CELEX: 51991PC0437
Language: en
Date: 1991-11-05
Title: Proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION ( EEC ) imposing a definitive anti­dumping duty on imports of oxalic acid originating in India or China

tJJIf"'*" " I
                     COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
  p f e L " • >- r
  Iff 4    r ^ ^  ^
                                                          C0M(91) 437 final
                                                          Brussels, 5  November 1991
                                              Proposal for a
                                         COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC)
                            Imposing a definitive ant I-dumping duty on Imports
                               of oxalic acid originating In India or China
                                      (presented by the Commission)
jjj*^
 ---pagebreak---                              EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM
        Procedure
        Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1472/91 of 29 May 19911 Imposed
        provisional ant I-dumping duties of 6.5% on imports of oxalic acid
        originating in India and of 20.3% on those originating in China.
        The duties were extended for a period not exceeding two months by
        Council Regulation 2833/91.2
 I I. Qumolng
        The arguments put forward by the producers/exporters concerned were
        not considered to provide sufficient grounds for a change In the
        method used to make a provisional assessment of dumping margins. The
        provisional figures are therefore confirmed.
        The Indian producers/exporters claimed that normal value should have
        been calculated on the basis of a weighted monthly average. The
        Commission decided to allow this request, and the dumping margin was
        reduced to 4,4% for Punjab Chemicals and Pharmaceuticals Ltd and Excel
        Industries Ltd.
 n i . inlury
        The Commission also confirms Its provisional findings with regard to
        Injury.
 IV.    Definitive measures
       The Commission concludes that imports of oxalic acid originating in
        India should carry an ad valorem anti-dumping duty of 4.4% and those
       originating In China an ad valorem duty of 20.3%.
1      0J L 138, 1.6.1991, p.62.
2      0J L 272, 28.9.1991, p.2.
 ---pagebreak---                                  -2-
The Commission is therefore submitting to the Council a proposal for a
CounclI Régulât Ion:
    imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on Imports of oxalic acid
   originating in India;
    Imposing a definitive ant I-dumping duty on imports of oxalic acid
   originating in the People's Republic of China;
-  making definitive the collection of the amounts secured by the
   provisional ant I-dumping duty (up to the percentages Indicated in
   the Regulation imposing the definitive ant I-dumping duty).
 ---pagebreak---                              Proposal for a
                     COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No ...
                                    Of ...
             Imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on Imports
                of oxalic acid originating In India or China
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88 of 11 July 1988 on
protection against dumped or subsidized imports originating in countries
not members of the European Economic Community,1 and in particular Article
12 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal submitted by the Commission after
consultations within the Advisory Committee as provided for by the above
Régulât Ion,
Whereas:
                          A.   PROVISIONAL MEASURES
 (1) Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1472/912 imposed a provisional anti-
     dumping duty on Imports Into the Community of oxalic acid falling
     within CN code ex 2917 11 00 originating in India or China.
     Council Regulation (EEC) No 2833/91 3 extended that duty for a period
     not exceeding two months.
1    0J L 209, 2.8.1988, p.1.
2    0J L 138, 1.6.1991, p.62.
3    0J L 272, 28.9.1991, p.2.
 ---pagebreak---                                     -2-
                       B. CONTINUATION OF PROCEEDING
(2) Following Imposition of the provisional duty, the parties which had so
    requested were granted a hearing by the Commission. They also made
    their views on the provisional findings known in writing. The
    Commission examined their oral and written comments.
(3) At their request, the parties were informed of the essential facts and
    considerations on the basis of which It was intended to recommend the
    imposition of definitive duties and the definitive collection of
    provisional duty. They were allotted a period in which to make
    comments. Some made use of this opportunity.
                    C. PRODUCT CONSIDERED; LIKE PRODUCTS
(4)  In the absence of new arguments concerning the product considered and
     Its similarity to the Community product, the Council confirms the
    findings put forward by the Commission in recitals 10 and 11 of
    Regulation (EEC) No 1472/91.
                                 D. DUMPING
(5) (a) Normal value
    For the purposes of the definitive findings, normal value was
    established using the same methods used In the provisional calculation
    of dumping margins, taking account of new facts and arguments put
    forward by the parties.
 ---pagebreak---                                     -3-
(6) The Indian exporters claimed that normal value should have been
    established on the basis of a monthly weighted average Instead of a
    weighted average for the entire period of the Investigation. In this
    instance, the Commission considers that a monthly weighted average
    could Indeed be used.
(7) In the light of these considerations, the Commission will calculate
    normal value for oxalic acid from India on the basis of a weighted
    monthly average and confirms the calculation of normal value for
    oxalic acid from China contained in recital 13 of Regulation (EEC) No
    1472/91.
    The Council confirms these findings.
    (b) Export price
(8) The Chinese exporters wished the export prices provisionally
    calculated on the basis of available facts, as stipulated in Article
    7(7)(b) of Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88, to be determined using
    Eurostat statistics rather than the figures contained In the
    complaint.
    The Commission takes the view that In this case the figures contained
     In the complaint, which come from traders whose information has been
    confirmed by an importer which cooperated in the investigation, are
    more suitable than Eurostat statistics. The Commission observed that
    Eurostat Import figures for the product were not In fact correct.
(9) With regard to imports of oxalic acid from China, therefore, and in
    the absence of comments on the matter from Indian exporters, the
    Council confirms the findings put forward by the Commission In
    recitals 14 and 15 of Regulation (EEC) No 1472/91.
 ---pagebreak---                                      -4-
     (c) Comparison
(10) In the absence of new arguments from the Interested parties, the
     Council confirms the findings put forward by the Commission In recital
     16 of Regulation (EEC) No 1472/91.
     (d) Dumping margins
(11) 1. India
     On the basis of the new normal value, the definitive dumping margin is
     4,4% for Punjab Chemicals and Pharmaceuticals Ltd. and Excel
     Industrles Ltd.
     2. China
     The Council confirms the observations and findings put forward by the
     Commission In recital 17 of Regulation (EEC) No 1472/91.
                                  E. INJURY
(12) In Its preliminary findings, the Commission considered that the
     Community firm in question had suffered substantial Injury. The main
     grounds for this belief were the rapid increase in exports,
     undercutting by the exporters concerned on the Community market and
     the consequent decrease in selling prices for the Community
     complainant.
     (a) Volume, market share and export price
(13) With regard to export volume, the Indian exporters requested that
     calculations be made on the basis not of the accounting data received
     by the Commission in the replies to Its questions (data verified by
      its Investigators), but on lower Eurostat figures. This was on the
     grounds that re-export from the Community to third countries might
     have taken place. The Commission rejected this request, considering
     that It had no Information confirming this reasoning and that the
     Indian exporters had failed to offer even minimal proof of such
     occurrences.
 ---pagebreak---                                     -5-
(14) The Indian and Chinese exporters also challenged the Commission's
     provisional findings with regard to market share. However, since
     their figures were based on Inaccurate statistics for Community
     consumption (sales figures for all Community producers and figures for
     imports of Indian origin), the Commission confirmed the observations
     It had put forward in recitals 19 and 20 of Regulation (EEC) No
     1472/91.
     In the absence of other considerations, the Council confirms the
     findings put forward by the Commission In recitals 19 to 22 of
     Regulation (EEC) No 1472/91.
     (b) Cumulative effect
(15) The Indian exporters claimed that taking an aggregate of Chinese and
     Indian exports of oxalic acid to the Community was inappropriate in
     that the economic structures, tax systems, raw materials subsidies and
     manufacturing procedures of the two countries were different.
(16) The Chinese exporters, meanwhlle, challenged aggregation of Chinese
     and Indian exports on the grounds that they had followed a different
     sales strategy from the Indian exporters, bringing down their exports
     during the first eight months of 1990.
(17) The Commission took the view that the Indian exporters' arguments were
     not strictly relevant to the considérât ions governing aggregation of
     exports from third countries. It rejected the Chinese exporters'
     arguments on the grounds that their conduct was comparable to that of
     the Indian exporters for the Investigation period as a whole, although
     it had differed to a degree for a few months.
 ---pagebreak---                                     -6-
     The Commission therefore upholds the validity of the reasoning put
     forward In recital 23 of Regulation (EEC) No 1472/91.
     In the light of these considerations, the Council confirms the
     findings put forward by the Commission In recitals 23 and 24 of
     Regulation (EEC) No 1472/91.
     (c) The state of the Community Industry; conclusions concerning injury
(18) in the absence of new arguments from the Interested parties, the
     Council confirms the observations and findings put forward by the
     Commission In recitals 25 to 34 of Regulation (EEC) No 1472/91.
                     F. LINK BETWEEN DUMPING AND INJURY
(19) The Indian exporters disputed that their exports of oxalic acid to the
     Community might have caused injury to the Community producer
     concerned, arguing that their share of the market was negligible and
     that the Community complainant's difficulties were caused by errors of
     management such as an Increase in production capacity and ill-
     considered Investment within the existing company and in the
     establishment of a new company.
                            «.
(20) The Chinese exporters also disputed causing Injury, adding to the
     claim referred to above the argument that the Community complainant's
     difficulties were caused mainly by the activity of other Community
     producers.
 ---pagebreak---                                     -7-
(21) The Commission pointed out that India's market share was 9.4%, and
     therefore not negligible. It said that the Investment which had been
     criticised and the increase in production capacity had occurred at a
     time when Community consumption had risen substantially.
     The Commission stressed that the new company's production capacity had
     not been considered during the assessment of Injury, as It had not
     begun production during the period of Investigation.
(22) With regard to other Community producers, the fact that the production
     of oxalic acid was only a marginal activity for them, the fact that
     one of the producers sold most of its output to the other and the fact
     that the prices they charged on the Community market were
     significantly higher than those of the complainant Community firm led
     the Commission to conclude that these firms' activities had not caused
     Injury to the complainant.
(23) The Council therefore confirms the findings put forward by the
     Commission In recitals 35 to 41 of Regulation (EEC) No 1472/91.
                           G. COMMUNITY INTEREST
(24) The Indian exporters claimed that the risk In Imposing anti-dumping
     measures on their exports of oxalic acid was that the Community firm
     would acquire a monopoly, given that ant I-dumping measures were
     already applied to other countries.
 ---pagebreak---                                      -8-
     Thls argument seems to have little foundation considering the
     complainant's share of the Community market, the presence of other
     Community producers and the market penetration In the Community of
     imports from third countries.
(25) In the light of these considerations, the Council confirms the
     findings put forward by the Commission in recitals 42 to 44 of
     Regulation (EEC) No 1472/91.
                                   H. DUTY
(26) The Council confirms the provisional measures (ad valorem ant I-dumping
     duties corresponding to the dumping margins calculated) set out in
     recitals 45 to 47 of Regulation (EEC) No 1472/91.
                                I. UNDERTAKING
(27) The Indian producers/exporters offered a price undertaking. After
     consultation this undertaking was not considered acceptable by the
     Commission. The Commission notified the producers/exporters of the
     reasons for this decision.
                    J. COLLECTION OF PROVISIONAL DUTIES
(28) In the light of the dumping margins calculated for imports of oxalic
     acid originating In India and China and the degree of injury caused to
     the Community firm In question, the Council considers it necessary
     that the provisional ant I-dumping duty received be definitively
     collected at a rate corresponding to the definitive duty imposed.
 ---pagebreak---                                      -9-
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
                                  Article 1
1.   A definitive ant I-dumping duty is hereby imposed on imports of oxalic
     acid falling within code ex 2917 11 00 of the Combined Nomenclature
     and TARIC code 2917 11 00 * 10, originating In India or China.
2.   The amount of the duty, based on the free-at-Community-front 1er price,
     not cleared through customs, shall be:
     -  4.4% for imports of oxalic acid originating in India, and
     -  20.3% for imports of oxalic acid originating in China.
3.   The provisions in force concerning customs duties shall apply.
                                  Article 2
The amounts secured by way of provisional ant I-dumping duty Imposed by
Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1472/91 shall be collected at the rate
corresponding to the definitive duty.
                                  Article 3
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following Its publication
In the Official Journal of the European Communities.
 ---pagebreak---                                    -10-
Thls Regulation shall be binding In its entirety and directly applicable in
a 11 Member States.
Done at Brussels,
                                        For the CounclI
 ---pagebreak---  ---pagebreak---                                                                      ISSN 0254-1475
                                                              COM(91) 437 final
                                                       DOCUMENTS
EN                                                                              02
                                 Catalogue number : CB-CO-91-487-EN-C
                                                             ISBN 92-77-77148-8
Office for Official Publications of the European (immunities
L-2985 Luxembourg