CELEX: 51995PC0069
Language: en
Date: 1995-03-02
Title: Proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of colour television receivers originating in Malaysia, the People' s Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, Singapore and Thailand and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
                                                    COM(95) 69 final
                                                    Brussels, 02.03.1995
                                   Proposal for a
                              COUNCIL RFfiULATION (EC)
  imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of colour television receivers
   originating in Malaysia, the People's Republic of China, the Republic of Korea,
  Singapore and Thailand and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed
                           (presented by the Commission)
 ---pagebreak---                                             y<
                           EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM
   1.   Commission Regulation (EC) No 23 76/941 imposed a provisional anti-dumping
        duty on imports of colour television receivers originating in Malaysia, the
        People's Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, Singapore and Thailand.
  2.    The expiry date for the provisional duty was 2 February 1995. Council
        Regulation (EC) No 140/952 extended this duty for a period of two months
        expiring on 3 April 1995.
  3.    With regard to normal value, following publication of the provisional measures
        and the subsequent disclosure of the Commission's dumping calculations, a large
        majority of the exporters concerned requested, and were granted, a hearing and
        made their views known in writing, as did other interested parties.
  4.    Several exporters made submissions on the calculation of the dumping margins,
       which were accepted or rejected on their merits and are discussed in more detail
       in the attached proposed Regulation. Consequently, the dumping margins of
       some exporters were modified.
  5.   As far as other points in the provisional measures are concerned, particularly
       with regard to injury and causality, various arguments were put forward by
       exporters and other interested parties., With regard to the calculation of the
       definitive duty, the Commission has taken into consideration the contribution of
       the dumped imports to the poor economic situation of the Community industry.
       These arguments are discussed in detail in the attached proposed Regulation.
 6.    The Commission originally published a notice of initiation3 in respect of the
       proceeding which included exports of colour television receivers originating in
       Turkey. As far as these exports are concerned, they were found to be
       insignificant and therefore it is proposed to confirm their exclusion from the
       scope of the measures and to terminate the proceeding with regard to Turkey.
l
  OJL255, 1.10.94, p. 50.
2
   OJL 21, 28.1.95, p. 1.
3
  OJC307,25.11.92,p.4
 ---pagebreak--- 7. In iK^or^ance with Aitiâs 12 of Çmml ^ejulation p i € ) M® %mM, the
   ÇoRimisskm is propping #iat definitive antidumping me&surss jfeouW !œ
   imposed oa imports of mkw M&mm mmvws originating m Malaysia, the
   $§&^&$Qûm* thel^pphlic of terea, Siagapoie mû 1 M . In mw ofohe
   dumping ma*pns e^tahtisJW aj*d the mtimmm ofih§ kywy mmâ Ihffefey, it
   is considered necessary that amounts secured by way of provisional anti-
   imping duties should hi definitively coHeeted to the extent of Ae amount of the
   définitive duty imposed.
8. The {^pission intend to palish the decision to tecmifjaie the proceeding in  in
   respect of Turkey at the same time as the Council Reptation
 ---pagebreak---                                              yf<5--
                         COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No
                                             of
   imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of colour television receivers
    originating in Malaysia, the People's Republic of China, the Republic of Korea,
   Singapore 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 (EEC) No 2423/88 of 11 July 1988 on protection
  against dumped or subsidized imports from countries not members of the European
  Economic Community4, as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 522/945, and in
  particular Article 12 thereof,
 Having regard to the proposal submitted by the Commission after consultation of the
  Advisory Committee,
 Whereas :
                                A. PROVISIONAL MEASURES
 (1)     The Commission, by Regulation (EC) No 2376/946, hereinafter referred to as
         the "provisional Regulation", imposed a provisional anti-dumping duty on
         imports into the Community of colour television receivers (hereinafter referred
         to as "CTVs") originating in Malaysia, the People's Republic of China, the
         Republic of Korea, Singapore and Thailand.
4
   O.J. No L 209,02.08.1988, p. 1.
5
   O.J. No L 66,10.03.1994, p. 10.
6
  O.J.NoL255,1.10.94, p. 50.
 ---pagebreak---       By Regulation (EC) Wfa 14©»* tfie €&ua©E extended* the* validity of this: duty
      for a period of tw^months^expiring on••$ April 1995;
                            B. SUBSEQUENT PROCEDURE
(2)   Following; the imposition of the provisional' antidumping: èaty; several interested
      parties submitted comments in writing, requested, and were granted, hearings.
(3 )   Upon request; parties were informed of the essential fmm and considerations on
      the basis of which it wau intended to* reeommefld l i e impositions oi definitive
      duties and the definitive collection of amounts secured: by way of a provisional
      duty. They were also granted a period within which to make representations
      subsequenf to the disclosure
(4)   The oral and written comments submitted by the parties were considered and,
      where appropriate, the Commission'sfindingswere modified to take account of
      them.
     e. m&met mwm cmmrnrnMA-mm Mm LIKE mmmm
(5)   As no new evidence nor arguments have been presented regarding the product
      under consideration and the like product, the findings set out in recitals 8 to 18
      of the provisional Regulation are confirmed
                             B, COMMUNITY INPUSTRY
(6)   After the imposition of the provisional duties, several exporters questioned the
      standing of the complainants^ on the grounds that the criteria used to define the
      producers' "main core of business* (recital 23 of the provisional Regulation)
      were too weak, particularly in the light of the fact that imports by the
      Community industry from the countries concerned accounted for up to 25% of
      their Community production sold in the Community.
7
  OJ. NoL 21,28.1.95, p. 1.
 ---pagebreak---     It should be recalled in this respect that Article 4(5) of Regulation (EEC)
    No 2423/88 (hereinafter referred to as the "Basic Regulation") leaves a margin
    of discretion to the Community institutions to interpret the term Community
    industry as referring to the rest of Community producers, where the other
    producers are related to the exporters concerned or are themselves importers of
    the product concerned.
    In this particular case sufficient evidence has been provided to show that the
    purpose of the imports of the Community producers from countries concerned in
    the proceeding was to stay on the market with as full a range of models as
    possible or even to protect market niches which would have disappeared without
    sales of the models in question. Account was also taken of the fact that the
    commercial decision to import CTVs from the countries concerned had been
    taken by the producers in question at least partly as a consequence of the proven
    injurious dumping and that the prices of these imports did not undercut already
    depressed prices on the Community market.
    In addition one exporter argued that, due to the allegedly insufficient standing of
    the complainants, injury had been assessed on too narrow a basis. The standing
    of the complainants has been the subject of an in-depth examination by the
    Commission which was referred to, in detail, in the provisional Regulation. The
    exporter argued that other non-complaining Community producers should have
    been taken into account when assessing whether the complainants comprised a
    major proportion of the Community industry. This factor has indeed been taken
    into account in the said examination and the argument of the exporter in this
    regard is therefore rejected as being unfounded.
(7) In these circumstances, it is considered that the criteria referred to in the
    provisional Regulation for the purpose of applying Article 4(5) of the Basic
    Regulation were applied appropriately and reasonably and consequently, the
    findings set out in recitals 19 to 23 of the provisional Regulation are confirmed.
    The standing of the complainants thus confirmed, the allegations made in respect
    of the scope of the injury investigation are therefore rejected.
 ---pagebreak---                                 E. ORIGIN
The three Chinese exporters, specifically referred to in recifcal 33 and 34 of the
provisional Regulation, which disputed the Commission's origin findings as
established in recitals 33 to 38 of the same Regulation, claimed that the origin
had not been determined for the People's Republic of China in accordance witn
the relevant customs provisions in force and that the approach followed in the
case of the People's Republic of China was inconsistent with the me adopted in
respect of the other exporting countries concerned.
As already indicated in the provisional Regulation, recitals 32 and 37, the
investigation has been based, inter alia, on the working assumption that CTVs
have the origin declared when imported into the Community.
The Chinese exporters who disputed the Commission's conclusions arising out of
the origin examination had previously supplied importers in the Community with
information that indicated that the CTVs imported into the EC during the
investigation period had indeed originated in China.
The Commission continued to examine the issue of origin in relation to Chinese
exports and took into account the arguments made by Chinese exporters
following publication of the provisional Regulation. However no new evidence
was forwarded by the Chinese exporters concerned which would lead the
Commission to consider that a different conclusion would be appropriate for the
definitive determination. It was decided that there are insufficient grounds to
depart torn the origin of these exports as declared to the Customs authorities of
the Member States during the period of investigation.
One Korean producer alleged that the approach taken by the Community to the
origin of CTVs in this proceeding would favour non-cooperating subsidiaries of
Japanese companies located in Malaysia and Singapore, in that these subsidiaries
might in the future declare their CTVs assembled in Malaysia and Singapore to
be of Japanese origin and, in this way, avoid the residual duties established for
those latter countries. This would be as a direct result of Japanese exporters
being excluded from the proceeding on the grounds of insufficient imports into
the Community of Japanese origin CTVs.
 ---pagebreak---      In this respect it has to be pointed out that the exporter concerned did not submit
     any evidence that the CTVs assembled in Malaysia and Singapore by subsidiaries
     of Japanese companies actually originated in Japan. A change in the origin
     determination is therefore not warranted. It should be recalled that only in those
     cases where data verified by the investigators at on-site verification visits
     conducted as part of a normal anti-dumping investigation proved that
     declarations were incorrect, was a departure made from the origin as declared by
     importers based on information received from their suppliers. With regard to the
     possibility that in the future these subsidiaries of Japanese companies located in
     Malaysia and Singapore will declare their CTVs exported to the Community to
     be of Japanese origin, the normal customs control against false declaration will
     take place. Should the declared Japanese origin turn out to be true and all other
     conditions for initiating an anti-dumping proceeding against CTVs of Japanese
     origin be fulfilled, a proceeding may be initiated.
(10) Since all above claims have been rejected, the findings set out in recitals 24 to 41
     of the provisional Regulation are confirmed.
                                     F. DUMPING
                                    (i) Normal value
                                        (a) General
(11) One Malaysian and one Thai exporter continued to claim that the Commission
     should have based normal values on sales to third countries after making
     adjustments for "cost differences". Informed of the Commission's position that
     the application of the methodology in question would require adjustments which
     risked committing serious errors due to a lack of precise comparable data, these
     exporters argued that the constructed values involved subjective choices as to
     the establishment of the amounts for both S.G. & A. and profit. The exporters
     concerned stressed that the constructed values led to a much more unfavourable
     result than the method based on sales to third countries and that, where there
     was a choice between two alternative methods, the method leading to a lower
     dumping margin should be preferred.
 ---pagebreak---                                            €
     After extensive examination of this issue», the Commission: rejects the argujnenti
     that the level of S M M A, and profit were subjectively determined ft should
     indeed be noted thafc the level of SO. & A and profit used; for the- e^nsteuejted
     value methodology applied to these exporters were nott déterminée oiivs*ib|eetive
     assessments but were based on actual accounting, data. The Commissioniremains
     of the opinion that the use of &<&. & A. and prcrfit established a& indicated in the
     provisional Regulation and applied to producers/exporters in market economy
     countries, is more precise than the suggested methodology based; on third
     country export prices. Accordingly, the use of constructed normal values,, which
     are more accurate and therefore more appropriate m confirmed,
(12} One Korean exporter objected to the method of calculating the OEM allowance
     in relation to the construction of normal values. The exporter concerned argued
     that the OEM allowance should be 30% instead of one third of the profit realized
     on own^brand sales;
     In relation to the level of the OEM allowance, it should be recalled that this
     allowance has been applied in the past on a ease-by-case basis, dependent on the
     facts established in particular proceedings. In the absence of OEM sales on some
     domestic markets, the Commission has, in this case, decided to grant the OEM
     allowance by applying the profit used for constructing normal values as one third
     of the profit realized on own-brand sales. This approach is in line with previous
     practice and has not been objected to by any other exporter in this proceeding.
     The claim by the exporter is therefore rejected and recitals 51 and 52 of the
     provisional Regulation are confirmed.
 ---pagebreak---                                     (b) Republic of Korea
  (13) One Korean exporter claimed that its normal values should be reduced because
        the Commission had based the constructed values on the expenses incurred and
        the profit realized on the sales of products in the same business sector and not
        solely on sales of the like product. The Commission had originally based its
        calculations on sales in the same business sector because it was not satisfied that
        there were sufficient representative sales of the like product sold profitably on
        the domestic market. The exporter concerned was able satisfactorily to
        demonstrate that its sales of the like product on the domestic market were both
        profitable and made in sufficient quantities. Accordingly, the exporter's normal
       values were revised.
 (14) One Korean exporter continued to claim that an OEM allowance should be
       granted on comparable models' normal values for two of its models exported to
       the Community. However, after requesting further documentation relating to
       these particular sales, it was apparent that these models were own-brand sales
       and therefore the granting of an OEM allowance for normal value calculations
       was not justified in these circumstances.
 (15) The findings set out in recitals 54 to 56 are confirmed.
(16) One Turkish exporter of Korean origin sets, for which a dumping margin was
       established for the purposes of the provisional Regulation, had its normal values
       revised. This arose because of changes to the normal value of comparable sets
       manufactured and sold on the Korean market and upon which the exporter's
       margin was based. As a consequence of these changes it was determined that no
       dumping margin was applicable to this producer's exports of own-assembled
      Korean origin sets.
                                        (c) Singapore
(17) In the absence of any new arguments, the findings laid down in recital 58 are
      confirmed.
 ---pagebreak---                                       (d) Thailand
(18) In the absence of any new arguments, thefindingslaid down in recitals 59 to 64
     of the provisional Regulation are confirmed.
                                      (e) Malaysia
(19) One Malaysian exporter objected to the amount of an adjustment made for
     financing costs which involved an interest-free loan from its parent company.
     This objection was based on the premise that the benefits gainedfromthe loan in
     constructing normal value had been overestimated. After re-examining the
     method of calculation and the amount of costs allocated to the like product, the
     effects of the change to the exporter's normal value was adjusted to take account
     of its objection. The findings set out in recitals 65 to 67 of the provisional
     Regulation are confirmed.
                             (f) People's Republic of China
(20) As far as the choice of the market economy country used for reference purposes
     as set out in Article 2 (5) of the Basic Regulation is concerned, one exporter,
     after having expressed in the course of the investigation its preference for the
     country "with the lowest normal value", indicated that it now considered Korea
     more appropriate than Singapore. However, neither the alleged greater
     similarity of models nor the assumption that the comparison would be easier if
     Korea was chosen were supported by substantiated evidence. This claim was
     therefore rejected.
(21) Another exporter continued to express its preference for normal values based on
     domestic prices in the market economy country used for reference purposes as
     set out in Article 2 (5) of the Basic Regulation. In this respect, reference should
     be made to the fact that such a methodology would require numerous, and
     possibly inaccurate adjustments, a situation which also led the Commission to
     establish constructed normal values for the exporters themselves in the market
     economy countries concerned.
 ---pagebreak---   (22) The choice of Singapore as the market economy country used for reference
        purposes as set out in Article 2 (5) of the Basic Regulation for the establishment
        of normal value for the People's Republic of China is therefore confirmed.
                                      (ii) Export price
                          (a) Market economy countries / General
 (23) The findings set out in recitals 71 to 73 of the provisional Regulation are
        confirmed.
                    (b) Market economy countries /Related     importers
 (24) A Korean exporter reiterated that all exports to his related importer in the
       Community should be taken into account for export price calculations. This
       request cannot be acceded to, since, the exports concerned were not imported
       into the Community, but held under bond, until a sale to an independent
       customer in, or outside, the Community was made. Only those exports that were
       released for free circulation in the Community during the period of investigation
       were taken into account.
       Recitals 74 to 76 of the provisional Regulation are therefore confirmed.
                               (c) People's Republic of China
(25) All Chinese exporters reiterated their claims to receive individual treatment and
       alleged that the Commission did not sufficiently motivate the refusal of such
      treatment in the provisional Regulation.
 ---pagebreak---                                             10
      The Commission has repeatedly stated, in extenso, its reasoning for not allowing
      individual treatment of companies in the People's Republic of China. In the
      provisional Regulation, reference was made in particular to the difficulty of
      establishing whether a company enjoys real and permanent independence where
      it merely appears to enjoy a degree of independence at a certain point in time.
      No Chinese exporter supplied sufficient evidence to warrant a different
      conclusion to be drawn/Although, some exporters were able to show that they
      enjoyed a degree of independence from the state in that they were not wholly
      controlled state organizations, this freedom can only be seen as conferring at
      most a quasi-autonomous status within an economic and political system that
      still retains a large degree of centralized control and which clearly does not
      correspond to that which pertains in a market economy country.
      It is considered that the reasons for not allowing individual treatment in this case
      are sufficiently explained.    The findings set out in recitals 78 to 81 of the
      provisional Regulation are therefore confirmed.
                                    (iii) Comparison
(26) Several exporters disputed the preliminary determination in so far as it rejected
     the allowances claimed under Article 2(10)(c) of the Basic Regulation in respect
     of OEM sales. After due consideration, the Commission accepted that those
     direct selling expenses claimed by exporters and duly substantiated should be
     deducted in full, as the expenses to which they relate formed part of expenses
     included in the construction of normal value for the OEM models.
(27) Although the difference in prices for sales made in different quantities was
     already taken into account by the acceptance of a volume rebate granted by the
     exporter concerned in the calculation of normal value, one Korean exporter
     continued to claim an allowance for sales made in different quantities and at
     different commercial stages. At the request of the Commission the exporter
     produced further evidence to support its claim. However, the evidence
     forwarded did not justify making the additional allowances claimed .
 ---pagebreak---                                               11
 (28) All producers concerned reiterated their claims that certain commissions paid to
        companies belonging to the same group should not be treated, as indicated in
        recital 86 of the provisional Regulation, as expenses under Article 2 (10) (c) (v)
        of the Basic Regulation.     Following the imposition of provisional duties, the
        producers concerned provided sufficient evidence that the commissions in
        question related partly to payments which had no bearing on the sales under
        consideration.    Accordingly, the relevant adjustments were reduced to the
        amount corresponding to the actual sales commissions.
 (29) Two Korean exporters objected to the Commission reducing the allowance
       claimed in respect of normal value for the cost of credit granted, by the costs
       relating to the financing of value added tax (VAT) and special excise tax
       portions of the net invoiced amount. They argued that the taxes charged on the
       invoices were directly related to the sales under consideration and that they were
       demonstrably part of the costs of credit relating to the sales.
       After due consideration, the Commission accepted that the costs of credit
       relating to special excise tax did form part of legitimate costs relating to sales
       and thus could form part of the allowance claimed, after taking into account the
       legal deadline for rendering the monies due to the Korean tax authorities.
      However, in the case of VAT, their arguments were rejected. No direct link
      between the (net) costs of VAT payable with the sales concerned could be
      established since the amount of VAT charged on domestic sales is not
      accountable in full to the Korean tax authorities, such VAT is offset against
      VAT charged on the purchases of the exporters concerned and only the net
      amount is payable, (if any). Any cost of credit relating to the exporters' VAT
      accounting system is a general overhead expense and cannot be identified
      separately as a selling expense for CTVs.          The credit adjustments of the
      producers concerned were revised accordingly.
(30) Several Chinese exporters claimed that an adjustment to normal value should be
      granted for differences "in economic levels" existing between the People's
      Republic of China and the market economy country used for reference purposes
      as set out in Article 2 (5) of the Basic Regulation.         In the absence of any
      provision in the Basic Regulation in this respect, no such adjustment was
      granted.
 ---pagebreak---                                           12
                                 (iv) Dumping margins
                              (a) Co-operating Exporters
(31) Account being taken of comments received from interested parties where
     appropriate, the dumping margins thus established are as follows:
     Malaysia:        -Makonka:               2.3%
                      -Orion:                13.5%
                      - Technol Silver:     25.1%
     - Thai companies assembling CTVs of Malaysian origin:
                      - GoldStar Mitr:       19.6%
                      - World Electric:      17.3%
     Thailand:        - Samsung:             29.7%
                      - Teletech:            33.6%
                      - Thomson:             14.7%
     Singapore:       - Hitachi:             16.3%
                      - Funai:                 0%
                      - Philips:            24.6%
                      - Sanyo:               14.4%
                      - Thomson:             13.3%
     Korea:           -Daewoo:               17.9%
                      -GoldStar:             13.4%
                      -Samsung:             13.7%
     - Turkish companies assembling CTVs of Korean origin:
                      - Profilo:              0%
                     - Bekoteknik:            0%
     People's Republic of China:            25.6%
 ---pagebreak---                                                 13
                                (b) Non-cooperating Exporters
 (32) Several Chinese exporters disputed the methodology used for the establishment
       of the weighted average dumping margin for the People's Republic of China in
      the provisional Regulation. One exporter claimed in particular that the weighted
       average dumping margin of the co-operating companies should be used for all
       Chinese exporters.
      In the absence of any indication that the dumping margins of the non-
      cooperating companies are lower than the maximum margin found at the co-
      operating companies, it is considered that this claim should be rejected. Indeed,
      if dumping margins had been lower, the exporters concerned would, in all
      probability, have made themselves known and co-operated.
(33) Several of the Chinese exporters claimed that the methodology chosen would
      dissuade exporters from co-operating since it did not take account of the
      relatively high level of co-operation reached in the present case.
      It has to be stressed in this respect that, on the contrary, co-operation enables the
      companies to improve the information available to the Commission.                  In
      particular, it is clear that the larger the percentage of co-operating exporters, the
      smaller the impact of the "highest dumping margin" on the level of the duty
      applicable. Finally, as far as the reasoning is based on the percentage of co-
      operation, it is precisely because the reported figures were considered as
      representative that they were used as "facts available".
(34) In the absence of any further comment, Recitals 95 and 96 of the provisional
      Regulation are therefore confirmed.
 ---pagebreak---                                             14
                                      G. INJURY
                           (i) Prices of the dumped imports
                                  (a) Related importers
(35) Concerning the method of establishing the level of price undercutting in relation
      to sales by related importers to the first independent customers in the
      Community, one exporter objected that the model comparison, as explained in
     recitals 102 and 103 of the provisional Regulation, did not take account of all
     factors affecting selling prices. The exporter claimed that differences in signal
     reception capabilities had an impact on the selling price. In view of the fact that
     no conclusive evidence was supplied by this exporter to support its objection and
     that no other exporter contested the criteria which were uniformally applied for
     determining the comparability of models, the Commission found that there were
     no reasonable grounds to modify the price undercutting calculation.
                                 (b) Unrelated importers
(36) For the purposes of the establishment of price undercutting, the price of all
     imports by unrelated importers had been established at the level of the
     Community frontier price plus customs duty and other import costs (15%).
     Given the difficulty of arriving at an amount which took into account all channels
     of sale as well as individual levels of trade for the sales to non-cooperating
     importers, (a large majority) and given the fact that most exporters who sold to
     unrelated importers had a similar mix of customers it was considered reasonable
     to apply a uniform percentage. Accordingly, a further 10% was added for
     additional distribution and marketing costs and profit.
 ---pagebreak---                                                15
        With regard to this method of establishing price undercutting, representations
        were made that the adjustments to the selling prices of the product concerned
        were inadequate for allowing a correct calculation. One exporter claimed that the
         10% mark-up to cover distribution and marketing costs plus profit was
        inadequate and that a higher adjustment should be applied. It was, however,
        pointed out that its proposals for adjustments were based on a selective sample
        of sales and that, conversely, sales which were made direct to large retail chains
        incurred little or no extra distribution or marketing costs and therefore in these
        circumstances a 10% adjustment would have been excessive.
        Therefore, taking all sales channels into account an amount of 10% was
       considered reasonable for comparison purposes. A general change in the method
       of undercutting was therefore not appropriate. The findings set out in recitals
        102 to 105 of the provisional Regulation are confirmed.
 (37) After a general re-examination, the weighted average undercutting margins
       expressed as a percentage of the free at Community frontier price were in the
       following ranges:
                 - for Malaysia,                 from 7.50% to 23.40%;
                 - for Thailand,         from         3.02% to 29.89%;
                 - for Singapore,                from 0% to 23.68%;
                 - for the Republic of Korea, from 38.61% to 54.00%;
       For the People's Republic of China, the weighted average undercutting margin
       expressed as a percentage of the free at Community frontier price was 58.7%.
                                  (ii) Other injury issues
(38) Another exporter claimed that the volume of so-called large screen CTVs
      imported from the People's Republic of China was insignificant and should not
      be cumulated with the imports of other countries involved in the proceeding. The
      Commission cannot accept that these imports should not be cumulated. It should
      be noted that the Community market share of Chinese exports of large screen
      CTVs alone was more than 2% of total Community consumption in the
      investigation period and that these imports represented more than ten times the
      imports of large screen Chinese CTVs in 1988.
 ---pagebreak---                                                16
  (39) One exporter continued to claim that the Community industry had not suffered
       injury in the case of imports of so-called large screen CTVs and that the decrease
       in sales of small screen CTVs could not justify injury causation in the case of
       large screen CTVs. The Commission examined this issue in the provisional
       Regulation and the exporter concerned produced no new evidence to support its
       arguments.     Therefore the claim was rejected for the reasons given in the
       provisional Regulation.
 (40) The remaining findings in recitals 97 to 117 of the provisional Regulation are
       therefore confirmed.
                                       H. CAUSATION
                             (i) Effect of the dumped imports
 (41) One Chinese exporter argued that exports of very large screen CTVs from the
       People's Republic of China were either negligible or did not exist and therefore
       could not be causing injury to the Community industry. This claim cannot be
       accepted, as the exports of CTVs from the People's Republic of China which
       form part of the product under consideration and the like product, compete with
       Community production of all CTVs including such large screen CTVs and
       thereby contribute to the overall injurious effects of dumping that has been
       found,
                                 (ii) Effects of other factors
 (42) One exporter alleged that the Community industry had suffered from self-
       inflicted injury or was shielded from the effects of dumping, in that a large
       proportion of its lost sales were merely replaced by Community industry-owned
       production in Austria or from dumped imports by Community producers from
7      countries involved in the proceeding.
       This allegation cannot be accepted. Only a part of the exports from Austria may
       be linked to the Community industry.           No evidence was produced which
       demonstrated that any of the imports from Austria were offered at prices which
       undercut the Community industry's prices.
 ---pagebreak---                                              17
      As already stated in recital 6 of this Regulation, the purpose of the imports of the
      Community producers from the countries concerned in the proceeding was to
      stay on the market with as full a range of models as possible or even to protect
      market niches which would have disappeared. The producers in question took a
      commercial decision influenced by external factors and based on legitimate self-
      interest. Their decision to import from the countries concerned was caused by
      the proven injurious dumping that took place. It should also be recalled that the
      prices of these imports did not undercut the already depressed prices on the
      Community market.
(43) After re-examination it should be noted that recital 126 of the provisional
      Regulation requires correction to the extent that volumes imported by the
      Community industry from the countries concerned represented 4.5% of the
      market in 1990, while during the period of investigation, this share was 4.1%.
                                     (iii) Conclusion
(44) In consideration of the above, the findings set out in recitals 118 to 129, with the
      exception mentioned in recital 43 of this Regulation, are confirmed.
                           I. COMMUNITY INTEREST
(45) One exporter alleged that taking measures would not avoid further de-
     localization of Community production since the Community production of CTVs
     would be non-viable for structural reasons. No evidence to support this
     allegation was supplied.
(46) Several exporters alleged that measures would not be in the interest of
     consumers. This allegation has already been addressed at length in the
     provisional Regulation and in the absence of any further substantiated evidence,
     thefindingsset out in recitals 130 to 138 of the said Regulation are confirmed.
 ---pagebreak---                                               18
                 J. DETERMINATION IN RESPECT OF TURKEY
(47) Further analysis of the situation pertaining to exports of Turkish origin CTVs,
        described in recitals 98, 99 and 139 of the provisional Regulation was carried out
        and the conclusion reached is that the facts as set out in the provisional
       determination should be confirmed8.
                                     K. UNDERTAKINGS
(48) The Commission has received offers of undertakings from several exporters
       pursuant to Article 10 (2) of the Basic Regulation. These offers have been the
       subject of careful examination, with particular attention being paid to the
       feasibility of monitoring the undertakings proposed.
       The acceptance of undertakings for consumer products has historically been
       exceptional given, inter alia, the complexity of the models, the number of
       different types and the variety and the regularity with which they are upgraded Of
       otherwise modified. All these characteristics lead to virtually insurmountable
       difficulties in monitoring. In the case of CTVs, it is the Commission's opinion
       that these difficulties could not be overcome and that, consequently, such
       measures would not ensure the long term suppression of injurious dumping. Jt
       w p therefore considered, after consultation, that the acceptance of undertakings
       was not appropriate in this particular proceeding and the offers concerned have
       accordingly been rejected.
                                         L. DUTY
(49) Diverging views were submitted on the fact that duty calculations were based on
       thé injury elimination level (where appropriate), which was arrived at by using
       pricf undercutting calculations. No new arguments or viewpoints which were
       sufficiently reasoned have been forwarded, therefore a change in the method of
       calculating the Injury elimination level is not justified.
S See page XX of this Official Journal.
 ---pagebreak---                                             19
      On this basis, the resulting percentage increases are :
        for the Republic of Korea              up to 54.00%
        for Malaysia                           up to 23.40%
        for Thailand                           up to 29.89%
        for Singapore                          up to 23.68%
        for the People's Republic of China     up to 58.79%
      For the reasons outlined in the provisional Regulation and in recital 25, 32 and
      33 above, a single duty has been established for all producers in the People's
     Republic of China.
(50) The methodology applied in establishing the duty rates for non-cooperating
     exporters who exported CTVs originating in Malaysia, the Republic of Korea,
     Singapore and Thailand, as set out in recital 145 of the provisional Regulation is
     confirmed.
(51) Definitive anti-dumping duties, in the form of ad valorem duties, should be
     imposed as follows:
                                              Rate of duty
       Republic of Korea                      17.9%
       Daewoo                                 17.9%
       GoldStar                               13.4%
       Samsung                                13.7%
       Profilo                                  0    (CTVs assembled in Turkey)
       Bekoteknik                               0    (CTVs assembled in Turkey)
      Malaysia                               23.4%
      Makonka                                  2.3%
      Orion                                   10.1%
      Technol Silver                           7.5%
      GoldStar Mitr                          19.6% (CTVs assembled in Thailand)
      World Electric                         13.5% (CTVs assembled in Thailand)
 ---pagebreak---                                              20
        Singapore                               23.6%
        Thomson                                  2.6%
        Sanyo                                    4.3%
        Philips                                  2.8%
        Ifl^chi                                  0
        Eunaj                                    0
                                                29.8%
        lel^fich                                29.8%
        Thomson                                  3.0%
        l^msung                                 12.1%
        P$q$$'$JUpHblic of China                25.6%
             M< C Q W C T I Q N OF THE PROVISIONAL DUTIES
(2|) In view of tl^e magnitude of the dumping margins found for the majority of
      exporters and the seriousness of the injury caused thereby, it is co^sid§r§d
      necessary tlwt amounts secured by way of provisional anti-dymping fjuty for all
      compass should be definitively collected. Where the provisional duty exceed?
     the ^uty rate d a t i v e l y imposed, the amount collected should pot exceed that
     of the definitive anti-dumping duty,
WL$ A J W T E P TRIS REGULATION:
                                         Article 1
\.   ^ déPnJfjy^ antidumping duty is hereby imposed on imports of colciur television
     reçeivfrs;
     with i| disgonaj screen si?e of more than 15,5 cm, whether or not c^mhipfd |n
     tji§ same housing with a radio broadcast receiver and/or a clock, facing wiflim
     ÇN çode$ £x: 8528 IP 52 (Taric code : Ex 8528 10 52*10), $S§9 10 H 85|g
     10 56; P ? 8 10 58, px 8528 10 62 (Taric code : 8528 10 6? *10) $nd 8528 ÏQ
     6$, originating lr| Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand,
 ---pagebreak---                                             21
      with a diagonal screen size of more than 42 cm, whether or not combined in the
      same housing with a radio broadcast receiver and/or a clock, falling within CN
      codes 8528 10 54, 8528 10 56, 8528 10 58, Ex 8528 10 62 (Taric code : 8528
      10 62 *90) and 8528 10 66, originating in the People's Republic of China and the
      Republic of Korea.
2.    The rate of the duty applicable to the net free-at-Community-frontier price
      before duty shall be as follows :
                                    Rate of                  Taric additional
                                    duty                     code
 Malaysia                           23.4%                    8801
 People's Republic of China         25.6%
 Republic of Korea                  17.9%                    8807
 Singapore                          23.6%                    8812
 Thailand                           29.8%                    8816
     with the exception of imports which are manufactured and sold for export to the
     Community by the following companies which shall be subject to the rate of duty
     mentioned hereunder :
 ---pagebreak---                                              22
                                                                Rate of    Taric
                                                                duty       additional
 .:,      , .            •   . ••                                          code
  a) CTVs originating in Malaysia manufactured by:
  - Makonka Electronics SDN BHD, Ehsan, Malaysia                  2.3%     8796
  - Orion Electric SDN. BHD, Melaka, Malaysia                    10.1%     8797
  - Technol Silver (M) SDN. BHD, Ehsan, Malaysia                  7.5%     8798
  - GoldStar Mitr Co. Ltd., Samutsakorn, Thailand                19.6%     8799
  - World Electric (Thailand) Ltd., Chonburi, Thailand           13.5%     88QQ
  b) CTVs originating in the Republic of Korea
         manufactured by:
  - Daewoo Electronics Co. Ltd., Seoul, Republic of Korea       17.9%      8802
  - GoldStar Co. Ltd., Seoul, Republic of Korea                  13.4%     8803
  - Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Seoul, Republic of Korea      13.7%      8804
  - Bekoteknik Sanayi A.S., Istanbul, Turkey                      0.0%     3805
  - Profile Telra Elektronik Sanayi Ve Ticaret A.S., Istanbul,
         Turkey                                                   0.0%     $305
  c) CTVs originating in Singapore manufactured by:
  - Funai Electric (Singapore) Pte. Ltd., Singapore               0.0%     8808
  - Hitachi Consumer Products (S.) Pte. Ltd., Singapore           0.0%     8808
  - Philips Singapore Pte. Ltd., Singapore                        2.8%     8809
  - Sanyo Electronics (Singapore) Pte. Ltd., Singapore            4.3%     8810
 - Thomson Television Singapore Pte. Ltd, Singapore               2.6%     8811
 d) CTVs originating in Thailand manufactured by:
 - Teietech (Thailand) Ltd., Chonburi, Thailand                 29.8%      8813
 - Thai Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Chonburi, Thailand        12.1%      8814
 - Thomson Television (Thailand) Co. Ltd., Pathumthani,
         Thailand                                              1 3.0%    | 8815
3.     Unless otherwise specified, the provisions in force concerning customs duties
       shall apply.
 ---pagebreak---                                            23
                                        Article 2
The amounts secured by way of provisional anti-dumping duty under Regulation (EC)
No 2376/94 shall be definitively collected at the duty rate definitively imposed.
Amounts secured in excess of the definitive rate of duty shall be released.
                                        Article 3
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the
OfflcialJournal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member
States.
Done at Brussels,
                                               For the Council
 ---pagebreak---                                                                ISSN 0254-1475
                                                          COM(95) 69 final
                                  Catalogue number : ÇB-CO-95H3f79-lN«C
                                                           ISBN 92«77«8$|63-7
OfBctforOfficial Publications of the European Communities