HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"L 336/6
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
20.12.2011
REGULATIONS
COUNCIL IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 1331/2011
of 14 December 2011
imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on
imports of certain seamless pipes and tubes of stainless steel originating in the People’s Republic of
China
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
of trends relevant for the assessment of injury covered
the period from 1 January 2006 to the end of the IP (the
period considered).
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European
Union,
B. SUBSEQUENT PROCEDURE
(4)
Subsequent to the disclosure of the essential facts and
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of
considerations on the basis of which it was decided to
30 November 2009 on protection against dumped imports
impose provisional measures (provisional disclosure),
from countries not members of the European Community ( 1 )
several interested parties made written submissions
(the basic Regulation) and in particular Article 9 thereof,
making known their views on the provisional findings.
The parties who so requested were granted the oppor
tunity to be heard. The Commission continued to seek
information it deemed necessary for its definitive
Having regard to the proposal submitted by the European
findings.
Commission (the Commission) after having consulted the
Advisory Committee,
Individual examination
Whereas:
(5) With
regard
to
the
three
claims
for
individual
exam
ination, it has been definitively decided that they could
not be granted as they would render the investigation
unduly burdensome and would prevent the completion
A. PROVISIONAL MEASURES
of the investigation in good time. As stated in recital 6 of
the provisional Regulation, the Commission had selected
(1) The
Commission,
by
Regulation
(EU)
No
627/2011
( 2 )
a representative sample, covering 25 % of the total
(the provisional Regulation) imposed a provisional anti-
imports recorded in Eurostat during the IP and over
dumping duty on imports of certain seamless pipes and
38 % of the total volume of the cooperating exporters
tubes of stainless steel originating in the People’s
in the IP. As indicated in recital 13 of the provisional
Republic of China (PRC).
Regulation, two of the three sampled exporting
producers constitute large groups. The size of the
groups amounted to a particular burden for the present
investigation in terms of both the investigative effort as
(2)
The proceeding was initiated as a result of a complaint
lodged on 16 August 2010 (the complaint) by the
well as analysis. In these circumstances, it was not
Defence Committee of the Seamless Stainless Steel
possible to accommodate the claims for individual exam
Tubes Industry of the European Union (the Defence
ination from additional exporting producers.
Committee) on behalf of two groups of Union
producers (the complainants) representing a major
proportion, in this case more than 50 % of the total
C. PRODUCT CONCERNED AND LIKE PRODUCT
Union production of certain seamless pipes and tubes
of stainless steel.
1. Product concerned
(6) It
is
recalled
that,
as
set
out
in
recital
15
of
the
provi
sional Regulation, the product concerned is seamless
(3)
It is recalled that, as set out in recital 14 of the provi
pipes and tubes of stainless steel (excluding such pipes
sional Regulation, the investigation of dumping and
and tubes with attached fittings suitable for conducting
injury covered the period from 1 July 2009 to 30 June
gases or liquids for use in civil aircraft), originating in the
2010 (‘the investigation period’ or ‘IP’). The examination
PRC, currently falling within CN codes 7304 11 00,
7304 22 00, 7304 24 00, ex 7304 41 00, 7304 49 10,
( 1 ) OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 51.
ex 7304 49 93, ex 7304 49 95, ex 7304 49 99 and
( 2 ) OJ L 169, 29.6.2011, p. 1.
ex 7304 90 00 (the product concerned).

---

EN
20.12.2011 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union
L
336/7
(7) In
the
absence
of
any
comment
with
regard
to
the
to the rejection of criterion 1 of the MET claim were not
product concerned following provisional disclosure,
based on iron ore prices but on the price difference
recitals 15 to 19 of the provisional Regulation are
between the raw materials, i.e. billets, ingots and round
hereby confirmed.
bars, directly used in the production of the product
concerned; this price difference combined with the estab
lished State interference (export tax and no VAT refund)
led to the conclusion that it has not been shown that
criterion 1 for granting MET was fulfilled.
2. Like product
(8)
In the absence of any comment, recital 20 of the provi
sional Regulation is hereby confirmed.
(12) One
party
reiterated
on
several
occasions
the
same
claim
related to the procedural aspects of MET determination.
D.
The claim related to consultations with the Advisory
DUMPING
Committee of Member States, namely the information
1. Market economy treatment
transmitted to that committee in the course of the
current investigation. The issue has been explained in
(9) Following
provisional
disclosure,
some
parties
contested
two letters sent to the party and it was subject to
some of the findings related to the MET determination as
several exchanges with the Hearing Officer. In this
set out in recitals 21 to 43 of the provisional Regulation.
respect it has to be noted that pursuant to
Article 19(5) of the basic Regulation exchanges of
information relating to consultations made with the
Advisory Committee of Member States shall not be
divulged except as specifically provided for in the basic
Regulation. Consequently, the provisions in force do not
(10) One
party
claimed
that
the
Commission
did
not
disclose
allow granting parties any access to the exchanges
the price difference of raw materials between the EU and
between the Commission and the Member States.
the PRC market. In this respect, it has to be noted that
both the MET disclosure, as well as the provisional Regu
lation, disclose the nominal price difference between the
EU, USA and PRC prices of raw materials. As stated in
recital 27 of the provisional Regulation, this difference,
on average and depending on the steel grade, amounts to
around 30 %. As far the sources of information that
formed the basis for this comparison are concerned,
(13) The
same
party
made
certain
claims
related
mainly
to
the
the Commission used data available from cooperating
issue of distortions on the market of raw materials. It
Union producers and exporting producers in the PRC.
was claimed that the stainless steel billets purchased on
These data have been cross-checked with some publicly
the PRC domestic market accounted for a portion only of
available sources (
the purchases of raw materials during the IP. In this

1 ).
regard, it is noted first and foremost that Article 2(7)(c)
of the basic Regulation does not establish any threshold
with regard to the proportion of raw materials purchases
that would have to be affected by distortions.
Article 2(7)(c) of the basic Regulation stipulates that
(11) It
was
further
claimed
that
the
Commission
conducted
costs of major inputs have to substantially reflect
no comparison of prices of iron ore imported into the
market values. Most importantly, however, the
PRC and international market prices. A related claim was
Commission explained that the distortions on the raw
that no data have been provided concerning the impact
material market in the PRC concerned the main raw
of iron ore on the cost of the raw material (billet, ingot,
materials used in the production of seamless stainless
round bars) purchased by the producers of the product
steel pipes and tubes and not only billets. The main
concerned. The reference to iron ore in recital 28 of the
raw materials used in the production of seamless
provisional Regulation was made in the context of
stainless steel pipes and tubes are stainless steel billets,
comparative advantage to analyse a possible explanation
ingots and round bars which represent more than 50 %
for the low prices of billets, ingots and round bars in the
of the cost of production of the product concerned.
PRC. Iron ore as well as nickel and chromium are main
Those raw materials collectively fall under HS Code
cost drivers in the production of stainless steel billets,
7218 10 (ingots and other primary forms of stainless
ingots and round bars. But, due to the fact that the
steel). They are all subject to a 15 % export tax and are
prices of iron ore, nickel and chromium are in general
not subject to any refund of the 17 % VAT when
based on international market prices, their impact on the
exported. It is in this regard that distortions have been
price difference between EU and PRC billets, ingots and
established leading to the conclusion that criterion 1 of
round bars and finally on stainless seamless pipes and
the MET evaluation was not met by any of the sampled
tubes can only be limited. Therefore, the findings that led
PRC exporting producers. For the company concerned,
the raw materials used for the production of the product
( 1 ) Inter alia, www.meps.co.uk
concerned purchased on the PRC domestic market

---

L 336/8
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
20.12.2011
account for a substantial part — around 30 % of
paid or payable in the Union for the like product, duly
purchases. It should be noted in addition that another
adjusted if necessary to include a reasonable profit, as set
major part is imported from related companies.
out in recital 51 of the provisional Regulation, is hereby
confirmed.
When focussing specifically on purchases from unrelated
suppliers, even 56 % have been purchased domestically.
Consequently, contrary to the party’s claim, there was no
(b) Determination of normal value
misrepresentation of facts as far as the MET deter
mination was concerned, neither in the communication
(19) As detailed in recitals 49 to 51 of the provisional Regu
with that party nor in the consultation process with the
lation the normal value is based on prices actually paid
Advisory Committee, which was informed about all the
or payable in the Union for the like product, duly
arguments submitted. Consequently, the claim has to be
adjusted if necessary to include a reasonable profit, of
rejected.
the closest resembling product types having the same
diameter, steel grade and product type (e.g. cold or hot
drawn).
(14) One
company
claimed
that
the
decision
to
deny
MET
should be individual and company specific whereas in
the present case the institutions extended the general
findings at the country level to individual producers.
(20) Parties’
comments
relating
to
prices
actually
paid
or
This argument cannot be accepted; indeed the analysis
payable in the Union and well as those concerning
made by the institutions has been made individually for
adjustments (such as level of trade and quality
each sampled producer. It is true that the institutions
perception) have been addressed in recitals 45 and 46
have reached the same conclusion for the three of
below.
them but this is due to the fact that there is State inter
ference in the decision-making process of each of them,
as explained in the provisional Regulation.
(21) One
company
claimed
that
the
normal
value
could
be
constructed on the basis of import prices of the stainless
steel hollows into the US from the EU or into the EU by
(15) Having regard to the above, the finding that all MET
claims should be denied, as established in recitals 21 to
the Union producers. This claim has not been further
43 of the provisional Regulation, is hereby confirmed.
substantiated. The company presented no arguments
with regard to how such construction would be better
suited for the determination of the normal value than the
method used in the provisional Regulation. In particular
2. Normal value
it has not been substantiated why it would be more
suitable to construct normal value on the basis of
(a) Analogue country
prices of hollows rather than basing it on prices of the
Union industry for the like product.
(16) One
party
claimed
that
the
USA
should
have
been
used
as an analogue country. In this respect it has to be noted
that the grounds for the decision not to use USA as an
analogue country have been thoroughly laid down in
recitals 46 to 48 of the provisional Regulation. In view
(22) Furthermore,
it
has
not
been
substantiated
why
the
EU
of the fact that the party did not substantiate its claim
exports to the US should be considered. This alternative
and did not provide any additional arguments which
appears not suitable in particular in view of the fact that
could alter the findings with regard to the USA as a
all cooperating US producers rely on imports from their
possible analogue country, the claim has to be rejected.
EU parent companies as already mentioned in recital 48
of the provisional Regulation. Further, the high
processing cost in the USA as stated in recital 48 of
the provisional Regulation — the very reason why USA
(17) At the same time it has to be stressed that the
has been considered inappropriate as an analogue
Commission continued efforts to obtain cooperation
country — would make the method suggested not
from an appropriate analogue country. Further to
suitable.
efforts referred to in recital 47 of the provisional Regu
lation the Commission contacted producers in Brazil,
Canada, Malaysia, Mexico, South Africa, South Korea,
Taiwan and Ukraine. Altogether 46 companies have
been contacted, but no cooperation could be obtained.
(23) As
far
as
exports
from
the
US
to
the
EU
are
concerned,
this question has been dealt with explicitly in recital 49
of the provisional Regulation. It was considered that the
US export prices would be tainted by the high
(18) Having regard to the above, the provisional conclusion
production costs and that the volumes of such exports
that the normal value should be based on prices actually
were very limited.

---

EN
20.12.2011 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union
L
336/9
(24) The
same
company
proposed
to
construct
the
normal
(31) According
to
Article
2(11)
of
the
basic
Regulation,
the
value on the basis of the actual import prices of the
dumping margin is normally established on the basis of a
stainless steel hollows by Union producers. However,
comparison of weighted average normal value with a
the EU producer importing hollows from India into the
weighted average of prices of all export transactions.
EU, as mentioned in the complaint, does not cooperate
Article 2(11) of the basic Regulation requires that
in the current investigation. Neither do any of the
dumping calculations should be based on ‘all export
sampled Union producers import hollows from any
transactions to the Community’ but they should be
country outside the EU. Therefore, the proposed
‘subject to the relevant provisions governing fair
methodology cannot be used.
comparison’. The company referred to the so-called
product control number and the parameters contained
therein. In this regard, it has to be noted that the
(25) Having regard to the above, the determination of normal
product control number is a tool used in the investi
value as set out in recitals 49 to 51 of the provisional
gation in order to structure and organise the substantial
Regulation is hereby confirmed.
amounts of very detailed data submitted by the
companies. It is an aid to conduct a more detailed
analysis of different product characteristics within the
category of the product concerned and the like
3. Export price
product. The comparison was based on the most
(26) One
party
reiterated
its
claim
that
the
date
of
order
pertinent characteristics in order to ensure a fair
rather than the date of invoicing should be considered
comparison.
as being the date of sale to ensure a fair comparison. This
claim has been made with reference to Article 2(10)(j) of
the basic Regulation. As already explained to the party
concerned during the hearing with the Hearing Officer
(32) Following the company’s claim, the Commission
held on 11 March 2011, the provision in question
explained in a letter that the wall thickness of a pipe
specifically refers to currency conversions, i.e. exchange
was proportionally linked to its weight and was thus
rates applicable when the price comparison requires a
indirectly covered by the comparison. Other char
conversion of currencies. Consequently, the reference to
acteristics, such as testing, have minor effects on the
the dates of purchase orders concerns currency
comparison. For example, nearly all products concerned
conversions in the framework of fair comparison
are subject to standard test applications.
between export price and normal value and does not
relate to the turnover and the volume of export sales
to the EU during the IP.
(33) It has to be stressed that, contrary to that party’s claims,
the Commission did not disregard any information.
(27) In
all
cases
the
product
concerned
was
exported
to
inde
pendent customers in the Union and, therefore, the
However, it is not uncommon that certain parameters
export price was established in accordance with
used in the product control number have a lesser
Article 2(8) of the basic Regulation, namely on the
weight and that specific parameters more than others
basis of export prices actually paid or payable. Therefore,
form a better basis for fair comparison. No pipes have
recital 52 of the provisional Regulation is hereby
been disregarded from the comparison on the basis of
confirmed.
physical differences or for any other reasons nor have
any new product types been created. On the contrary, all
sales were included in the comparison, regardless of the
diameter or length of the pipe.
4. Comparison
(28) As
stated
in
recital
20
above,
the
parties’
comments
relating to the prices actually paid or payable in the
Union as well as those concerning adjustments (such as
(34) The
company
further
submitted
that
the
approach
used
level of trade and quality perception) have been addressed
by the Commission prevented it from making a claim for
in recitals 45 and 46 below.
adjustments for physical characteristics. This claim, again,
has been based on the fact that the Commission
conducted the comparison on the basis of three
(29) One party contested the method of comparing the export
parameters and not more and has already been
price and normal value based on three specific
addressed above in recitals 31 et seq.
parameters (diameter, steel grade and product type (e.g.
cold or hot drawn)). The party claimed that comparisons
should have been conducted at the level of greater detail,
i.e. taking into other parameters as well, notably wall
(35) As far as the procedural angle of the issue of comparison
thickness, length and testing.
is concerned, also raised by the same party, it has to be
noted that the company had full opportunity to
comment on the calculations performed in its individual
(30) The
Commission
services
indeed
collected
information
in
case. Full details of those calculations have been disclosed
relation to a number of parameters including the length,
on the day of publication of the provisional Regulation.
wall thickness and testing.
The company commented on the issue of parameters

---

L 336/10
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
20.12.2011
used in comparison in a letter of 11 July 2011
noted that in the present case the comparison between
requesting further clarifications. A reply has been
export price and normal value is not a comparison
provided by the Commission services on 19 July 2011.
between prices and costs, but only between weighted
The company then reiterated its arguments in a letter of
average sales prices (normal value was established on
29 July 2011. While the company disagreed with the
the basis of the sales prices of EU industry). Furthermore,
basis for comparison, it repeatedly claimed that
the increase in nickel prices was an increase in world
parameters like wall thickness, length or testing had an
market prices and therefore was not an isolated PRC
impact on prices. As stated above, the Commission
phenomenon. The increase affected at most 3 months
acknowledges that those parameters had some impact
of the IP, while the sales of the product concerned
on prices. However, it was found more appropriate,
took place throughout the full IP. Furthermore, changes
that the calculations should be based on three most
in raw material prices must be considered as a normal
important parameters as this leads to the highest level
part of the business operations. The increasing nickel
of matching and at the same time to the possibility to
prices should be affecting both the Union and PRC
find matching sales for all export transactions.
producers equally, as nickel is quoted on the London
Metal Exchange. Any differences would be due to the
distortion on raw material prices in the PRC and
should therefore not be taken into account in the calcu
(36) The
company
claimed
that
it
was
prevented
from
pres
lation. Consequently, the claim has to be rejected and
enting claims for adjustment. This argument has to be
comparison based on the annual average PRC export
rejected. The opportunities to present claims existed
prices with annual average EU prices, duly adjusted to
throughout the course of the proceeding, not least at
include a reasonable profit margin. This claim was
the time of disclosure of provisional findings when the
therefore rejected.
company became fully aware of all the details of the
calculations.
(41) One
PRC
producer
made
a
substantiated
claim
that
the
computation of adjustments in its individual dumping
(37) One party claimed that applying production costs of
calculation was inaccurate. The Commission accepted
smaller diameters to the larger ones did not reflect the
this claim and performed a new calculation, which
actual costs, because the costs for larger diameter were
resulted in a dumping margin of 83,7 %. Apart from
much higher. However, the party did not provide any
this change the findings in recitals 55 to 61 of the
alternative nor did it substantiate its claim. Consequently,
provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed. The
in view of the fact that no alternative method has been
revised dumping margins are as follows:
presented, the method used is considered to be the most
reasonable.
Definitive
(38) One
company
claimed
that
the
number
of
adjustments
dumping margins
(the fact that the Commission used three parameters and
not more, the quality perception and level of trade
Changshu Walsin Specialty Steel, Co. Ltd,
83,7 %
adjustments) suggest that the products of the Union
Haiyu
producers are hardly comparable to the imported PRC
products. In this regard it is noted that the mere fact that
Shanghai Jinchang Stainless Steel Tube Manu
62,6 %
the institutions perform adjustments is an inherent part
facturing, Co. Ltd, Situan
of any dumping calculation. Those adjustments are
foreseen in the basic Regulation and therefore as such
Wenzhou Jiangnan Steel Pipe Manufacturing,
67,1 %
do not call into question the comparability between
Co. Ltd, Yongzhong
product concerned and the like product. In fact the
high matching ratio confirms that the product
Sample weighted average for the cooperating
71,5 %
concerned and the like product are fully comparable.
exporting producers not included in the
sample and listed in Annex I
All other companies 83,7
%
(39) Having regard to the above, the findings in recitals 53
and 54 of the provisional Regulation are hereby
confirmed.
E. INJURY
1. Union industry
5. Dumping margins
(42) With regard to the definition of the Union industry and
the representativity of the sample of Union producers, no
(40) One
party
claimed
that
due
to
a
high
fluctuation
of
the
claims have been received following provisional
nickel price, the dumping margin should have been
disclosure. Therefore, recitals 62 and 63 of the provi
calculated on a quarterly basis. In this respect it is
sional Regulation are hereby confirmed.

---

EN
20.12.2011 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
336/11
2. Union consumption
was made with regard to the drop in Union sales which
allegedly occurred also at a rate comparable to the
(43) In
respect
of
the
Union
consumption,
no
claims
have
reduction of consumption.
been received. Therefore, recitals 64 to 66 of the provi
sional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
(49) In
this
context
it
should
first
be
noted
that
according
to
Article 3(5) of the basic Regulation, ‘all economic factors
and indices having a bearing on the state of the industry’
3. Imports from the country concerned
should be examined in an injury analysis. As regards the
potential effects of any other factors than dumped
(44) Concerning
the
provisional
findings
relating
to
volume,
imports that may have contributed to the injury, those
market share and price evolution of dumped imports, no
are addressed under Chapter F. Causation, in particular
claims have been submitted by the interested parties.
under the point concerning the effects of any other
Therefore, recitals 67 to 69 of the provisional Regulation
factors (see recitals 59 to 69 below).
are hereby confirmed.
(50) In
the
absence
of
any
other
comments,
recitals
72
to
89
of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Price undercutting
(45) With
regard
to
the
calculation
of
price
undercutting
by
imports from the PRC, both the PRC exporting producers
5. Conclusion on injury
and the Union industry requested further information
concerning the method of determining certain
(51) In
the
absence
of
any
other
comments,
recitals
90
to
92
adjustments (such as post importation costs, level of
of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
trade and market perception of quality) that had been
applied in the calculation. The Commission accom
modated these requests by disclosing how those
adjustments were determined while at the same time
F. CAUSATION
ensuring compliance with the rules of confidentiality.
1. Effects of the dumped imports and of the
economic downturn
(52) Some
parties
reiterated
their
claims
submitted
during
the
provisional stage that a substantial part of the material
(46) Following the comments of a PRC producer, a minor
injury experienced by the Union industry should be
correction was made in the calculation of price under
attributed to factors other than dumped imports.
cutting, as in the provisional calculation the level of trade
adjustment included also a part of post importation costs
which had at the same time been covered by a separate
adjustment for all post importation costs. The correction
(53) In
this context, following the provisional disclosure,
resulted in a change of less than one percentage point in
some PRC exporting producers alleged in particular
the undercutting margins and injury elimination level (for
that a substantial part of the loss of sales volume and
the revision of the injury elimination level see recitals 82
market share was due to falling demand resulting from
and 83 below) in comparison to the provisional stage.
the economic crisis rather than to dumped imports from
the PRC. They further alleged that the comparable
decrease in the prices of PRC imports and of the
Union industry during the period considered (by 9 %
and 8 %, respectively) also indicated that the falling
(47) Apart
from
the
changes
mentioned
above
and
in
the
prices of the Union industry was purely due to the
absence of any comments, recitals 70 and 71 of the
reduced market demand rather than to the effect of
provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
dumped imports.
(54) Firstly, it should be noted that it is recognised in recitals
4. Economic situation of the Union industry
103 to 106 of the provisional Regulation that the
economic downturn and the resulting contraction in
(48) Following
provisional
disclosure,
some
PRC
exporting
demand had a negative effect on the state of the Union
producers claimed that certain indicators should be
industry and that, as such, may have contributed to the
excluded from the injury analysis. Notably, they stated
injury suffered by the Union industry. However, this does
that production and capacity utilisation fell at the same
not diminish the injurious effect of the low priced and
rate as did Union consumption, alleging that for this
dumped PRC imports which have considerably increased
reason those indicators should not be considered as
their share in the Union market during the period
factors in the material injury analysis. A similar claim
considered.

---

L 336/12
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
20.12.2011
(55) As
explained
in
recitals
104
and
105
of
the
provisional
fact the PRC imports gained market share at the expenses
Regulation, the effect of dumped imports is actually
of both other imports and the Union industry. The
much more detrimental in a period of falling demand
increase of PRC market share of 7,9 percentage points
than during years of rapid growth. PRC imports appear
can be divided into the 3,6 percentage points loss of
to have continuously undercut the Union prices
Union industry market share and the 4,3 percentage
throughout the period considered. In addition, in the IP
points loss of market share of other imports.
the price undercutting was in the range of between 21 %
and 32 %, and PRC imports represented more than 18 %
of the Union market share, as a result of a substantial
gain of 7,9 percentage points over the period considered.
Therefore, while PRC imports exerted an evident price
(60) The same PRC exporting producers
stated that the
pressure that prevented the Union industry from setting
average prices of imports of some selected other third
cost-covering (not to mention profitable prices), at the
countries, notably Ukraine, India and the USA, had also
same time the increased volume and market share of
seriously decreased which could have caused injury to the
those imports also made it impossible for the Union
Union industry. In this regard it is noted, however, that
industry to aim at higher volumes of production,
overall, the average price of imports from all countries
capacity utilisation and sales, particularly with regard to
other than the PRC have actually increased by 34 %
more commodity-type products mainly sold via
during the period considered. As already stated in
distributors.
recital 100 of the provisional Regulation, the average
import price from the USA had largely exceeded the
prices on the Union market. As also emphasised in
that same recital, the market share of imports from
Ukraine lessened while the American and Indian
market shares remained basically stable. Nevertheless,
(56) Secondly,
drawing
conclusions
solely
based
on
selected
on the basis of Eurostat data on those imports, it
injury indicators such as sales volume and market share,
cannot be concluded that imports from other third
or sales prices only, would distort the analysis in this
countries would have played a significant role in the
case. For instance, the losses in sales volume and
deterioration of the state of the Union industry,
market share were combined, inter alia, with severe
thereby breaking the causal link established between
profitability deterioration and were due, to a large
the dumped PRC imports and the injury.
extent, to the price pressure from the dumped imports.
As concerns specifically the question of market share, the
Union industry lost 3,6 percentage points to the PRC
imports during the period considered. Finally, again in
view of the rate of undercutting and the increase of PRC
(61) In
the
absence
of
any
other
comments
regarding
the
imports in both relative and absolute terms, by no means
findings set out in recitals 97 to 102 of the provisional
can be concluded that the reduction of the prices of
Regulation, those findings are hereby confirmed.
Union producers was unrelated to the price levels of
the dumped imports.
(62) As
concerns
the
effect
of
the
economic
downturn,
the
reasons why the economic downturn cannot be
considered an element to break the causal link are
(57) In the light of the above, the causal link between dumped
analysed in recitals 52 to 58 above. As none of the
imports and the material injury found is herewith
submitted comments indicated the opposite, the
confirmed on the basis of the combined existence of
findings set out in recitals 103 to 106 of the provisional
substantial volume and price pressure exerted by the
Regulation are hereby maintained.
PRC imports on the Union industry.
(63) As
for
the
export
performance
of
the
Union
industry,
in
(58) In
the
absence
of
any
other
comments,
recitals
94
to
96
the absence of any comments regarding the findings in
of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
recitals 107 and 108 of the provisional Regulation, those
findings are hereby confirmed.
2. Effects of any other factors
(64) A
number
of
PRC
exporting
producers
claimed
that
the
18 % increase in the unit cost of production described in
(59) With
regard
to
the
effect
of
other
third
country
imports
recital 109 of the provisional Regulation played an
to the Union, some PRC exporting producers claimed
important role in the deterioration of the profitability
that 1,0 of the 3,6 percentage points of market share
of the Union industry rather than dumped imports,
loss of the Union industry should have been attributed
and requested a more detailed analysis of the effect of
to imports from Japan and India. However, as a matter of
that unit cost increase.

---

EN
20.12.2011 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
336/13
(65) The
Commission
examined
the
issue
and
found
that
the
3. Conclusion on causation
increase in the unit cost of production can be attributed
to: higher manufacturing costs as a result of higher raw
(70) None of the arguments submitted by the interested
material prices, as well as to fixed costs such as direct
parties demonstrates that the impact of factors other
labour, depreciation, manufacturing overheads and SG&A
than dumped imports from the PRC is such as to
costs, and also to the rapid drop in production.
break the causal link between the dumped imports and
the material injury established. In the light of the
foregoing it is concluded that the dumped imports
from the PRC caused material injury to the Union
industry within the meaning of Article 3(6) of the
(66) Given that the raw material cost fluctuation is to a large
basic Regulation.
extent covered by the price setting mechanism of the
Union industry — the so-called ‘alloy surcharge’
mechanism directly links prices to the quotation of the
most important raw materials such as nickel,
molybdenum and chromium — its impact on the profit
(71) Therefore the conclusions on causation in the provisional
ability is unlikely to be significant. However, the other
Regulation, as summarised in the recitals 111 to 113
elements, related to the insufficient production and sales
thereof, are hereby confirmed.
volumes, had a direct effect on the profitability levels. As
the production and sales volumes of the Union industry
would have been significantly higher in the absence of
dumped imports, it cannot be concluded that the
G. UNION INTEREST
increase in the unit cost of production in itself is a
major factor leading to the injury rather than dumped
(72) In
view
of
parties’
comments,
the
Commission
continued
imports, as it is inextricably linked to the augmented
its analysis pertaining to the Union interest.
volume of dumped imports.
1. Interest of the Union industry
(67) Some
PRC
exporting
producers
also
submitted
that
the
(73) Regarding the interest of the Union industry, no further
Union industry’s failure to restructure despite the falling
comments or information was received. Therefore the
consumption may have been an important factor leading
findings in recitals 116 to 120 of the provisional Regu
to the injury established.
lation are hereby confirmed.
(68) In
this
respect
it
should
first
be
noted
that
the
Union
2. Interest of unrelated importers in the Union
industry had to cope with not only the effect of falling
consumption in itself but with the impact of dumped
(74) In
the
absence
of
any
comments
on
this
point,
recitals
imports in a period of falling consumption. Nonetheless,
121 to 123 of the provisional Regulation are hereby
the investigation has shown that the Union industry (i)
confirmed.
maintained its production capacity in the expectation of
the temporary nature of the crisis and of a forthcoming
recovery, and cannot be expected to adapt capacity
because of the increasing volumes of PRC imports
made at abnormally low, dumped prices, (ii) continuously
3. Interest of the users
developed its product mix with a focus on higher value
(75) After
the
imposition
of
provisional
measures,
a
user
specialised products where PRC competition is less
company that had not cooperated submitted comments
prominent and (iii) reduced its workforce by 8 % and
with regard to the Union interest. Notably, the user
cut the average labour cost per employee by 2 % in
argued that the impact of the anti-dumping measures
the period considered (if these reductions are viewed
will be significant on the company. It stated that
only in the crisis period, i.e. between 2008 and the IP,
stainless steel tubes are a critical component for several
they amount to as much as 19 and 11 percentage points,
downstream products including those manufactured by
respectively). All these elements show that the Union
that user (e.g. heat exchangers), and that there was also
industry was very active in taking measures in an
an additional concern of security of supply in view of the
attempt to respond to the negative effects deriving
delays the company had experienced in respect of certain
from the injury suffered. However, the above steps
deliveries made by Union producers.
proved to be insufficient to counteract the injurious
effects of dumped imports in a period of weak demand.
(76) However,
given
that
this
user
only
purchases
5
%
of
their
stainless steel pipes and tubes from China, the possible
(69) In
the
absence
of
any
other
comments,
recitals
109
and
impact on this company would appear limited, both in
110 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
terms of costs and security of supply.

---

L 336/14
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
20.12.2011
(77) As
concerns
the
alleged
cost
impact
in
particular,
the
(82) As
regards
the
determination
of
the
injury
elimination
company failed to substantiate this claim with actual
level, as already stated in recital 45 above, the small
data. Furthermore, it is recalled that, as set out in
correction with regard to the adjustment for the level
recitals 124 and 125 of the provisional Regulation, the
of trade that affected the calculation of price undercutting
cost impact on the sole fully cooperating user was
was also applied in the calculation of the injury elim
considered to be insignificant, both with regard to the
ination level.
whole company and to its division using stainless steel
tubes.
(83) The
above
change
led
to
a
minor
revision
of
the
injury
(78) As
regards
the
issue
of
security
of
supply
raised
by
the
elimination level. As a result, the injury elimination level
user, it should be recalled that there is a large number of
is in the range between 48,3 % and 71,9 %, as shown in
third countries other than the PRC that continue to
the table below:
import stainless steel tubes into the Union. In addition,
as the Union industry remains the most important
supplier of the product, their continued existence is
critical also for the user industry.
Company/companies
Injury elimination
level
(79) Although at provisional stage it was also considered that
Changshu Walsin Specialty Steel, Co. Ltd,
71,9 %
the anti-dumping measures may have a more serious
Haiyu
impact on those users that use substantial quantities of
stainless steel tubes imported from the PRC for manu
Shanghai Jinchang Stainless Steel Tube Manu
48,3 %
facturing their downstream products (see recital 126 of
facturing, Co. Ltd, Situan
the provisional Regulation), in view of the lack of any
substantiated claim or any new information following
Wenzhou Jiangnan Steel Pipe Manufacturing,
48,6 %
provisional disclosure, it can be concluded that the
Co. Ltd, Yongzhong
essential benefits of the Union industry from the
imposition of anti-dumping measures appear to
Sample weighted average for the cooperating
56,9 %
outweigh the expected negative impacts on such users.
exporting producers not included in the
Therefore the findings with regard to the interest of users
sample and listed in Annex I
as laid down in recitals 124 to 130 of the provisional
Regulation are hereby confirmed.
All other companies 71,9
%
4. Conclusion on Union interest
(84) One
PRC
exporting
producer
claimed
that
due
to
the

injury caused by the economic crisis, the injury margin
(80) On the basis of the above, it is definitively concluded that
should be based on price undercutting rather than price
on balance, no compelling reasons exist against the
underselling, claiming that this method had been
imposition of definitive anti-dumping duties on imports
followed in a number of anti-dumping proceedings ( 1 ).
of the product concerned originating in the PRC.
However, in all the investigations cited by the
Therefore the conclusions in recitals 131 and 132 of
exporting producer, there were particular reasons
the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
regarding the industry or the economic sector (such as
the threat of creating a monopoly, a substantial capacity
( 1 ) Commission Regulation (EC) No 2376/94 of 27 September 1994
H.
imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of colour
DEFINITIVE MEASURES
television receivers originating in Malaysia, the People’s Republic of
China, the Republic of Korea, Singapore and Thailand (OJ L 255,
1. Injury elimination level
1.10.1994, p. 50). Commission Regulation (EEC) No 129/91 of
11 January 1991 imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on
(81) The
complainants
argued
that
the
5
%
target
profit,
as
imports of small-screen colour television receivers originating in
established at the provisional stage, was excessively low
Hong Kong and the People’s Republic of China (OJ L 14, 19.1.1991,
and it reiterated the view that a level of 12 % would be
p. 31). Commission Decision 91/392/EEC of 21 June 1991
justified, in view of the fact that the industry at hand is
accepting undertakings given in connection with the anti-dumping
capital intensive and necessitates permanent technical
proceeding concerning imports of certain asbestos cement pipes
originating in Turkey, and terminating the investigation (OJ L 209,
improvements and innovation updates, consequently
31.7.1991, p. 37). Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2686/92 of
substantial investments. The complainants argued that
16 September 1992 imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on
such a profitability level would be needed to generate
imports of certain types of electronic microcircuits known as
sufficient return on capital and allow for those
DRAMs (dynamic random access memories) originating in the
investments. However, the above claim was not convin
Republic of Korea (OJ L 272, 17.9.1992, p. 13) and Council Regu
cingly substantiated by actual figures. Therefore it is
lation (EC) No 1331/2007 of 13 November 2007 imposing a
definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of dicyandiamide orig
concluded that the 5 % profit margin established at the
inating in the People’s Republic of China (OJ L 296, 15.11.2007,
provisional stage should be maintained.
p. 1).

---

EN
20.12.2011 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
336/15
increase of the Union industry in a mature market, the
mentioned, cannot benefit from these rates and shall be
long-term absence of profits of the industry on a global
subject to the duty rate applicable to ‘all other
scale) which supported the exceptional application of this
companies’.
particular methodology. In the current investigation this
is not the case, as the economic crisis affected the global
economy as such, and can therefore not be considered to
be specific to the industry producing seamless pipes and
(88) In
order
to
minimise
the
risks
of
circumvention
due
to
tubes of stainless steel.
the high difference in the duty rates, it is considered that
special measures are needed in this case to ensure the
proper application of the anti-dumping duties. These
special measures include the presentation to the
2. Definitive measures
Customs authorities of the Member States of a valid

commercial invoice, which shall conform to the
(85) In
view of the conclusions reached with regard to
requirements set out in Annex II to this Regulation.
dumping, injury, causation and Union interest, and in
Imports not accompanied by such an invoice shall be
accordance with Article 9(4) of the basic Regulation, a
made subject to the residual anti-dumping duty
definitive anti-dumping duty should be imposed on the
applicable to all other exporters.
product concerned at the level of the lower of the
dumping and injury margins found, in accordance with
the lesser duty rule. In this case, as the injury elimination
levels are lower than the dumping margins established,
(89) Should the exports by one of the companies benefiting
the definitive measures should be based on the injury
from lower individual duty rates increase significantly in
elimination levels.
volume after the imposition of the measures concerned,
such an increase in volume could be considered as
constituting in itself a change in the pattern of trade
due to the imposition of measures within the meaning
of Article 13(1) of the basic Regulation. In such circum
(86) On the basis of the above, the duty rates, expressed as a
stances and provided the conditions are met, an anti-
percentage of the CIF Union frontier price, duty unpaid,
circumvention investigation may be initiated. This inves
are:
tigation may, inter alia, examine the need for the removal
of individual duty rate(s) and the consequent imposition
of a country-wide duty.
Definitive anti-
Company/companies
dumping duty
rate
(90) Any
claim
requesting
the
application
of
an
individual
company anti-dumping duty rate (e.g. following a
Changshu Walsin Specialty Steel, Co. Ltd,
71,9 %
change in the name of the entity or following the
Haiyu
setting up of new production or sales entities) should
be addressed to the Commission ( 1 ) forthwith with all
Shanghai Jinchang Stainless Steel Tube Manu
48,3 %
relevant information, in particular any modification in
facturing, Co. Ltd, Situan
the company’s activities linked to production, domestic
and export sales associated with, for example, that name
Wenzhou Jiangnan Steel Pipe Manufacturing,
48,6 %
change or that change in the production and sales
Co. Ltd, Yongzhong
entities. If appropriate, the Regulation will then be
accordingly amended by updating the list of companies
Sample weighted average for the cooperating
56,9 %
benefiting from individual duty rates.
exporting producers not included in the
sample and listed in Annex I
All other companies 71,9
%
(91) All
parties
were
informed
of
the
essential
facts
and
considerations on the basis of which it was intended to
recommend the imposition of a definitive anti-dumping
(87) The individual company anti-dumping duty rates
duty on imports of certain seamless pipes and tubes of
specified in this Regulation were established on the
stainless steel originating in the PRC. They were also
basis of the findings of the present investigation.
granted a period of time within which they could
Therefore, they reflect the situation found during that
make representations subsequent to the final disclosure.
investigation with respect to the companies concerned.
These duty rates (as opposed to the country-wide duty
applicable to ‘all other companies’) are thus exclusively
applicable to imports of products originating in the PRC
(92) The
comments
submitted
by
the
interested
parties
were
and produced by the companies and thus by the specific
duly considered. None of the comments was such as to
legal entities mentioned. Imported products produced by
alter the findings of the investigation.
any other company not specifically mentioned in the
operative part of this Regulation with its name and
( 1 ) European Commission, Directorate-General for Trade, Directorate H,
address, including entities related to those specifically
Office N105 04/092, 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel, BELGIQUE/BELGI.

---

L 336/16
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
20.12.2011
(93) In
order
to
ensure
a
proper
enforcement
of
the
anti-
Definitive anti-
dumping duty, the country-wide duty level should not
Company/companies
dumping duty TARIC additional
code
only apply to the non-cooperating exporting producers
rate
but also to those producers which did not have any
exports to the Union during the IP.
Companies listed in Annex I 56,9
%
All other companies 71,9
% B999
(94) In
order
to
ensure
equal
treatment
between
any
new
exporters and the cooperating companies not included
in the sample, mentioned in Annex I to this Regulation,
3. The
application
of
the
individual
duty
rates
specified
for
provision should be made for the weighted average duty
the companies mentioned in paragraph 2 shall be conditional
imposed on the latter companies to be applied to any
upon presentation to the customs authorities of the Member
new exporters which would otherwise be entitled to a
States of a valid commercial invoice, which shall conform to the
review pursuant to Article 11(4) of the basic Regulation
requirements set out in Annex II. If no such invoice is
as that Article does not apply where sampling has been
presented, the duty applicable to all other companies shall
used.
apply.
3. Definitive collection of provisional duties
4. Unless
otherwise
specified,
the
provisions
in
force
concerning customs duties shall apply.
(95) In view of the magnitude of the dumping margins found
and given the level of the injury caused to the Union
industry (the definitive duty imposed by this Regulation
having been set at a level higher than the provisional
Article 2
duty imposed by the provisional Regulation), it is
considered necessary that the amounts secured by way
The amounts secured by way of provisional anti-dumping duties
of the provisional anti-dumping duty imposed by the
pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 627/2011 on imports of
provisional Regulation should be definitively collected,
seamless pipes and tubes of stainless steel (excluding such
pipes and tubes with attached fittings suitable for conducting
gases or liquids for use in civil aircraft), currently falling within
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
CN
codes
7304 11 00,
7304 22 00,
7304 24 00,
ex 7304 41 00, 7304 49 10, ex 7304 49 93, ex 7304 49 95,
ex 7304 49 99 and ex 7304 90 00 and originating in the
PRC, shall be definitively collected.
Article 1
1. A
definitive
anti-dumping
duty
is
hereby
imposed
on
imports of seamless pipes and tubes of stainless steel (excluding
Article 3
such pipes and tubes with attached fittings suitable for
conducting gases or liquids for use in civil aircraft), currently
Where any new exporting producer in the PRC provides
falling within CN codes 7304 11 00, 7304 22 00, 7304 24 00,
sufficient evidence to the Commission that:
ex 7304 41 00, 7304 49 10, ex 7304 49 93, ex 7304 49 95,
ex 7304 49 99
and
ex 7304 90 00
(TARIC
codes
7304 41 00 90,
7304 49 93 90,
7304 49 95 90,
7304 49 99 90 and 7304 90 00 91), and originating in the
— it did not export to the Union the product described in
People’s Republic of China (PRC).
Article 1(1) during the investigation period (1 July 2009
to 30 June 2010),
2. The
rate
of
the
definitive
anti-dumping
duty
applicable
to
the net, free-at-Union-frontier price, before duty, of the product
— it is not related to any of the exporters or producers in the
described in paragraph 1 and manufactured by the companies
PRC which are subject to the measures imposed by this
listed below shall be as follows:
Regulation,
Definitive anti-
Company/companies
dumping duty TARIC additional
— it has actually exported to the Union the product concerned
rate
code
after the investigation period on which the measures are
based, or it has entered into an irrevocable contractual obli
Changshu Walsin Specialty Steel, Co.
71,9 % B120
gation to export a significant quantity to the Union,
Ltd, Haiyu
Shanghai Jinchang Stainless Steel
48,3 % B118
Tube Manufacturing, Co. Ltd, Situan
the Council, acting by simple majority on a proposal submitted
by the Commission after consulting the Advisory Committee,
Wenzhou Jiangnan Steel Pipe Manu
48,6 % B119
may amend Article 1(2) by adding the new exporting producer
facturing, Co. Ltd, Yongzhong
to the cooperating companies not included in the sample and
thus subject to the weighted average duty rate of 56,9 %.

---

EN
20.12.2011 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
336/17
Article 4
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the
European Union.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Geneva, on 14 December 2011.
For the Council
The President
M. NOGAJ

---

L 336/18
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
20.12.2011
ANNEX I
PRC COOPERATING EXPORTING PRODUCERS NOT SAMPLED
Name
TARIC
additional code
Baofeng Steel Group, Co. Ltd, Lishui, B236
Changzhou City Lianyi Special Stainless Steel Tube, Co. Ltd, Changzhou, B237
Huadi Steel Group, Co. Ltd, Wenzhou, B238
Huzhou Fengtai Stainless Steel Pipes, Co. Ltd, Huzhou, B239
Huzhou Gaolin Stainless Steel Tube Manufacture, Co. Ltd, Huzhou, B240
Huzhou Zhongli Stainless Steel Pipe, Co. Ltd, Huzhou, B241
Jiangsu Wujin Stainless Steel Pipe Group, Co. Ltd, Beijing, B242
Jiangyin Huachang Stainless Steel Pipe, Co. Ltd, Jiangyin B243
Lixue Group, Co. Ltd, Ruian, B244
Shanghai Crystal Palace Pipe, Co. Ltd, Shanghai, B245
Shanghai Baoluo Stainless Steel Tube, Co. Ltd, Shanghai, B246
Shanghai Shangshang Stainless Steel Pipe, Co. Ltd, Shanghai, B247
Shanghai Tianbao Stainless Steel, Co. Ltd, Shanghai, B248
Shanghai Tianyang Steel Tube, Co. Ltd, Shanghai, B249
Wenzhou Xindeda Stainless Steel Material, Co. Ltd, Wenzhou, B250
Wenzhou Baorui Steel, Co. Ltd, Wenzhou, B251
Zhejiang Conform Stainless Steel Tube, Co. Ltd, Jixing, B252
Zhejiang Easter Steel Pipe, Co. Ltd, Jiaxing, B253
Zhejiang Five — Star Steel Tube Manufacturing, Co. Ltd, Wenzhou, B254
Zhejiang Guobang Steel, Co. Ltd, Lishui, B255
Zhejiang Hengyuan Steel, Co. Ltd, Lishui, B256
Zhejiang Jiashang Stainless Steel, Co. Ltd, Jiaxing City, B257
Zhejiang Jinxin Stainless Steel Manufacture, Co. Ltd, Xiping Town, B258
Zhejiang Jiuli Hi-Tech Metals, Co. Ltd, Huzhou, B259
Zhejiang Kanglong Steel, Co. Ltd, Lishui, B260
Zhejiang Qiangli Stainless Steel Manufacture, Co. Ltd, Xiping Town, B261
Zhejiang Tianbao Industrial, Co. Ltd, Wenzhou, B262
Zhejiang Tsingshan Steel Pipe, Co. Ltd, Lishui, B263
Zhejiang Yida Special Steel, Co. Ltd, Xiping Town. B264

---

EN
20.12.2011 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
336/19
ANNEX II
A declaration signed by an official of the entity issuing the commercial invoice, in the following format, must appear on
the valid commercial invoice referred to in Article 1(3):
(1) the name and function of the official of the entity issuing the commercial invoice;
(2) the following declaration:
‘I, the undersigned, certify that the (volume) of seamless pipes and tubes of stainless steel sold for export to the
European Union covered by this invoice was manufactured by (company name and registered seat) (TARIC additional
code) in the People’s Republic of China. I declare that the information provided in this invoice is complete and
correct.
Date and signature’.

---