HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"EN
8.5.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
126/1
II
(Non-legislative acts)
REGULATIONS
COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 418/2013
of 3 May 2013
imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of certain stainless steel wires originating in
India
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
evidence of dumping of the said product and of material
injury resulting therefrom, which was considered
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European
sufficient to justify the initiation of an investigation.
Union,
1.2. Parties concerned by the investigation
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of
30 November 2009 on protection against dumped imports
(4) The
Commission
officially
advised
the
complainant,
other
from countries not members of the European Community (
known Union producers, the known exporting

1 )
(‘the basic Regulation’), and in particular Article 7 thereof,
producers, known importers and users, and the Indian
authorities of the initiation of the investigation.
After consulting the Advisory Committee,
(5) Interested
parties
were
given
an
opportunity
to
make
their views known in writing and to request a hearing
Whereas:
within the time limit set in the notice of initiation. All
interested parties, who so requested and showed that
1. PROCEDURE
there were particular reasons why they should be
heard, were granted a hearing.
1.1. Initiation
(1) On
10
August
2012,
the
European
Commission
(‘the (6) In
view
of
the
large
number
of
exporting
producers
in
Commission’) announced, by a notice published in the
the country concerned, unrelated importers and Union
Official Journal of the European Union (
producers involved in the proceeding and in order to

2 ) (‘the notice of
initiation’), the initiation of an anti-dumping proceeding
complete the investigation within the statutory time
(‘the anti-dumping proceeding’) with regard to imports
limits, the Commission announced in the notice of
into the European Union (‘the Union’) of certain
initiation that it had decided to limit to a reasonable
stainless steel wires originating in India (‘the country
number the exporting producers in the country
concerned’).
concerned, unrelated importers and Union producers
that would be investigated by selecting a sample in
accordance with Article 17 of the basic Regulation (this
(2) On
the
same
day,
the
Commission
announced
by
a
process is also referred to as ‘sampling’).
notice published in the Official Journal of the European
Union ( 3 ), the initiation of an anti-subsidy proceeding
with regard to imports into the Union of certain
1.2.1. Sampling of exporting producers
stainless steel wires originating in India and
commenced a separate investigation (‘the anti-subsidy
(7) In
order
to
enable
the
Commission
to
decide
whether
proceeding’).
sampling would be necessary and, if so, to select a
sample, all exporting producers in the country
concerned were requested to make themselves known
(3) The
anti-dumping
proceeding
was
initiated
following
a
to the Commission and to provide information
complaint lodged on 28 June 2012 by the European
specified in the notice of initiation.
Confederation of Iron and Steel Industries (Eurofer)
(‘the complainant’) on behalf of producers representing
more than 50 % of the total Union production of certain
(8) In
total,
18
exporting
producers,
some
belonging
to
the
stainless steel wires. The complaint contained prima facie
same group, provided the requested information, agreed
to be included in the sample and seven of them asked for
individual examination in case they would not be
( 1 ) OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 51.
( 2 ) OJ C 240, 10.8.2012, p. 15.
included in the sample. 15 of these cooperating
( 3 ) OJ C 240, 10.8.2012, p. 6.
companies reported exports of stainless steel wires to

---

L 126/2
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
8.5.2013
the Union during the investigation period. Therefore, the
themselves known to the Commission and to provide
sample was chosen on the basis of the information
information specified in the notice of initiation.
submitted by these 15 exporting producers.
(16) A total of nine unrelated importers provided the
(9) In
accordance
with
Article
17
of
the
basic
Regulation,
requested information and agreed to be included in the
the Commission selected a sample based on the largest
sample. The Commission selected a sample of three
representative volume of exports of the product
companies accounting for 23,8 % of Indian imports
concerned to the Union which could reasonably be
into the Union during the investigation period on the
investigated within the time available. The sample
basis of the largest volume of imports into the Union.
selected consisted of two individual companies and one
However, two of the importers selected in the sample did
group of companies consisting of four related companies,
not submit questionnaire replies. Therefore, sampling at
together representing more than 63 % of the total
this stage of the investigation could not be applied and
volume of exports to the Union of the product
cooperation will be again sought from importers in the
concerned.
remainder of the investigation.
(10) In
accordance
with
Article
17(2)
of
the
basic
Regulation,
all known exporting producers concerned and the auth
1.2.4. Questionnaire replies and verification visits
orities of the country concerned were consulted on the
(17) Questionnaires
were
sent
to
the
three
sampled
(groups
selection of a representative sample. No comments to the
of) exporting producers in India and to the exporting
selection of the sample were made.
producers which requested individual examination, to
the six sampled Union producers, to the three sampled
(11) As
mentioned
in
recital
9
above,
the
sample
was
limited
unrelated importers and to nine known users.
to a reasonable number of companies which could be
investigated within the time available. The companies
investigated for the purpose of the investigation are
(18) Questionnaire replies were received from the three
listed in recital 19 below.
sampled (groups of) exporting producers in India as
well as from two of those exporting producers which
had requested individual examination, the six sampled
(12) Moreover,
as
mentioned
in
recital
8
above,
initially
7
Union producers, one unrelated importer and three users.
requests for individual examination were received.
Hence it was considered that at this stage the individual
examination would be unduly burdensome and would
(19) The
Commission
sought
and
verified
all
the
information
prevent the timely completion of the investigation.
provided by interested parties and deemed necessary for a
provisional determination of dumping, resulting injury
(13) However,
the
requests
made
by
exporters
that
submitted
and Union interest. Verification visits were carried out
the necessary information within the time limits will be
at the premises of the following parties:
examined in the remainder of the investigation.
Union producers:
1.2.2. Sampling of Union producers
(14) The
Commission
announced
in
the
notice
of
initiation
— Hagener Feinstahl GmbH, Hagen, Germany;
that it had provisionally selected a sample of Union
producers. This sample initially consisted of five
producers that were known to the Commission prior
— Inoxfil S.A., Igualada, Spain;
to the initiation of the investigation to produce
stainless steel wires in the Union. The Commission
— Rodacciai SPA, Milano, Italy;
selected the sample on the basis of the sales, production
volume and geographical location. Interested parties were
also invited in the notice of initiation to make their views
— Trafilerie Brambilla SPA, Calziocorte, Italy;
known on the provisional sample. No comment was
received on the proposed sample. The analysis of the
questionnaire replies revealed that one selected Union
— Ugitech Group:
producer had a related company also involved in the
manufacturing and sales of stainless steel wires. This
— Ugitech France S.A., Bourg en Bresse, France,
related company was thus also included in the sample.
Thus, the six sampled Union producers accounted for
46,5 % of the estimated total Union production The
— Sprint Metal Edelstahl, Hemer, Germany.
sample is considered to be representative of the Union
industry.
Exporting producers in India:
1.2.3. Sampling of importers
— Raajratna Metal Industries, Ahmedabad, Gujarat;
(15) In order to enable the Commission to decide whether
sampling would be necessary and, if so, to select a
sample, all unrelated importers were requested to make
— Viraj Profiles Vpl. Ltd, Thane, Maharashtra;

---

EN
8.5.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
126/3
— Venus group:
India, as well as the product produced by the Union
industry and sold on the Union market have the same
basic physical, chemical and technical characteristics and
— Venus Wire Industries Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai, Maha
uses. They are therefore provisionally considered to be
rashtra,
alike within the meaning of Article 1(4) of the basic
Regulation.
— Precision Metals, Mumbai, Maharashtra,
3. DUMPING
— Hindustan Inox Ltd, Mumbai, Maharashtra.
3.1. Introduction
1.3. Investigation period and period considered
(25) During the verification visits at the premises of the three
sampled Indian exporting producers and the subsequent
(20) The
investigation
of
dumping
and
injury
covered
the
analysis of the collected information, it was found that
period from 1 April 2011 to 31 March 2012 (‘the inves
they all had submitted some information which could
tigation period’ or ‘IP’). The examination of trends
not be considered to be reliable.
relevant for the assessment of injury covered the period
from 1 January 2009 to the end of the investigation
period (‘period considered’).
(26) In the case of one exporting producer, the Commission

had found that the costs reported in its questionnaire
reply was not in line and could not be reconciled with
2. PRODUCT CONCERNED AND LIKE PRODUCT
the costs reported in the producer’s internal accounting
system.
2.1. Product concerned
(21) The product concerned is wire of stainless steel
(27) The exporting producer alleged that the observed
containing by weight:
differences between the costs reported to the
Commission and the costs found in the internal
accounting system during the verification visit were due
— 2,5 % or more of nickel, other than wire containing
to errors in the registration of the transactions and to
by weight 28 % or more but not more than 31 % of
differences in accounting methods, in particular with
nickel and 20 % or more but not more than 22 % of
regards to the raw material consumption. The
chromium,
exporting producer argued that the data in the internal
accounting system was not reliable and should not be
— less than 2,5 % of nickel, other than wire containing
used for the purposes of the investigation. Although the
by weight 13 % or more but not more than 25 % of
exporting producer has been using the same accounting
chromium and 3,5 % or more but not more than 6 %
system for several years, it claimed that the Commission
of aluminium,
should base its analysis on the costs reported in the
questionnaire reply, not on the cost data contained in
the company’s internal accounting system.
currently falling within CN codes 7223 00 19 and
7223 00 99 and originating in India.
(28) It
should
be
noted
that,
whilst
the
data
contained
in
the
internal accounting system was consistent with the
(22) One
party
claimed
that
there
exist
so
called
‘highly
tech
audited financial statements provided by the exporting
nical’ product types which are different from the other
producer, it has not been possible to establish during
types of the product concerned produced in India but
the verification visit the reconciliation and thus the link
also in the Union. They further alleged that unlike most
between the costs tables specifically prepared for the
types exported from India to the Union, the technical
current investigation and the data contained in the
types are not commodities but specific product types
internal accounting system. Hence, in accordance with
produced for specific uses in certain steel grades and
Article 18 of the basic Regulation, it is considered that
certain diameters and should not be covered by the
the information found in the accounting system of the
investigation.
exporting producer should be used for the purpose of
this anti-dumping investigation.
(23) At
this
stage,
it
appears
that
the
technical
types
were
part
of the product definition and they have similar basic
(29) For
this
reason,
the
Commission
provisionally
adjusted
physical, chemical and technical characteristics
the cost data provided by the said exporting producer in
compared to other types of the product concerned.
its questionnaire reply by using the facts available in its
Moreover, it appears that these types are also produced
internal accounting system.
in by Union producers, hence the technical types are
covered by the scope of the investigation.
(30) In the case of a second exporting producer, the
Commission found that the purchases and the
2.2. Like product
consumption of raw materials reported to the
Commission in its questionnaire reply were not
(24) The
investigation
that
the
product
concerned
and
the
supported by the data found in the producer’s inventories
product produced and sold on the domestic market of
management system. In particular, it appeared that the

---

L 126/4
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
8.5.2013
distribution per steel grades was different in the two
the company also alleged that partly overlapping steel
sources. The Commission notes that the steel grade is a
grades make it impossible to make an exact recon
key factor in the determination of the cost of the final
ciliation as per each individual steel grade. This
product. Unreliable information concerning the steel
argument further undermines the reliability of the
grade could seriously distort the calculations of costs
reporting system of steel grades as a whole. The
and sales prices of individual product types and could
information provided concerning steel grades must be
therefore be misleading.
considered misleading.
(31) The exporting producer claimed however that the
(36) The
Commission
considers
that
the
reported
distribution
computer files containing the purchases of raw material
of raw material by steel grade is not reliable and should
collected by the Commission during the verification visit
be provisionally disregarded and that the determinations
were incomplete, because additional purchases of raw
should be made on the basis of facts available pursuant
material had been made by other units in the
to Article 18 of the basic Regulation. Due to the unre
company, but those purchases had not been reported
liability of the reporting system as a whole, it was not
and were not included in the computer files collected
possible to make the determinations on the basis of any
during the verification visit and examined by the
of the reported steel grades. Therefore the total
Commission. Furthermore, the exporting producer
consumption of all raw materials taken as a whole,
claimed that the observed discrepancies in the quantities
without considering the distribution by steel grade, was
of steel grades were due to the fact that some steel grades
used in calculating an overall dumping margin for all
were partly overlapping with each other and that some
products.
parts of the production process were not traceable on the
level of individual steel grades.
(37) Each
exporting
producer
received
an
individual
letter
outlining the specific and detailed reasons for which it
(32) The
Commission
however
notes
that
the
above
claims
was considered that some of the data provided in the
made by the company relating to the additional
questionnaire reply could not be accepted. They were
purchases of raw material are not sufficient to explain
also informed that the Commission intended to make
the observed discrepancies at the level of individual steel
provisional findings on the basis of facts available
grades. The Commission also notes that the company has
pursuant to Article 18 of the basic Regulation.
alleged that it is not possible to make an exact tracing by
individual steel grades in all the stages of the production
process. This argument further undermines the reliability
(38) All
three
exporting
producers
were
given
the
opportunity
of the reporting system of steel grades as a whole. The
to comment and requested hearings which were granted
information provided concerning steel grades must be
to them. They also provided their observations regarding
provisionally considered misleading.
the possible application of Article 18 of the basic Regu
lation in writing. Despite the explanations obtained from
the companies, they could not satisfactorily clarify the
issues described above which led to the replacement of
(33) The
Commission
considers
that
the
reported
distribution
some of the data by best facts available.
of raw material by steel grade is not reliable and should
be provisionally disregarded and that the determinations
should be made on the basis of facts available pursuant
to Article 18 of the basic Regulation. Due to the unre
3.2. Normal value
liability of the reporting system as a whole, it was not
(39) For
the
determination
of
normal
value,
the
Commission
possible to make the determinations on the basis of any
first examined for each sampled exporting producer
of the reported steel grades. Therefore the total
whether the total domestic sales volume of the like
consumption of all raw materials taken as a whole,
product to independent customers was representative,
without considering the distribution by steel grade, was
i.e. whether the total volume of such sales represented
used in calculating an overall dumping margin for all
at least 5 % of the total export sales volume of the
products.
product concerned to the Union during the IP in
accordance with Article 2(2) of the basic Regulation.
The Commission found that the overall sales by each
(34) In the case of the third exporting producer, the
sampled producer of the like product on the domestic
Commission also found during the verification visit
market were representative.
that the flows of raw materials reported in the ques
tionnaire reply were not consistent with the data
contained in the producer’s accounting system. It
(40) The
Commission
subsequently
identified
for
the
sampled
appeared that the distribution per steel grades was
producers having overall representative domestic sales
different in the two sources.
those product types sold domestically which were
identical or directly comparable with the types sold for
export to the Union.
(35) The
exporting
producer,
while
admitting
some
errors
in
its questionnaire reply, alleged that the differences in the
overall quantities of raw material could be reconciled by
(41) However,
as
explained
in
Section
3.1,
for
two
of
the
taking into account the changes in inventories. However,
exporting producers the comparisons described

---

EN
8.5.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
126/5
hereunder were made on the basis of the total of all
product, in the ordinary course of trade, during the
products, instead of comparing individual product types
investigation period. Where necessary, in particular as
separately.
explained in Section 3.1 above, the cost of production
and SG&A expenses were adjusted, before being used in
the ordinary course of trade test and for constructing
(42) For each product type sold by each sampled producers
normal value.
on its domestic market and found to be identical or
comparable with the product type sold for export to
the Union, it was examined whether the domestic sales
(49) Each
company
receives
its
individual
detailed
calculations
were sufficiently representative for the purposes of
used to determine their normal values and will be given
Article 2(2) of the basic Regulation. Domestic sales of
the opportunity to comment.
a particular product type were considered sufficiently
representative when the total volume of that product
type sold on the domestic market to independent
3.3. Export price
customers during the IP represented at least 5 % of the
total volume of the identical or comparable product type
(50) The
sampled
exporting
producers
exported
to
the
Union
sold for export to the Union.
either directly to independent customers or through

related companies.
(43) The
Commission subsequently
examined
whether
the
domestic sales of each sampled producer could be
(51) Where
the
product
concerned
was
directly
exported
to
considered as being sold in the ordinary course of
independent customers in the Union, the export price
trade pursuant to Article 2(4) of the basic Regulation.
was established in accordance with Article 2(8) of the
This was done by establishing the proportion of
basic Regulation on the basis of export prices actually
profitable sales to independent customers on the
paid or payable.
domestic market during the IP.
(52) Where
export
sales
to
the
Union
were
made
through
a
related company, the export price was established in
(44) Where the sales volume of a product type, sold at a net
sales price equal to or above the calculated cost of
accordance with Article 2(9) of the basic Regulation on
production, represented more than 80 % of the total
the basis of the price at which the imported product was
sales volume of that type, and where the weighted
first resold to independent customers in the Union. In
average sales price was equal to or higher than the unit
such cases, adjustments were made for all costs incurred
cost of production, normal value was based on the actual
between importation and resale, including duties and
domestic price calculated as the weighted average of the
taxes, as well as for SG&A and profits. The related
prices of all domestic sales of that type made during the
importer’s own SG&A costs were used and a reasonable
IP, irrespective of whether those sales were profitable or
profit margin was established on the basis of the profit
not.
margin attained by an independent importer of the

product concerned.
(45) Where
the
volume
of
profitable
sales
represented
80
%
or
less of the total sales volume of that type, or where the
3.4. Comparison
weighted average price of that type was below the unit
(53) The
normal value and export price
of the sampled
cost of production, normal value was based on the actual
exporting producers were compared on an ex-works
domestic price calculated as the weighted average price of
basis.
only the profitable domestic sales of that type made
during the IP.
(54) For
the
purpose
of
ensuring
a
fair
comparison
between
the normal value and the export price, due allowance in
(46) Where
the
product
types
were
all
sold
at
a
loss,
it
was
the form of adjustments was made for differences
considered that they were not sold in the ordinary course
affecting prices and price comparability in accordance
of trade.
with Article 2(10) of the basic Regulation.
(47) Where there were no sales of a like product in the
(55) On
this
basis,
adjustments
were
made
for
transport,
ordinary course of trade or where a product type was
ocean freight and insurance costs, handling loading and
not sold in representative quantities on the domestic
ancillary costs, packing costs, credit costs, discounts and
market, the Commission constructed normal value in
commissions where demonstrated to affect price
accordance with Article 2(3) and (6) of the basic Regu
comparability.
lation.
3.5. Dumping margins
(48) Normal
value
was
constructed
by
adding
to
the
average
cost of production during the investigation period,
(56) As
provided
by
Article
2(11)
and
(12)
of
the
basic
Regu
adjusted where necessary, the weighted average selling,
lation, for each sampled company the weighted average
general and administrative (‘SG&A’) expenses incurred
normal value established for the like product was
and the weighted average profit realised by the sampled
compared with the weighted average export price of
exporting producers on domestic sales of the like
the product concerned.

---

L 126/6
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
8.5.2013
(57) In line with the provisions of Article 9(6) of the basic
industry within the meaning of Articles 4(1) and 5(4)
Regulation, due to the application of Article 18 of the
of the basic Regulation and will hereinafter be referred
basic Regulation to all three sampled exporting
to as the ‘Union industry’.
producers, the dumping margin of the cooperating
exporting producers not included in the sample could
not be established on the basis of the average dumping
margin of the sampled companies.
4.2. Union production
(64) All
available
information
concerning
the
Union
industry,
such as information provided in the complaint, data
(58) In this case, it was considered appropriate to
collected from Union producers before and after
provisionally establish the dumping margin applicable
initiation of the investigation and the questionnaire
to the cooperating non-sampled exporting producers
responses of the sampled Union producers, was used in
based on their export price, established on the basis of
order to establish the total Union production for the
Eurostat import statistics, and the average normal value
investigation period.
established for the sampled Indian producers insofar as
the average normal value had not been affected by the
application of Article 18 of the basic Regulation.
(65) It
should
be
mentioned
that
one
Union
producer
related
to an Indian exporting producer and which opposed the
initiation of the investigation is also included in the defi
(59) On
this
basis,
the
dumping
margin
calculated
for
the
cooperating companies not included in the sample was
nition of the Union industry.
provisionally established at 28,0 %.
(66) On
this
basis,
the
total
Union
production
was
estimated
(60) With
regard
to
all
other
exporting
producers
in
India,
the
to be around 139 141 tonnes during the IP. This figure
Commission first established the level of cooperation. To
includes the production of all Union producers that made
this end, a comparison was made between the total
themselves known and the estimated production volume
export quantities indicated in the sampling replies and
of the rest of the Union producers, which did not come
the total imports from India as derived from the
forward in the investigation.
Eurostat import statistics. Since the level of cooperation
was high, the residual dumping margin was set at the
level of the highest dumping margin established for the
sampled exporting producers.
4.3. Sampling of Union producers
(67) As
indicated
in
recital
14
above
six
Union
producers
were included in the sample representing 46,5 % of the
(61) On
this
basis,
the
country-wide
level
of
dumping
was
estimated total Union production of the like product.
provisionally established at 32,3 %.
5. INJURY
(62) On
this
basis,
the
provisional
weighted
average
dumping
margins, expressed as a percentage of the CIF Union
5.1. Union consumption
frontier price, duty unpaid, are as follows:
(68) Union
consumption
was
established
on
the
basis
of
the
total sales volume of the Union industry on the Union
(in %)
market and the total imports. The year of 2009 was
marked by unprecedented high prices of nickel, the
Company
Provisional dumping
margin
main raw material used to produce the product
concerned and the like product, and the global negative
Raajratna Metal Industries 32,3
effects of the financial crisis, which together led to a
particularly low level of Union consumption in that
Venus Group 30,4
year. However, the market situation improved, as
shown in the table below and Union consumption
Viraj Profiles 24,4
increased by 50 % between 2009 and the IP.
Cooperating non-sampled companies 28,0
All other companies 32,3
2009 2010 2011 IP
Consumption
131 436 187
280 196
476 197
327
(in tonnes)
4. UNION INDUSTRY
4.1. Union industry
Index
100 142 149 150


(2009 = 100)
(63) The like product was manufactured by 27 Union
Source: Eurostat, complaint and questionnaire replies.
producers. They are deemed to constitute the Union

---

EN
8.5.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
126/7
5.2. Imports into the Union from the country
2009 2010 2011 IP
concerned
Average price (in EUR/ 2 372 2
801 3
246 3
196
5.2.1. Volume and market share of the imports concerned
tonne)
(69) During
the
period
considered
the
dumped
imports
into
Index
100 118 137 135
the Union from the cooperating exporting producers
(2009 = 100)
were found to have developed in terms of volume and
market share as follows:
Source: Eurostat and questionnaire replies.
(75) The
average
import
prices
from
India
increased
by
35
%
2009 2010 2011 IP
during the period considered, but they remained below
Volume 16
847 29
053 36
720 35
398
the sales prices of the Union industry during the same
period (see recital 93 below). This explains the surge in
Index
100 172 218 210
import volume and the significant increase by 40 % in
(2009 = 100)
the market share held by Indian exporters in the same
period.
Market share
12,8 15,5 18,7 17,9
(in %)
(76) In
order
to
determine
the
price
undercutting
during
the
Index
100 121 146 140
IP, the weighted average sales prices per product type of
(2009 = 100)
the sampled Union producers charged to unrelated
customers on the Union market, adjusted to an ex-
Source: Eurostat, complaint and questionnaire replies.
work level, were compared to the corresponding
weighted average prices per product type of the
dumped imports from the sampled Indian producers to
(70) Import
volumes
from
India
increased
considerably
by
the first independent customer on the Union market,
110 % over the period considered. The increase was
established on a CIF basis, with appropriate adjustments
particularly marked between 2009 and 2010 when
for post-importation costs.
imports from India surged by 72 % and when the
Union consumption increased by 42
%. However,
whilst consumption only increased by 5 % between
(77) The
result
of the
comparison,
when
expressed
as
a
2010 and the IP, the import volume from India
percentage of the sampled Union producers’ turnover
continued increasing significantly by 22 % in the same
during the IP, showed a weighted average undercutting
period.
margin of 15 % by the dumped imports from the
country concerned on the Union market. The lower
prices of the dumped imports compared to the Union
(71) The market share of dumped imports from India has
ones during the period considered, explain the significant
increased significantly by 40
% during the period
increase in Indian import volume and in the market
considered.
share held by the imports from India between 2009
and the IP.
5.2.2. Prices of imports and price undercutting
5.3. Economic situation of the Union industry
(72) As
explained
above
in
recital
22
one
party
expressed
concerns regarding the fact that the anti-dumping ques
5.3.1. Preliminary remarks
tionnaire did not allow to distinguish in particular certain
types of the product concerned, which in their view are
(78) In
accordance
with
Article
3(5)
of
the
basic
Regulation,
different.
the examination of the impact of the dumped imports

from India on the Union industry included an evaluation
of all economic indicators having a bearing on the state
of the Union industry during the period considered.
(73) This
concern was
addressed
in the
questionnaire
by
enlarging the so-called product control numbers (PCN)
in order to clearly identify the relevant types in the
(79) As
mentioned
in
recital
14,
sampling
was
used
for
the
investigation in particular for the price comparison
examination of the possible injury suffered by the Union
exercise. At this stage, the investigation revealed that
industry.
Indian exporting producers only exported limited quan
tities of these highly technical types. Nevertheless, it is
pointed that the changes made in the PCN ensured that
(80) For the purpose of the injury analysis, the Commission
prices of certain product types were compared directly
distinguished between macroeconomic and micro
with the prices of similar product types.
economic injury indicators. In this regard, the
economic situation of the Union industry is assessed
on the basis of (a) macroeconomic indicators, namely
(74) The
table
below
shows
the
average
price
of
dumped
indicators such as production, production capacity,
imports:
capacity utilisation, sales volume, market share and

---

L 126/8
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
8.5.2013
growth, employment, productivity, magnitude of the
evolution of consumption. Production volumes,
actual dumping margin and recovery from past
however, stagnated between 2010 and the IP.
dumping, for which the data was collected at the level
of the total Union industry and on the basis of (b) micro
economic indicators, namely indicators such as average
unit prices, unit cost, profitability, cash flow, investments,
(85) Whilst
capacity
utilization
improved
and
increased
by
13
return on investment and ability to raise capital, stocks
percentage points during the period considered,
and labour costs, for which the data was collected at the
production capacity remained fundamentally stable
level of the sampled Union producers.
during the period considered.
(81) It
is
noteworthy
that
all
available
information
concerning
(b) Sales volume, market share and growth
the Union industry including information provided in the
complaint, data collected from the Union producers
(86) The
trends
concerning
sales
volumes,
market
share
and
before and after the initiation of the investigation, and
growth developed as follows during the period
the questionnaire responses of the sampled Union
considered:
producers, was used in order to establish the macro
economic indicators and in particular the data pertaining
to the non-sampled Union producers.
2009 2010 2011 IP
Sales volume
88 796 124
641 124
007 124
217
(82) The
microeconomic
indicators
were
established
on
the
(tonnes)
basis of information provided by the sampled Union
producers in their questionnaire replies.
Index
100 140 140 140
(2009 = 100)
5.3.2. Macroeconomic indicators
Market share
67,6 66,6 63,1 62,9
(%)
(a) Production, production capacity and capacity utili
sation
Index
100 98 93 93
(83) The
trends
for
Union
production,
production
capacity
(2009 = 100)
and the utilization of the capacity developed as follows
during the period considered:
Source: Complaint, questionnaire replies.
2009 2010 2011 IP
(87) After
a
considerable
increase
between
2009
and
2010,
in
Production
105 646 140
363 138
795 139
141
the context of an increasing consumption, the sales
volume (tonnes)
volume to unrelated customers slowed down and did
not benefit from the continued increase in demand
Index
100 133 131 132
(4,9 % between 2010 and 2011). This is also reflected
(2009 = 100)
in the upward trend of closing stocks, which increased
overall by 41 % during the period considered as shown
in recital 100 below.
Production
244 236 246
324 245
922 246
599
capacity
(tonnes)
(88) Furthermore,
the
Union
industry
market
share
decreased
Index
100 101 101 101
by 4,7 percentage points during the period considered
(2009 = 100)
despite the steady increase of 50 % in consumption.
Capacity
43 57 56 56
utilisation (%)
(89) As
indicated
in
recital
68
above,
the
Union
consumption
was growing with 50 % between 2009 and the IP, while
Index
100 132 130 130
the volume of dumped imports increased significantly, by
(2009 = 100)
110 % during the same period, as indicated in recital 70
above. The growth of the Union market between 2009
Source: Complaint, questionnaire replies.
and the IP was therefore partially absorbed by dumped
imports, while the Union sales of the Union industry
grew by 40 % during the same period. This shows that
Union industry could not fully benefit from the growth
(84) Union production increased by 32 % during the period
in Union consumption due to the increasing market
considered reflecting to a certain extent the positive
share of dumped imports.

---

EN
8.5.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
126/9
(c) Employment and productivity
effect of the past dumping. The investigation in any case
did not bring forward any evidence that the industry is
(90) Notwithstanding
the
difficult
financial
situation
described
still recovering from past dumping practices.
in recitals 94-99 below, the employment of the Union
industry remained relatively stable during the period
considered. Given the increased production volume (see
recital 84 above), productivity as measured as output in
5.3.3. Microeconomic indicators
tonnes per person employed per year increased by 30 %
during the same period suggesting that the Union
(a) Average unit selling prices on the Union market and
industry made significant efforts to improve its efficiency.
unit cost of production
(93) The
average
sales
prices
of
the
sampled
Union
producers
to unrelated customers in the Union increased by 34 %
over the period considered. The rise reflects the general
increase in the cost of raw material experienced by the
2009 2010 2011 IP
industry during the same period. In 2011 and during the
IP the Union producers could only moderately increase
Number of
1 726 1
687 1
729 1
747
the prices to cover the increasing costs of production,
employees
enough just to keep profitability slightly above 1 % in
2011 and at break-even level in the IP. Thus, as the
Index
100 98 100 101
figures show in the table above, even a significant
(2009 = 100)
increase in sales price did not allow the Union industry
to achieve a reasonable level of profit.
Productivity (unit/ 61 83 80 80
employee)
Index
100 136 131 130
2009 2010 2011 IP
(2009 = 100)
Average unit selling price 2 988 3
833 4
185 4
018
Source: Complaint, questionnaire replies.
in the Union to
unrelated customers
Index
100 128 140 134
(d) Magnitude of the actual dumping margin and
(2009 = 100)
recovery from past dumping
Unit cost of production 3 542 3
931 4
127 4
011
(91) The
dumping
margins
of
three
of
the
sampled
Indian
(EUR/tonne)
exporting producers are above the de minimis level (see
recital 62 above). Given the sector of the product
concerned, the volume, market share and prices of the
Index
100 111 117 113
dumped imports from India, discussed above, the impact
(2009 = 100)
on the Union industry of the actual dumping margin
cannot be considered to be negligible.
Source: Questionnaire replies.
(b) Profitability, cash flow, investments, return on
(92) It
is
recalled
that
in
1999
anti-dumping
and
anti-subsidy
investments and ability to raise capital
measures ( 1 ) were imposed on the product concerned.
However, given the time lap between the expiry of the
(94) During the period considered the Union producers’ cash
measures that were introduced in 1999 and the current
flow, investment, return on investment and their ability
investigation, there is no data available to assess the
to raise capital developed as follows:
2009 2010 2011 IP
Profitability of sales in the Union to unrelated
– 18,5 –
2,6 1,4 0,2
customers (% of sales turnover)
Cash flow (EUR) –
19
790
367 –
226
207 7
778
576 5
096
869
Investments (EUR) 4
653
604 8
436
096 4
552
443 4
156
522
( 1 ) Council Regulations (EC) No 1599/1999 (OJ L 189, 22.7.1999,
p. 1), (EC) No 1600/1999 (OJ L 189, 22.7.1999, p. 19) and (EC)
No 1601/1999 (OJ L 189, 22.7.1999, p. 26).

---

L 126/10
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
8.5.2013
2009 2010 2011 IP
Index (2009 = 100) 100 181 98 89
Return on investments (%) –
68,8 –
11,2 6,7 0,8
Source: Questionnaire replies.
(95) The
profitability
of
the
sampled
Union
producers
was
became positive in 2011, it decreased considerably, by
established by expressing the pre-tax net profit of the
5,9 percentage points during the IP, reaching a low level
sales of the like product to unrelated customers as a
of 0,8 %.
percentage of the relevant turnover. In 2009, the
sampled Union producers were loss making but started
to recover in 2010 in line with the increase by 50 % in
consumption described in recital 68 above. However,
even if profitability slightly increased, profit levels at
(99) In
light
of
the
above,
it
can
be
concluded
that
the
0,2 % were still far below a reasonable level of profit
financial performance of the sampled Union producers
ability in the steel sector. Indeed, the target profit margin
remained somewhat fragile during the IP.
was provisionally set at 5 %, because it is considered that
it corresponds to the margin that could be reasonably
achieved by an industry of this type in the sector of the
product investigated under normal conditions of
competition, i.e. in the absence of dumped imports, on
(c) Stocks
sales of the like product in the Union as indicated by the
(100) The level of stocks of the sampled Union producers
Union industry. Furthermore this 5 % is a pre-tax profit
increased by 41 % during the period considered; their
margin which was considered as an appropriate
increase coincided with losses in market share, in
minimum in other investigation into similar products
particular during the IP.
in the same sector.
(96) During the IP the sampled Union producers managed to
2009 2010 2011 IP
break even; however, the price pressure exerted by
dumped imports prevented them from aligning their
Closing stocks 4 395 5
289 5
469 6
214
(tonnes)
prices with costs and thus to achieve satisfactory
results. This situation is also explained by the fact that
the product under investigation is considered to be a
Index
100 120 124 141
(2009 = 100)
commodity and thus prices are the main factor which
is driving customer’s choices.
Source: Questionnaire replies.
(97) Cash flow, which is the ability of the industry to self-
finance its activities and which was calculated on the
(d) Labour costs
basis of operations, was negative until 2010. Although
it improved in 2011, it decreased by 34 % between 2011
(101) The average labour costs of the sampled Union producers
and the IP.
increased modestly during the period considered
therefore they do not represent a determining factor in
the rise of cost of production.
(98) The
evolution
of
profitability
and
cash
flow
during
the
period considered limited the ability of the sampled
Union producers to invest in their activities and
2009 2010 2011 IP
undermined their development. As a consequence the
ability of the Union producers to raise capital and
Average labour 52 356 57
182 55
907 54
509
finance costs was hindered. Although the sampled
costs per
Union producers managed to make some investments
employee (EUR)
related to the like product in 2010, they dropped
thereafter and in particular during the IP when they
Index
100 109 107 104
decreased by 51 % compared to 2010 levels. Moreover,
(2009 = 100)
even if the return on investment, expressed as the profit
Source: Questionnaire replies.
in percentage of the net book value of investments,

---

EN
8.5.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
126/11
5.4. Conclusion on injury
Union industry, were also examined to ensure that the
possible injury caused by these other factors was not
(102) The investigation showed that the Union industry did not
attributed to the dumped imports.
fully benefit from the increase in consumption during the
period considered and in particular during the IP.
Initially, between 2009 and 2010, most of the injury
indicators pertaining to the Union industry largely
6.2. Effect of the dumped imports
improved but, subsequently, its economic situation
stagnated or even deteriorated.
(107) The investigation showed that the Union consumption
increased by 50 % over the period considered and at
the same time the volume of imports originating in
India more than doubled. On the other hand, the
(103) Indeed, in the context of a booming market, certain
increase of dumped imports coincided with a
indicators such as production and sales volume of the
slowdown in the sales volume of the Union industry to
Union industry increased significantly between 2009 and
unrelated parties between 2010 and the IP.
2010 but then registered a slowdown from 2010
onwards. This situation occurred despite a continued
increase in consumption.
(108) With regard to the price pressure prevailing on the
Union market during the period considered, it was
(104) Furthermore, the injury indicators related to the financial
found that the average import prices from India
performance of the Union industry such as cash flow,
remained constantly lower than the average sales prices
investment and profitability were seriously affected by
of the Union industry. By undercutting the Union
the price pressure which prevailed in the Union
industry on average by 15 % during the IP, Indian
market, in particular during the IP. The Union industry
dumped imports increased their market share from
was not able to increase its prices sufficiently in order to
2009 to the IP by 40 %, whilst the market share of
cover its costs of production between 2009 and 2010.
the Union industry decreased by 4,7 percentage points
Profitability was improving between 2009 and 2011 by
(from 67,6 % in 2009 to 62,9 % in the IP). The loss in
making a slight profit of 1,4 % in 2011; however, it
market share reveals that the Union industry could only
started deteriorating again during the IP when it
benefit from the increased consumption to a limited
reached only a breakeven level. This means that the
extent.
ability of the Union industry to raise capital and
recover was also undermined.
(109) In view of the increasing cost of production, the Union
industry tried to increase the unit price to unrelated
(105) In light of the foregoing, it is provisionally concluded
customers as shown in recital 93 above. However, due
that the Union industry suffered material injury within
to the price pressure exerted by the increasing volumes
the meaning of Article 3(5) of the basic Regulation.
of dumped Indian imports as stated above, the price
increase was not sufficient to sustain the growing costs,
thus the Union industry could not reach satisfactory
6. CAUSATION
profit levels that could be considered necessary for this
particular industry.
6.1. Introduction
(106) In accordance with Article 3(6) and (7) of the basic
Regulation, the Commission examined whether the
(110) Based on the above, it is concluded that the surge of
dumped imports from India had caused injury to the
dumped imports from India at prices constantly under
Union industry to a degree sufficient to be considered
cutting those of the Union industry have had a deter
as material. Known factors other than the dumped
mining role for the material injury suffered by the Union
imports, which could at the same time be injuring the
industry.
6.3. Effect of other factors
6.3.1. Imports from third countries
Country 2009 2010 2011 IP
People’s Republic of China Volume (tonnes) 8
129 10
853 14
360 16
403
(PRC)
Index (2009 = 100) 100 134 177 202
Market share (%) 6,2 5,8 7,3 8,3

---

L 126/12
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
8.5.2013
Country 2009 2010 2011 IP
Index (2009 = 100) 100 94 118 134
Average price 1
914 2
607 2
835 2
508
Index (2009 = 100) 100 136 148 131
Switzerland Volume
(tonnes) 8
094 10
700 9
187 9
115
Index (2009 = 100) 100 132 113 113
Market share (%) 6,2 5,7 4,7 4,6
Index (2009 = 100) 100 93 75 75
Average price 3
423 4
063 4
475 4
360
Index (2009 = 100) 100 119 131 127
The Republic of Korea
Volume (tonnes) 4
900 6
775 6
355 6
266
Index (2009 = 100) 100 138 130 128
Market share (%) 3,7 3,6 3,2 3,2
Index (2009 = 100) 100 97 87 85
Average price 3
717 4
165 4
761 4
627
Index (2009 = 100) 100 112 128 124
Total of all third countries
except India
Volume (tonnes) 25
793 33
586 35
749 37
712
Index (2009 = 100) 100 130 139 146
Market share (%) 19,6 17,9 18,2 19,1
Index (2009 = 100) 100 91 93 97
Average price 3
609 4
214 4
748 4
483
Index (2009 = 100) 100 117 132 124
(111) Apart from the dumped imports from India that
and in particular during the IP. Moreover, their market
constituted 48 % of all imports into the Union market
share decreased by 0,5 and 1,6 percentage points
during the IP, there were other sources of imports,
respectively during the IP.
including the People’s Republic of China, Korea and Swit
zerland, that had to be examined in the context of the
causal link.
(113) The average price from the People’s Republic of China
was below the price level of the Union industry and that
country’s market share showed an increasing trend
during the period considered. However, the investigation
(112) The investigation showed that the average sales prices of
showed that the product mix represented by the Chinese
Korean and Swiss exporting producers remained above
imports is different and that the Chinese products are
the sales prices of the Indian exporting producers and
not in direct competition with the ones of the Union
those of the Union industry during the period considered
industry or those of Indian origin. It was therefore

---

EN
8.5.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
126/13
considered that the Chinese exports could not have had a
market share throughout the period considered, whereas
significant impact on the core product types sold by the
the dumped Indian exports gained more market share.
Union industry in the Union market. Hence, any effect
the imports from China may have had on the injury
suffered by the Union industry was minimal.
(120) Therefore, although the economic crisis and the increase
in the prices of the raw materials may have contributed
to the Union industry’s poor performance, overall, it
(114) Nevertheless,
an exporting producer claimed that imports
cannot be considered to have an impact such as to
of stainless steel wires from the People’s Republic of
break the causal link between the dumped imports and
China, the Republic of Korea and Switzerland should
the material injury that the Union industry suffered
have been included in the scope of this investigation.
during the IP.
6.4. Conclusion on causation
(115) In addition to the facts
and considerations given above, it
should be noted that, at initiation stage and up to now,
(121) It has been demonstrated that there was a substantial
there is no evidence of dumping, injury and or causal
increase in the volume and market share of the
link which would have justified the initiation of an anti-
dumped imports originating in India in the period
dumping proceeding concerning imports originating in
considered (by 110 % and by 40 % respectively). In
the abovementioned countries. Moreover, even if there
addition, it was found that these imports were constantly
would be evidence to justify investigating other imports,
undercutting the prices charged by the Union industry
a difference in treatment which consists of opening an
on the Union market and in particular during the IP (on
anti-dumping proceeding against Indian imports only
average by 15 %).
would not qualify as discriminatory. The claim that
these countries should have been included in the scope
of the investigation is therefore not founded and should
be rejected.
(122) This increase in volume and market share of the dumped
imports from India coincided with the slow development
of the financial situation of the Union industry in
particular as of 2010. Thus, despite the recovery in
(116) On the basis of above, it is concluded that exports from
consumption, the Union industry was unable to pass
third countries did not contribute significantly to the
on the increase in cost of production to its customer
injury suffered by the Union industry.
to a satisfactory level and consequently financial indi
cators such as profitability, cash flow and investment
remained at low levels.
6.3.2. Export performance of the Union industry
(117) The total exports of the product concerned by the Union
(123) The examination of the other known factors which
could
industry represented 8,5 % of total production in the IP.
have caused injury to the Union industry revealed that
This picture is mirrored by exports to unrelated
these factors were not such as to break the causal link
customers by the sampled Union producers whose
established between the dumped imports from India and
exports represented 7 % of production in the IP and
the injury suffered by the Union industry.
prices were 36 % higher than the one in the EU
market in the same period. Based on this, it can be
concluded that the export activity of the Union
(124) Based
on the above analysis, which had distinguished and
industry could not be a potential cause of material injury.
separated the effects of all known factors on the situation
of the Union in industry from the injurious effects of the
dumped exports, it is provisionally concluded that the
6.3.3. The economic crisis and prices of raw materials
dumped imports from India have caused material

injury to the Union industry within the meaning of
(118) As mentioned in recital 68 above, consumption in 2009
Article 3(6) of the basic Regulation.
was particularly low due to the exceptional high price
level of nickel and the effects of the economic crisis. This
situation certainly explains the particularly bad financial
7. UNION INTEREST
state of the Union industry in 2009. However, it is
noteworthy that in the situation of growing
7.1. General considerations
consumption from 2010 onwards the performances of
the low-priced dumped imports contrast with that of the
(125) In accordance with Article 21 of the basic Regulation it
Union industry.
has been examined whether, despite the provisional
finding of injurious dumping, compelling reasons exist
for concluding that it is not in the Union interest to
adopt measures in this particular case. The analysis of
(119) The investigation showed that even during the general
the Union interest was based on an appreciation of all
economic recovery, the Union industry was unable to
the various interests involved, including those of the
benefit from the growing consumption and was losing
Union industry, importers, and users.

---

L 126/14
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
8.5.2013
7.2. Interest of the Union industry
(135) On average, purchases from India constituted around
67 % of their total purchases of the product concerned,
(126) The Union industry is composed of 27 known producers
and India represented the exclusive source of supply only
representing all of the Union production of the like
for one user. During the IP, the average percentage of the
product. The producers are located in different Member
turnover incorporating the product concerned repre
States of the Union, employing directly 1 747 people in
sented 54 % of their total turnover.
relation to the like product during the IP.
(136) The investigation showed that, during the IP, the average
(127) One Union producer, representing a relatively small
profitability of all cooperating users in the sectors which
share of the Union production and having a related
use the product concerned was above 9 % on turnover.
company in India opposed the initiation of the investi
gation. As mentioned in recital 22, it also argued that the
highly technical products should not be covered and that
(137) The likely effect of the proposed measures was assessed
it was not in the Union interest to impose the same
on the basis of questionnaire replies received from the
measures on this product type.
users and the total Union market for the product
concerned and the like product. Assuming the worst
case scenario for the Union market, i.e. that no price
(128) As mentioned in recital
72 this concern was addressed in
increase could be passed on to the distribution chain
the questionnaire by enlarging the PCNs which clearly
and that the users would continue purchasing from
identified these types in the investigation. However, at
India in previous volumes, the impact of the duty on
this stage, the investigation revealed that highly
the users’ profitability would mean a decrease of
technical products were covered by the investigation
around 1,2 percentage points.
and that Indian exporting producers only exported
limited quantities of these product types. Hence, the
concerns expressed by this producer were not considered
(138) It has to be noted that one user had a neutral position
to be founded and its claim was rejected.
regarding the investigation because it considers that the
imposition of measures will have no significant effect on
the market prices as the potential price increase would be
(129) It has been established that the Union industry suffered
absorbed by the distributors.
material injury caused by the dumped imports from
India. It is recalled that the Union industry could not
fully benefit from the growing consumption and the
(139) Another user expressed concerns that, if imposed,
financial situation of the Union industry remained fragile.
measures would hit also certain product types that are
no longer produced in the Union. The investigation
showed, however that the product types referred to by
(130) It is expected that the imposition of anti-dumping duties
the said user are still produced in the Union and that the
will restore fair trade conditions on the Union market,
demand of those types of stainless steel grades is not
allowing the Union industry to align its prices of the like
significant. Moreover, it should be noted that the
product to the costs of production.
Union producers did not produce at full capacity
during the period considered, and therefore if demand
(131) It can also be expected that the imposition of measures
increases the production could follow accordingly.
will enable the Union industry to regain at least part of
the market share lost during the period considered, with
(140) It should be pointed out that since the product
a positive impact on its profitability and overall financial
concerned is standardised in terms of sector and use,
situation. The imposition of measures would enable the
users could easily change their sources of supply as far
industry to maintain and further develop its efforts to be
as the product quality, or price is concerned. The
cost efficient.
imposition of measures should not preclude the possi
bility for importing the product concerned from other
(132) Should measures not be imposed, further losses in
countries and even from India once trade distorting
market share could be expected and the Union industry’s
effects due to dumping have been removed.
profitability would deteriorate.
(141) Taken the above into consideration, even if certain users
(133) It is, therefore, provisionally concluded that the
are likely to be impacted more negatively than others by
imposition of anti-dumping measures on imports orig
the measures on Indian imports, the overall impact on
inating in India would be in the interest of the Union
users is considered limited.
industry.
7.4. Interest of importers
7.3. Interest of users
(142) Limited cooperation was obtained from unrelated
(134) Questionnaires were sent to nine users in the Union.
importers. Nine importers provided sampling
Only three replied to the questionnaires representing
information, but only one cooperated. This company
around 6 % of total imports from India of the product
accounted for around 7 % of total imports from India
concerned during the IP. They are present in sectors
during the IP. The company opposes the imposition of
regarding food processing including commercial
measures since India is by far its most important
kitchens and catering, home appliances, automotive
supplier. Although the imposition of measures would
industry.
have a negative impact on its profitability due to the

---

EN
8.5.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
126/15
higher costs to be incurred, the importing company
product. The non-injurious price was established by
should be in a position to pass on at least part of the
adding to the cost of production a reasonable profit
increased cost to its customers.
level. The target profit margin was provisionally set at
5 % as stated in recital 95.
(143) Furthermore, importers could shift to other sources
including the Union industry and other exporting coun
(151) Any difference resulting from this comparison was then
tries.
expressed as a percentage of the average total CIF import
price, see recital 154.
(144) On this basis, it is provisionally concluded that the
imposition of anti-dumping measures will not have
8.2. Provisional measures
substantially negative effects on the interest of importers.
(152) In the light of the foregoing, it is considered that, in
accordance with Article 7(2) of the basic Regulation,
7.5. Conclusion on Union interest
provisional anti-dumping duties should be imposed in
respect of imports of certain stainless steel wires orig
(145) In view of the above, it is provisionally concluded that
inating in India at the level of the lower of the dumping
overall, based on the information concerning the Union
and the injury margins, in accordance with the lesser
interest, there are no compelling reasons against the
duty rule.
imposition of measures on imports of the product
concerned from India.
(153) As concerns the parallel anti-subsidy investigation,
pursuant to Article 14(1), of the basic Regulation and
(146) Moreover, when considering the overall impact of the
Article 24(1) second subparagraph of Council Regulation
anti-dumping measures on the Union market, the
(EC) No 597/2009 of 11 June 2009 on protection
positive effects, in particular on the Union industry,
against subsidised imports from countries not members
appear to outweigh the potential negative impacts on
of the European Community ( 1 ) no product shall be
the other more limited interest groups.
subject to both anti-dumping and countervailing duties
for the purpose of dealing with the one and the same
situation arising from dumping and from export
8. PROPOSAL FOR PROVISIONAL ANTI-DUMPING
subsidisation. All subsidy schemes addressed in the
MEASURES
provisional anti-subsidy regulation ( 2 ) refer to export
subsidisation. The relevant provisional anti-dumping
(147) In view of the conclusions reached with regard to
duty rates of the cooperating producers concerned are
dumping, injury, causation and Union interest,
therefore adjusted accordingly.
provisional anti-dumping measures should be imposed
in order to prevent further injury being caused to the
Union industry by the dumped imports.
(154) On the basis of the above, the provisional anti-dumping
duty rates have been established by comparing the injury
margins, dumping margins and the countervailing duty
8.1. Injury elimination level
rates. Consequently, the proposed anti-dumping duties
are as follows:
(148) For the purpose of determining the level of these
measures, account was taken of the dumping margins
found and the amount of duty necessary to eliminate
the injury suffered by the Union industry.
(in %)
Counter Provisional
Company
Injury
Dumping
anti-
margin
margin
vailing
dumping
(149) When calculating the amount of duty necessary to
duty rate duty rate
remove the effects of the injurious dumping, it was
considered that any measure should allow the Union
Rajaraatna Metal
17,2 32,3 4,3 12,9
industry to cover its costs of production and obtain a
Industries
profit before tax that could be reasonably achieved by an
industry of this type in the sector under normal
Venus group 26,1 30,4 3,2 22,9
conditions of competition, i.e. in the absence of
dumped imports, on sales of the like product in the
Viraj Profiles 32,1 24,4 0,0 24,4
Union.
Cooperating non-
24,0 28,0 3,8 20,2
sampled companies
(150) Therefore, the injury elimination level was calculated on
All other companies 32,1 32,3 4,3 27,8
the basis of a comparison of the weighted average price
of the dumped imports, as established for the price
undercutting calculations in recital 77 above, and the
( 1 ) OJ L 188, 18.7.2009, p. 93.
non-injurious price of the Union industry for the like
( 2 ) See page 19 of this Official Journal.

---

L 126/16
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
8.5.2013
(155) The individual company anti-dumping duty rates
— less than 2,5 % of nickel, other than wire containing by
specified in this Regulation were established on the
weight 13 % or more but not more than 25 % of
basis of the findings of the present investigation.
chromium and 3,5 % or more but not more than 6 % of
Therefore, they reflect the situation found during that
aluminium,
investigation with respect to these companies. These
duty rates (as opposed to the country-wide duty
applicable to ‘all other companies’) are thus exclusively
applicable to imports of product concerned originating
currently falling within CN codes 7223 00 19 and 7223 00 99
in India and produced by the companies and thus by the
and originating in India.
specific legal entities mentioned. Imported product
concerned produced by any other company not
specifically mentioned in the operative part of this Regu
lation with its name and address, including entities
2. The
rates
of
the
provisional
anti-dumping
duty
applicable
related to those specifically mentioned, cannot benefit
to the net, free-at-Union-frontier price, before duty, of the
from these rates and shall be subject to the duty rate
product described in paragraph 1 and produced by the
applicable to ‘all other companies’.
companies below shall be:
(156) Any claim requesting the application of these individual
company anti-dumping duty rates (e.g. following a
TARIC
change in the name of the entity or following the
Company Duty
(%) additional
code
setting up of new production or sales entities) should
be addressed to the Commission ( 1 ) forthwith with all
Raajratna, Metal Industries, Ahmedabad, Gujarat 12,9 B775
relevant information, in particular any modification in
the company’s activities linked to production, domestic
Venus Wire Industries Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai, Maha
22,9 B776
and export sales associated with, for example, that name
rashtra
change or that change in the production and sales
entities. If appropriate, the Regulation will accordingly
Precision Metals, Mumbai, Maharashtra 22,9 B777
be amended by updating the list of companies benefiting
from individual duty rates.
Hindustan Inox Ltd, Mumbai, Maharashtra 22,9 B778
Sieves Manufacturer India Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai, 22,9 B779
Maharashtra
(157) In order to ensure a proper enforcement of the anti-
dumping duty, the residual duty level should not only
Viraj Profiles Vpl. Ltd, Thane, Maharashtra 24,4 B780
apply to the non-cooperating exporting producers but
also to those producers which did not have any
Companies listed in the Annex 20,2 B781
exports to the Union during the IP.
All other companies 27,8 B999
9. FINAL PROVISION
3. The release for free circulation in the Union of the
(158) In the interests of sound administration, a period should
be fixed within which the interested parties which made
product referred to in paragraph 1 shall be subject to the
themselves known within the time limit specified in the
provision of a security equivalent to the amount of the
notice of initiation may make their views known in
provisional duty.
writing and request a hearing. Furthermore, it should
be stated that the findings concerning the imposition
of anti-dumping duties made for the purposes of this
4. Unless
otherwise
specified,
the
provisions
in
force
Regulation are provisional and may have to be recon
concerning customs duties shall apply.
sidered for the purposes of any definitive findings,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 2
1. Without
prejudice
to
Article
20
of
Regulation
(EC)
No
Article 1
1225/2009, interested parties may request disclosure of the
essential facts and considerations on the basis of which this
1. A
provisional
anti-dumping
duty
is
hereby
imposed
on Regulation was adopted, make their views known in writing
imports of wire of stainless steel containing by weight:
and apply to be heard orally by the Commission within one
month of the date of entry into force of this Regulation.
— 2,5 % or more of nickel, other than wire containing by
weight 28 % or more but not more than 31 % of nickel
and 20 % or more but not more than 22 % of chromium,
2. Pursuant to Article 21(4) of Regulation (EC) No
1225/2009, the parties concerned may comment on the appli
( 1 ) European Commission, Directorate-General for Trade, Directorate H,
cation of this Regulation within one month of the date of its
N105 8/20, 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel, BELGIQUE/BELGI.
entry into force.

---

EN
8.5.2013 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
126/17
Article 3
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the
European Union.
Article 1 of this Regulation shall apply for a period of six months.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 3 May 2013.
For the Commission
The President
José Manuel BARROSO

---

L 126/18
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
8.5.2013
ANNEX
Indian cooperating exporting producers not sampled
TARIC Additional Code B781
Company name City
Bekaert Mukand Wire Industries Lonand,
Tal.
Khandala,
Satara
District,
Maharastra
Bhansali Bright Bars Pvt. Ltd Mumbai,
Maharashtra
Bhansali Stainless Wire Mumbai,
Maharashtra
Chandan Steel Mumbai,
Maharashtra
Drawmet Wires Bhiwadi,
Rajastan
Garg Inox Ltd Bahadurgarh,
Haryana
Jyoti Steel Industries Ltd Mumbai,
Maharashtra
KEI Industries New
Delhi
Macro Bars and Wires Mumbai,
Maharashtra
Mukand Ltd Thane
Nevatia Steel & Alloys Pvt. Ltd Mumbai,
Maharashtra
Panchmahal Steel Ltd Dist.
Panchmahals,
Gujarat

---

Document Outline

• �

---