Corp. Ltd., Bangkok.
3.    Unless otherwise specified, the provisions in force concerning customs duties
      shall apply.
                                          Article 2
The amounts secured by way of the provisional anti-dumping duty pursuant to
Regulation (EC) No 2318/95 shall be definitively collected in full
                                          Article 3
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of 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
                                                         The President
                                               12
 ---pagebreak---                                                                    ISSN 0254-1475
                                                             COM(96) 83 final
                                              DOCUMENTS
EN                                                                        02 11
                                     Catalogue number : CB-CO-96-091-EN-C
                                                              ISBN 92-78-00987-3
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities
L-2985 Luxembourg
                                            13