title: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/2012 of 11 November 2015 laying down implementing technical standards with regard to the procedures for decisions to set, calculate and remove capital add-ons in accordance with Directive 2009/138/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (Text with EEA relevance)

text:
               12.11.2015

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 295/5

         COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2015/2012
   of 11 November 2015
   laying down implementing technical standards with regard to the procedures for decisions to set, calculate and remove capital add-ons in accordance with Directive 2009/138/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
   (Text with EEA relevance)
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to Directive 2009/138/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 on the taking up and pursuit of the business of Insurance and Reinsurance (Solvency II) (1), and in particular the third subparagraph of Article 37(8) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Directive 2009/138/EC provides for a possibility for the supervisory authorities to set a capital add-on for an insurance or reinsurance undertaking. It is necessary to provide for procedures for decisions to set, calculate and remove capital add-ons.

               (2)

               In order to enable the insurance or reinsurance undertaking to provide information and justifications which may mitigate or challenge the need for a capital add-on before taking a decision on setting the capital add-on, the supervisory authority should give the insurance or reinsurance undertaking the possibility to provide reasons against setting a capital add-on.

               (3)

               The cooperation of the insurance or reinsurance undertaking with the supervisory authority is essential in view of ensuring the effectiveness of the capital add-on as a supervisory measure. In order to enable the supervisory authority to base the capital add-on on accurate and up to date information, the insurance or reinsurance undertaking should calculate the capital add-on at the request of the supervisory authority.

               (4)

               In order to enable the insurance or reinsurance undertaking to remedy the deficiencies that led to the imposition of the capital add-on it is necessary to specify the content of the decision to set a capital add-on.

               (5)

               The supervisory authority and the insurance or reinsurance undertaking should not rely only on the annual review of the capital add-on, but should proactively monitor the circumstances which led to the setting of the capital add-on in order to take appropriate measures. To this end, the insurance or reinsurance undertaking should therefore provide the supervisory authority with progress reports on remedying the deficiencies that led to the imposition of the capital add-on. It is also necessary to provide for a procedure to review decisions on capital add-on if there is a material change in the circumstances that led to the setting of the capital add-on.

               (6)

               This Regulation is based on the draft implementing technical standards submitted by the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority to the Commission.

               (7)

               The European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority has conducted open public consultations on the draft implementing technical standards on which this Regulation is based, analysed the potential related costs and benefits and requested the opinion of the Insurance and Reinsurance Stakeholder Group established in accordance with Article 37 of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2),

         HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
   Article 1
   Notification before setting a capital add-on
   1.   The supervisory authority shall notify the insurance or reinsurance undertaking concerned of its intention to set a capital add-on and the reasons for setting the capital add-on.
   2.   The supervisory authority shall set a deadline by which the insurance or reinsurance undertaking is to respond to the notification referred to in paragraph 1. The supervisory authority shall consider any information provided by the insurance or reinsurance undertaking before taking its decision.
   Article 2
   Calculation of capital add-on
   If required by the supervisory authority, the insurance or reinsurance undertaking shall perform the calculation of the capital add-on in accordance with the specifications set by the supervisory authority.
   Article 3
   Provision of information
   1.   The supervisory authority may request the insurance or reinsurance undertaking to provide information necessary for taking a decision on setting a capital add-on by a deadline set by the supervisory authority.
   2.   When determining the deadline referred to in paragraph 1, the supervisory authority shall pay particular attention to the likelihood and severity of any adverse impact on policyholders and beneficiaries.
   3.   The insurance or reinsurance undertaking shall immediately notify the supervisory authority if it cannot meet the deadline referred to in paragraph 1.
   Article 4
   Decision to set a capital add-on
   1.   The supervisory authority shall notify in writing its decision to set a capital add-on to the insurance or reinsurance undertaking.
   2.   The decision of the supervisory authority shall be sufficiently detailed to enable the insurance or reinsurance undertaking to understand what measures it needs to take or what deficiencies it needs to remedy in order to have the capital add-on removed.
   3.   The decision referred to in paragraph 2 shall include:

               (a)

               the reasons for setting the capital add-on;

               (b)

               the methodology for calculating the capital add-on and the amount of the capital add-on;

               (c)

               the date from which the capital add-on is applicable;

               (d)

               where relevant, the deadline by which the insurance or reinsurance undertaking is to remedy the deficiencies that led to setting the capital add-on;

               (e)

               where relevant, the content and frequency of any progress report to be provided in accordance with Article 5.

         Article 5
   Progress report
   In the cases set out in Article 37(1)(b) and (c) of Directive 2009/138/EC and if requested by the supervisory authority, the insurance or reinsurance undertaking shall inform the supervisory authority about the progress it has made in remedying the deficiencies that led to the setting of the capital add-on and what relevant actions it has taken.
   Article 6
   Review of the capital add-on
   1.   The supervisory authority shall review the imposed capital add-on if there is a material change in the circumstances that led to the setting of the capital add-on.
   2.   Following the review of the imposed capital add-on the supervisory authority shall maintain, change or remove the capital add-on.
   Article 7
   Maintaining, changing or removing the capital add-on
   When considering whether to maintain, change or remove the capital add-on the supervisory authority shall take into account any of the following:

               (a)

               information submitted by the insurance or reinsurance undertaking during the process of setting and calculating the capital add-on;

               (b)

               information obtained by the supervisory authority through the supervisory review process and through any subsequent supervisory activity;

               (c)

               information provided in the progress report if requested by the supervisory authority in accordance with Article 5;

               (d)

               any other relevant information indicating a material change in the circumstances that led to the setting of the capital add-on.

         Article 8
   Decision to change or remove the capital add-on
   1.   The supervisory authority shall notify in writing without delay its decision to change or remove the capital add-on and the effective date of that decision to the insurance or reinsurance undertaking.
   2.   Where the supervisory authority decides to change the capital add-on, it shall adopt a new decision in accordance with Article 4(2) and (3).
   Article 9
   Entry into force
   This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of 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 Brussels, 11 November 2015.

            For the Commission

            The President

         Jean-Claude JUNCKER

      (1)  OJ L 335, 17.12.2009, p. 1.

      (2)  Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority), amending Decision No 716/2009/EC and repealing Commission Decision 2009/79/EC (OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 48).


title: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1376/2011 of 20 December 2011 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Mongeta del Ganxet (PDO))

text:
               23.12.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 343/14

         COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 1376/2011
   of 20 December 2011
   entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Mongeta del Ganxet (PDO))
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 7(4) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, Spain’s application to register the name ‘Mongeta del Ganxet’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union
                   (2).

               (2)

               As no statement of objection under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been received by the Commission, that name should therefore be entered in the register,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
   Article 1
   The name contained in the Annex to this Regulation is hereby entered in the register.
   Article 2
   This Regulation shall enter into force on the 20th 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 Brussels, 20 December 2011.

            For the Commission, On behalf of the President,
         Dacian CIOLOȘ

            Member of the Commission

      (1)  OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12.

      (2)  OJ C 124, 27.4.2011, p. 16.

      ANNEX
      Agricultural products intended for human consumption listed in Annex I to the Treaty:

         Class 1.6.   Fruit, vegetables and cereals, fresh or processed

      SPAIN
      Mongeta del Ganxet (PDO)


title: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1186 of 20 July 2016 amending for the 249th time Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with the ISIL (Da'esh) and Al-Qaeda organisations

text:
               21.7.2016

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 196/44

         COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2016/1186
   of 20 July 2016
   amending for the 249th time Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with the ISIL (Da'esh) and Al-Qaeda organisations
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 of 27 May 2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with the ISIL (Da'esh) and Al-Qaeda organisations (1), and in particular Article 7(1)(a) and Article 7a(5) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 lists the persons, groups and entities covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources under that Regulation.

               (2)

               On 15 July 2016, the Sanctions Committee of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) decided to remove one natural person from its list of persons, groups and entities to whom the freezing of funds and economic resources should apply. Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 should therefore be updated accordingly.

               (3)

               In order to ensure that the measures provided for in this Regulation are effective, this Regulation should enter into force immediately,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
   Article 1
   Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 is amended in accordance with the Annex to this Regulation.
   Article 2
   This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of 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 Brussels, 20 July 2016.

            For the Commission,

            On behalf of the President,

            Head of the Service for Foreign Policy Instruments

      (1)  OJ L 139, 29.5.2002, p. 9.

      ANNEX
      In Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 881/2002, the following entry under the heading ‘Natural persons’ is deleted:

         ‘Aschraf Al-Dagma (alias Aschraf Al Dagma). Address: Germany. Date of birth: 28.4.1969. Place of birth: (a) Abasan, Gaza Strip, Palestinian Territories, (b) Kannyouiz, Palestinian Territories. Nationality: Unresolved/Palestinian origin. Other information: (a) Refugee travel document issued by Landratsamt Altenburger Land (Altenburg County Administration Office), Germany, dated 30.4.2000; (b) Associated with Ismail Abdallah Sbaitan Shalabi, Djamel Moustfa and Mohamed Abu Dhess. Date of designation referred to in Article 2a(4)(b): 23.9.2003.’


title: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 228/2012 of 15 March 2012 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

text:
               16.3.2012

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 77/10

         COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 228/2012
   of 15 March 2012
   establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1),
   Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors (2), and in particular Article 136(1) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in Annex XVI, Part A thereto.

               (2)

               The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
   Article 1
   The standard import values referred to in Article 136 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 are fixed in the Annex to this Regulation.
   Article 2
   This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of 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 Brussels, 15 March 2012.

            For the Commission, On behalf of the President,
         José Manuel SILVA RODRÍGUEZ

            Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

      (1)  OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.

      (2)  OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.

      ANNEX
      Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

                  (EUR/100 kg)

                  CN code

                  Third country code (1)

                  Standard import value

                  0702 00 00

                  IL

                  51,1

                  JO

                  68,6

                  MA

                  57,8

                  TN

                  84,0

                  TR

                  97,9

                  ZZ

                  71,9

                  0707 00 05

                  JO

                  225,1

                  TR

                  174,9

                  ZZ

                  200,0

                  0709 91 00

                  EG

                  91,5

                  ZZ

                  91,5

                  0709 93 10

                  MA

                  64,2

                  TR

                  121,7

                  ZZ

                  93,0

                  0805 10 20

                  EG

                  53,0

                  IL

                  75,6

                  MA

                  65,8

                  TN

                  76,9

                  TR

                  62,9

                  ZZ

                  66,8

                  0805 50 10

                  EG

                  69,0

                  MA

                  69,1

                  TR

                  56,0

                  ZZ

                  64,7

                  0808 10 80

                  AR

                  89,5

                  BR

                  88,4

                  CA

                  119,9

                  CL

                  104,1

                  CN

                  115,1

                  MK

                  33,9

                  US

                  159,8

                  ZZ

                  101,5

                  0808 30 90

                  AR

                  95,3

                  CL

                  127,3

                  CN

                  47,7

                  ZA

                  91,4

                  ZZ

                  90,4

         (1)  Nomenclature of countries laid down by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1833/2006 (OJ L 354, 14.12.2006, p. 19). Code ‘ZZ’ stands for ‘of other origin’.


title: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 701/2013 of 11 July 2013 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (East Kent Goldings (PDO))

text:
               24.7.2013

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 199/1

         COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 701/2013
   of 11 July 2013
   entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (East Kent Goldings (PDO))
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 repealed and replaced Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (2).

               (2)

               Pursuant to Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, the United Kingdom’s application to register the name ‘East Kent Goldings’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union
                   (3).

               (3)

               As no statement of objection under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘East Kent Goldings’ should therefore be entered in the register,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
   Article 1
   The name contained in the Annex to this Regulation is hereby entered in the register.
   Article 2
   This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of 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 Brussels, 11 July 2013.

            For the Commission, On behalf of the President,
         Dacian CIOLOȘ

            Member of the Commission

      (1)  OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

      (2)  OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12.

      (3)  OJ C 285, 21.9.2012, p. 14.

      ANNEX
      Agricultural products intended for human consumption listed in Annex I to the Treaty:

         Class 1.8.   Other products of Annex I to the Treaty (spices, etc.)

      UNITED KINGDOM
      East Kent Goldings (PDO)


title: Implementing Regulation of the Council (EU) No 270/2010 of 29 March 2010 amending Regulation (EC) No 452/2007 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of ironing boards originating, inter alia , in the People’s Republic of China

text:
               31.3.2010

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 84/13

         IMPLEMENTING REGULATION OF THE COUNCIL (EU) No 270/2010
   of 29 March 2010
   amending Regulation (EC) No 452/2007 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of ironing boards originating, inter alia, in the People’s Republic of China
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of 30 November 2009 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (1) (‘the basic Regulation’), and in particular Article 11(3) thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal submitted by the European Commission after consulting the Advisory Committee,
   Whereas:
   1.   PROCEDURE

   1.1.   Measures in force

               (1)

               The Council, by Regulation (EC) No 452/2007 (2), imposed a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of ironing boards originating, inter alia, in the People’s Republic of China (‘PRC’). The measures consist of an ad valorem duty rate of 38,1 %, with the exception of five companies expressly mentioned which are subject to individual duty rates.

         1.2.   Request for a review

               (2)

               In 2008, the Commission received a request for a partial interim review pursuant to Article 11(3) of the basic Regulation (‘interim review’). The request, limited in scope to the examination of dumping, was lodged by a Chinese exporting producer Guangzhou Power Team Houseware Co. Ltd., Guangzhou (‘Power Team’ or ‘the applicant’). The rate of the definitive anti-dumping duty applicable to the applicant is 36,5 %.

               (3)

               In its request, the applicant claimed that the circumstances on the basis of which measures were imposed have changed and that these changes are of a lasting nature. The applicant provided prima facie evidence that the continued imposition of the measure at its current level is no longer necessary to offset dumping.

               (4)

               In particular, the applicant has claimed that it now operates under market economy conditions, i.e. that it meets the criteria laid down in Article 2(7)(c) of the basic Regulation. The applicant therefore alleged that its normal value should be determined in accordance with Article 2(7)(b) of the basic Regulation. A comparison of this normal value and its export prices to the European Union (‘EU’) indicated that the dumping margin appears to be substantially lower than the current level of the measure.

               (5)

               Therefore, the applicant claimed that the continued imposition of measures at the existing level, which was based on the level of dumping previously established, was no longer necessary to offset dumping.

         1.3.   Initiation of a review

               (6)

               Having determined, after consulting the Advisory Committee, that sufficient evidence existed for the initiation of an interim review, the Commission decided to initiate an interim review in accordance with Article 11(3) of the basic Regulation, limited in scope to the examination of dumping in respect of the applicant (3).

         1.4.   Product concerned and like product

               (7)

               The product concerned by the interim review is the same as that in the investigation that led to the imposition of the measures in force (‘original investigation’), i.e. ironing boards, whether or not free-standing, with or without a steam soaking and/or heating top and/or blowing top, including sleeve boards, and essential parts thereof, i.e. the legs, the top and the iron rest originating in the People’s Republic of China currently falling within CN codes ex 3924 90 00 (4), ex 4421 90 98, ex 7323 93 90, ex 7323 99 91, ex 7323 99 99, ex 8516 79 70 and ex 8516 90 00.

               (8)

               The product produced and sold on the Chinese domestic market and that exported to the EU, as well as that produced and sold in Ukraine (used as analogue country) have the same basic physical and technical characteristics and uses and are therefore considered to be alike within the meaning of Article 1(4) of the basic Regulation.

         1.5.   Parties concerned

               (9)

               The Commission officially advised the representative of the Union industry, the applicant and the representatives of the exporting country of the initiation of the review. Interested parties were given the opportunity to make their views known in writing and to be heard.

               (10)

               The Commission sent a market economy treatment (‘MET’) claim form and a questionnaire to the applicant and received a reply within the deadline set for that purpose. The Commission sought and verified all the information it deemed necessary for the determination of dumping, and a verification visit was carried out at the premises of the applicant.

         1.6.   Review investigation period

               (11)

               The investigation of dumping covered the period from 1 January 2008 to 31 December 2008 (‘the review investigation period’ or ‘RIP’). It is recalled that the investigation period of the original investigation leading to the imposition of the measures was 1 January 2005 to 31 December 2005 (‘the original investigation period’).

         2.   RESULTS OF THE INVESTIGATION

   2.1.   Market Economy Treatment (‘MET’)

               (12)

               Pursuant to Article 2(7)(b) of the basic Regulation, in anti-dumping investigations concerning imports originating in the PRC, normal value shall be determined in accordance with paragraphs 1 to 6 of the Article 2 of the basic Regulation for those producers which were found to meet the criteria laid down in Article 2(7)(c) of the basic Regulation, i.e. where it is shown that market economy conditions prevail in respect of the manufacture and sale of the like product. These criteria are set out in a summarised form below:

                           —

                           business decisions are made in response to market signals, without significant State interference, and costs reflect market values,

                           —

                           firms have one clear set of basic accounting records which are independently audited in line with International Accounting Standards (‘IAS’) and applied for all purposes,

                           —

                           there are no significant distortions carried over from the former non-market economy system,

                           —

                           bankruptcy and property laws guarantee stability and legal certainty,

                           —

                           currency exchanges are carried out at market rates.

               (13)

               The applicant requested MET pursuant to Article 2(7)(b) of the basic Regulation and was invited to complete a MET claim form.

               (14)

               The investigation established that the applicant did not meet the MET criterion referred to in the first indent of Article 2(7)(c) (criterion 1) of the basic Regulation as regards costs of major inputs. It was established that after the investigation period in the original investigation, i.e. after 2005, export restrictions were imposed by the State on several steel products, including the main raw materials for the production of ironing boards, i.e. steel plate, steel pipes and steel wire. It is noted that the cost of these raw materials represent a significant part of the total raw materials cost. The imposition of export taxes decreased the incentive to export and thereby increased the volumes available domestically, leading in turn to lower prices. It was also found that a number of subsidy schemes were available for Chinese steel producers (5), as well as publicly available accounts of a number of steel producers confirm that the Chinese State is actively supporting the development of the steel sector in the PRC.

               (15)

               As a consequence, domestic steel prices in the PRC were during the review investigation period far below prices on other sizeable world markets, notably steel prices in North America and North Europe (6), and these price differences cannot be explained by any competitive advantage in the production of steel.

               (16)

               Moreover, from the information on the file, it was found that the applicant was benefiting from these artificially low and distorted prices of steel, as it purchased its raw materials on the domestic Chinese market.

               (17)

               It was thus concluded that major inputs of Power Team do not substantially reflect market values. Consequently, it was concluded that the applicant has not shown that it fulfils all the criteria set out in Article 2(7)(c) of the basic Regulation and, thus, could not be granted MET.

               (18)

               The applicant, the exporting country and the Union industry were given an opportunity to comment on the above findings. Comments were received from the applicant and the Union industry.

               (19)

               The applicant put forward three main arguments within the deadline. Firstly, it stated that Power Team's raw material prices were still in line with domestic prices and that this finding was sufficient to fulfil criterion 1 in the original investigation. As a consequence, the company considered it a breach of Article 11(9) of the basic Regulation to compare the prices on the Chinese domestic market with prices on other international steel markets. In this context, the company also questioned the relevance of the North European and North American steel market prices to which a comparison was made. The applicant stated that there would be also prices of other international markets such as the Turkish export prices that were lower than the domestic prices in the PRC.

               (20)

               It is indeed true that the applicant fulfilled criterion 1 in the original investigation, but failed criterion 2. It is however considered that there is no breach of Article 11(9) of the basic Regulation as there is no change in methodology to assess whether the company operates under market economy conditions and notably whether it still fulfils criterion 1. In both investigations, the original investigation and the review investigation, the question of raw materials reflecting market values was assessed. In both investigations one of the indicators examined was domestic steel prices, but in the original investigation there were no other significant factors that appeared to influence raw material prices. Thus, the methodology remained the same, only the findings were different.

               (21)

               The review investigation revealed that after the original investigation period, i.e. since 2006, the circumstances have changed as several measures were imposed by the Chinese State to discourage exports of steel plate, pipes and wire by introducing an export tax and by eliminating the export VAT refund. This, together with the aforementioned subsidy schemes, had a distorting effect on the Chinese domestic steel prices because the price difference found between those prices and the domestic prices published for North America and North Europe, increased significantly to around 30 %. This price difference has not been challenged by the applicant following the disclosure of the MET findings.

               (22)

               As regards the argument that the domestic North American and North European steel prices are not the only internationally relevant prices, it is noted that both steel markets were selected for a comparison of prices as both markets have a high consumption of steel and are competitive markets with several active producers. It could thus reasonably be assumed that those domestic prices were representative for competitive market prices. Moreover, the claim that Turkish export prices would be lower than Chinese domestic prices was not further substantiated at this stage, i.e. no concrete prices were submitted within the deadline. Furthermore, no explanation as to why Turkish export prices, given the apparent relative small size of the Turkish export market compared to the domestic North American and North European markets, should be considered as more relevant.

               (23)

               The company secondly claimed that it was discriminated in the application of EU law, as in a number of recent other cases in which steel constituted a major input, there were some Chinese steel companies fulfilling criterion 1. These cases were all examined and it was found that none of the companies involved in those cases was granted MET as they all failed to satisfy at least one other criterion of Article 2(7)(c) of the basic Regulation. Thus, for reasons of administrative economy, it was not necessary to expand on criterion 1 in great detail when it was clear that the company would fail for another reason. In any event, in none of those recent cases had the Commission concluded that there were no distortions on the Chinese domestic steel market, but on the contrary, in recent cases, MET was denied whenever raw material distortions could be identified (7).

               (24)

               Lastly, the applicant argued that an adjustment of the normal value would be more appropriate than denying MET. However, an adjustment to the normal value appears inappropriate given that one of the criteria to be granted MET is that costs of major inputs have to reflect market values. If this is not the case, the consequence should rather be that MET is denied and the normal value will be replaced by an analogue country normal value, in particular if the raw materials constitute such a significant part of the cost of the inputs.

               (25)

               To conclude, none of the arguments raised by Power Team were convincing or led to a different assessment of the findings.

               (26)

               The Union industry pointed out that the Chinese State had massively intervened in the steel industry which already prompted the EU and the US to request WTO consultations to resolve this matter.

               (27)

               On the basis of the above, the findings and the conclusion that MET should not be granted to Power Team were confirmed.

               (28)

               Following the disclosure of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of which it was intended to recommend an amendment of Regulation (EC) No 452/2007, the applicant submitted further comments on the MET finding.

               (29)

               The applicant mainly reiterated its argument that its main inputs would reflect market values in the PRC and that Chinese prices would be broadly in line with other international markets. While it acknowledged the fact that the price increase for the main inputs was less pronounced in the PRC in 2008 compared to other international steel markets, the applicant alleged that this was not due to any distortions but that other pure commercial factors could be the reason for the lower prices on the Chinese domestic market. The applicant pointed to increased production in 2008 and indicated that the existing anti-dumping or countervailing duties in place against exports of most of the steel inputs produced in the PRC had led the Chinese producers to decrease their prices in the domestic market.

               (30)

               It is noted that the additional price information submitted by the applicant supported the finding that the main raw materials for the production of ironing boards in 2008 were on average significantly cheaper on the Chinese domestic market than on other sizeable world markets.

               (31)

               As to the argument that pure commercial factors were the reason for that price difference, i.e. the increased production in the PRC, it is noted that this argument was not sufficiently substantiated in particular with regard to any possible correlation between the alleged increase in production and the situation on the demand side. At the same time, the argument raised by the applicant that there were countervailing duties in place against exports of a number of steel products from the PRC, only demonstrates that indeed the Chinese steel producers were benefiting from subsidies.

               (32)

               Consequently, the applicant’s argument that the steel market in the PRC is not distorted cannot be upheld and it is definitively concluded that the MET determination should not be revised and that MET should not be granted to Power Team.

         2.2.   Individual Treatment (‘IT’)

               (33)

               Pursuant to Article 2(7) of the basic Regulation, a country-wide duty, if any, is established for countries falling under that Article, except in those cases where companies are able to demonstrate that they meet all criteria for individual treatment set out in Article 9(5) of the basic Regulation. These criteria are set out in a summarised form below:

                           —

                           in the case of wholly or partly foreign owned firms or joint ventures, exporters are free to repatriate capital and profits;

                           —

                           export prices and quantities, and conditions and terms of sale are freely determined;

                           —

                           the majority of the shares belong to private persons, and it must be demonstrated that the company is sufficiently independent from State interference;

                           —

                           exchange rate conversions are carried out at the market rate;

                           —

                           State interference is not such as to permit circumvention of measures if individual exporters are given different rates of duty.

               (34)

               The applicant, as well as requesting MET, also claimed IT in the event of it not being granted MET.

               (35)

               The investigation showed that the applicant met all the above criteria and it is concluded that IT should be granted to Power Team.

         2.3.   Normal value

               (36)

               According to Article 2(7) of the basic Regulation, in case of imports from non-market-economy countries and to the extent that MET could not be granted, for countries specified in Article 2(7)(b) of the basic Regulation, normal value has to be established on the basis of the price or constructed value in an analogue country.

               (37)

               In the notice of initiation, the Commission indicated its intention to use again Turkey, which was used as an analogue country in the original investigation, as an appropriate analogue country for the purpose of establishing normal value for the PRC, but no Turkish producer co-operated in this interim review. However, co-operation was received from an Ukrainian exporting producer that was subject to a parallel investigation for another interim review. The interested parties were informed accordingly and no comments against using Ukraine as an analogue country were received at that stage.

               (38)

               As there were no apparent reasons found not to select Ukraine as an analogue country, and in particular as no other third country producer cooperated, the normal value was established pursuant to Article 2(7)(a) of the basic Regulation, i.e. on the basis of verified information received from the cooperating producer in the analogue country.

               (39)

               In accordance with Article 2(2) of the basic Regulation, it was found that the volume of domestic sales of the like product of the cooperating producer in the analogue country was representative in comparison with the export sales of the applicant to the EU. Furthermore, for all exported product types, the comparable domestic sales (if necessary adjusted for physical characteristics) were considered representative since their sales volume was at least 5 % of the volume of the corresponding export sales to the EU.

               (40)

               The Commission subsequently examined whether the domestic sales in the analogue country of each type of ironing board sold domestically in representative quantities could be regarded as having been made in the ordinary course of trade, by establishing the proportion of profitable sales to independent customers of the ironing board type in question.

               (41)

               Domestic sales transactions were considered profitable where the unit price of a specific product type was equal to or above the cost of production. Cost of production of each type sold on the domestic market of the analogue country during the IP was therefore determined.

               (42)

               Where the sales volume of a product type, sold at a net sales price equal to or above the calculated cost of production, represented more than 80 % of the total sales volume of that type, and where the weighted average price of that type was equal to or above the cost of production, normal value was based on the actual domestic price. This price was calculated as a weighted average of the prices of all domestic sales of that type made during the IP, irrespective of whether these sales were profitable or not.

               (43)

               Where the volume of profitable sales of a product type represented 80 % or less of the total sales volume of that type, or where the weighted average price of that type was below the cost of production, normal value was based on the actual domestic price, calculated as a weighted average of only profitable sales of that type.

               (44)

               Following the disclosure, the applicant commented that in cases where profitable sales would represent less than 10 % of total sales volume of a particular type, a constructed normal value should normally be used.

               (45)

               In this regard, it is noted that a situation of less than 10 % profitable sales did not occur in this investigation. Moreover, the practice of automatically constructing a normal value in such circumstances is no longer in place.

         2.4.   Export price

               (46)

               In all cases the product concerned was sold for export to independent customers in the Union via independent traders in the PRC, and therefore, the export price was established in accordance with Article 2(8) of the basic Regulation, namely on the basis of prices actually paid or payable for the product when sold for export to the EU.

               (47)

               Following disclosure, the applicant submitted that the export price should be established on the basis of the sales invoice price of the independent Chinese trader to independent customers in the EU, and not, as it was done, on the basis of the price paid or payable for the product when sold from Power Team to the independent trader in the PRC for export. Such an approach, however, would not be in line with Article 2(8) of the basic Regulation that requires that when products are sold for export, the first independent transaction should be the basis for establishing the export price. Consequently, this claim has to be rejected.

         2.5.   Comparison

               (48)

               The normal value and export price were compared on an ex-works basis. In order to ensure a fair comparison between normal value and export price, account was taken, in accordance with Article 2(10) of the basic Regulation, of differences in factors which were claimed and demonstrated to affect prices and price comparability. On this basis, allowances for physical characteristics, transport costs, insurance, handling charges and credit costs were made where applicable and justified. Given that the export price was established exclusively on the basis of domestic sales to Chinese traders for export, there was no reason for an allowance for differences in taxation, since the normal value was also established on domestic sales in the analogue country subject to a similar taxation regime. Both normal value and export price were therefore calculated on a net of VAT basis.

               (49)

               Following disclosure, the applicant submitted that the grouping of the product types (that was indeed performed for comparison purposes) would cast certain doubts with regard to the correctness of the price comparison.

               (50)

               In this regard, it is noted that the grouping of product types in this investigation was identical to the grouping performed in the original investigation, and was considered necessary in order to increase comparability of the products sold for export to the Union by Power Team and those sold on the domestic market in the analogue country. It is also noted that the applicant did not substantiate its claim any further, in particular with respect to why the grouping as performed (and explained in the specific disclosure addressed to the applicant) would not be appropriate. Consequently, the claim has to be rejected.

         2.6.   Dumping margin

               (51)

               As provided for under Article 2(11) of the basic Regulation, the weighted average normal value by type was compared with the weighted average export price of the corresponding type of the product concerned. This comparison showed the existence of dumping.

               (52)

               The dumping margin of Power Team expressed as a percentage of the net, free-at-Union-frontier price was found to be 39,6 %.

         3.   LASTING NATURE OF CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES

               (53)

               In accordance with Article 11(3) of the basic Regulation, it was also examined whether the changed circumstances could reasonably be considered to be of a lasting nature.

               (54)

               In this respect, it is recalled that the applicant was denied MET in the original investigation due to established irregularities with regard to its accounting practices. This review concluded that Power Team fulfilled this criterion. However, as indicated above, the applicant did not meet the MET criterion referred to in the first indent of Article 2(7)(c) of the basic Regulation concerning costs of major inputs. Consequently, as far as MET is concerned, the circumstances have not changed for the applicant.

               (55)

               However, the data collected and verified during the investigation (i.e. the applicant's individual prices for export to the EU and a normal value established in Ukraine as an analogue country) led to a higher dumping margin. This change is considered significant and the continued application of the measure at its current level would no longer be sufficient to offset dumping.

         4.   ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES

               (56)

               In the light of the results of this review investigation, it is considered appropriate to amend the anti-dumping duty applicable to imports of the product concerned from Power Team to 39,6 %.

               (57)

               As concerns the level of the residual duty, it is recalled that in the original investigation, cooperation was low. Thus, the duty for the companies not co-operating was set at a level which corresponded to the weighted average dumping margin of the most sold product types of the co-operating exporting producer with the highest dumping margin. Applying the same methodology and considering the relevant data from the applicant, the residual duty has to be amended to 42,3 %.

               (58)

               Interested parties were informed of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of which it was intended to recommend an amendment of Regulation (EC) No 452/2007 and were given an opportunity to comment. The comments submitted by the parties were considered and, when appropriate, the definitive findings have been modified accordingly,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
   Article 1
   Regulation (EC) No 452/2007 is hereby amended as follows:

               —

               The entry concerning Guangzhou Power Team Houseware Co. Ltd., Guangzhou in the table in Article 1(2) shall be replaced by the following:

                           Country

                           Manufacturer

                           Rate of duty (%)

                           TARIC additional code

                           PRC

                           Guangzhou Power Team Houseware Co. Ltd., Guangzhou

                           39,6

                           A783

               —

               The entry concerning all other companies in the PRC in the table in Article 1(2) shall be replaced by the following:

                           Country

                           Manufacturer

                           Rate of duty (%)

                           TARIC additional code

                           PRC

                           All other companies

                           42,3

                           A999

         Article 2
   This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of 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 Brussels, 29 March 2010

            For the Council

            The President

         E. ESPINOSA

      (1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 51.

      (2)  OJ L 109, 26.4.2007, p. 12.

      (3)  OJ C 3, 8.1.2009, p. 14 (‘Notice of Initiation’).

      (4)  The modified code (3924 90 00 instead of 3924 90 90 as mentioned in the Notice of Initiation) is a result of the new Combined Nomenclature which became applicable on 1.1.2010 (see Regulation (EC) 948/2009, OJ L 287, 31.10.2009, p. 1).

      (5)  For instance ‘Money for Metal: A detailed Examination of Chinese Government Subsidies to its Steel Industry’ by Wiley Rein LLP, July 2007, ‘China Government Subsidies Survey’ by Anne Stevenson- Yang, February 2007, ‘Shedding Light on Energy Subsidies in China: An Analysis of China’s Steel Industry from 2000-2007’ by Usha C.V. Haley, ‘China's Specialty Steel Subsidies: Massive, Pervasive and Illegal’ by the Specialty Steel Industry of North America, ‘The China Syndrome: How Subsidies and Government Intervention Created the World’s Largest Steel Industry’ by Wiley Rein & Fielding LLP, July 2006 and ‘The State-Business Nexus in China’s Steel Industry — Chinese Market Distortions in Domestic and International Perspective’ by Prof. Dr. Markus Taube & Dr. Christian Schmidkonz of THINK!DESK China Research & Consulting, 25.2.2009.

      (6)  Source: Steel Business Briefing, average prices for 2005 and 2008.

      (7)  See Council Regulation (EC) No 91/2009 of 26 January 2009 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain iron or steel fasteners originating in the People's Republic of China (OJ L 29, 31.1.2009, p. 1); Commission Regulation (EC) No 287/2009 of 7 April 2009 imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of certain aluminium foil originating in, inter alia, the People's Republic of China (OJ L 94, 8.4.2009, p. 17).


title: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 123/2013 of 12 February 2013 amending for the 186th time Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with the Al Qaida network

text:
               13.2.2013

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 42/18

         COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 123/2013
   of 12 February 2013
   amending for the 186th time Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with the Al Qaida network
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 of 27 May 2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with the Al-Qaida network, (1) and in particular Article 7(1)(a) and 7a(1) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 lists the persons, groups and entities covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources under that Regulation.

               (2)

               On 5 February 2013 the Sanctions Committee of the United Nations Security Council decided to add one natural person to its list of persons, groups and entities to whom the freezing of funds and economic resources should apply.

               (3)

               Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 should therefore be updated accordingly.

               (4)

               In order to ensure that the measures provided for in this Regulation are effective, this Regulation should enter into force immediately,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
   Article 1
   Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 is amended in accordance with the Annex to this Regulation.
   Article 2
   This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of 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 Brussels, 12 February 2013.

            For the Commission, On behalf of the President,

            Head of the Service for Foreign Policy Instruments

      (1)  OJ L 139, 29.5.2002, p. 9.

      ANNEX
      Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 is amended as follows:
      The following entry shall be added under the heading ‘Natural persons’:

         ‘Djamel Akkacha (alias (a) Yahia Abou el Hoummam, (b) Yahia Abou el Hammam). Date of birth: 9.5.1978. Place of birth: Rouiba, Algiers, Algeria. Nationality: Algerian. Address: Mali. Other information: Father’s name is Slimane. Mother’s name is Akrouf Khadidja. Date of designation referred to in Article 2a (4) (b): 5.2.2013.’


title: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/2273 of 7 December 2015 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

text:
               8.12.2015

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 322/42

         COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2015/2273
   of 7 December 2015
   establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (1),
   Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors (2), and in particular Article 136(1) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in Annex XVI, Part A thereto.

               (2)

               The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
   Article 1
   The standard import values referred to in Article 136 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 are fixed in the Annex to this Regulation.
   Article 2
   This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of 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 Brussels, 7 December 2015.

            For the Commission,

            On behalf of the President,

         Jerzy PLEWA

            Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

      (1)  OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671.

      (2)  OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.

      ANNEX

         Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

                  (EUR/100 kg)

                  CN code

                  Third country code (1)

                  Standard import value

                  0702 00 00

                  MA

                  84,5

                  TR

                  83,5

                  ZZ

                  84,0

                  0707 00 05

                  MA

                  95,7

                  TR

                  155,0

                  ZZ

                  125,4

                  0709 93 10

                  MA

                  67,5

                  TR

                  150,7

                  ZZ

                  109,1

                  0805 10 20

                  MA

                  83,9

                  TR

                  59,6

                  UY

                  52,1

                  ZA

                  79,5

                  ZZ

                  68,8

                  0805 20 10

                  MA

                  72,8

                  ZZ

                  72,8

                  0805 20 30, 0805 20 50, 0805 20 70, 0805 20 90

                  TR

                  89,1

                  ZA

                  96,8

                  ZZ

                  93,0

                  0805 50 10

                  TR

                  113,3

                  ZZ

                  113,3

                  0808 10 80

                  AU

                  155,4

                  CL

                  87,9

                  NZ

                  213,1

                  US

                  120,1

                  ZA

                  149,3

                  ZZ

                  145,2

                  0808 30 90

                  CN

                  80,5

                  TR

                  143,4

                  ZZ

                  112,0

         (1)  Nomenclature of countries laid down by Commission Regulation (EU) No 1106/2012 of 27 November 2012 implementing Regulation (EC) No 471/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council on Community statistics relating to external trade with non-member countries, as regards the update of the nomenclature of countries and territories (OJ L 328, 28.11.2012, p. 7). Code ‘ZZ’ stands for ‘of other origin’.


title: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1345/2014 of 17 December 2014 on the determination of surplus quantities of sugar, isoglucose and fructose in Croatia

text:
               18.12.2014

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 363/80

         COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 1345/2014
   of 17 December 2014
   on the determination of surplus quantities of sugar, isoglucose and fructose in Croatia
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty of Accession of Croatia
   Having regard to the Act of Accession of Croatia,
   Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 170/2013 of 25 February 2013 laying down transitional measures in the sugar sector by reason of the accession of Croatia (1), and in particular Article 7(1) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               In order to avoid a disruption on the Union market in the sugar sector following the accession of Croatia to the Union on 1 July 2013, Section 2 of Chapter II of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 170/2013 lays down rules for the determination and elimination of the quantities of sugar as such or in processed products, isoglucose and fructose exceeding the quantity considered as being normal carry-over stock on 1 July 2013 (surplus quantities). In particular, Article 9 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 170/2013 provides that those surplus quantities are to be eliminated from the market in the form of sugar as such or isoglucose at the expense of Croatia.

               (2)

               Moreover, Section 2 of Chapter II of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 170/2013 provides that the Commission is to determine the surplus quantities by 31 December 2014 at the latest.

               (3)

               In order to determine the surplus quantities, Article 13(2) of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 170/2013 provides that Croatia was to communicate to the Commission relevant information on quantities of production, consumption, stocks, export and import, as well as information on the system established for the identification of surplus quantities. On that basis, the Commission should determine the surplus quantities comparing the development in the Croatian sugar market from 1 July 2012 to 30 June 2013, in relation to the previous three years. Specific circumstances of stock-piling should also be taken into consideration as provided for in Article 7(2)(c) of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 170/2013. In particular, due account needs to be taken of the increase in consumption and stocks in Croatia as well as of the trend in the Union, as also suggested by Croatia.

               (4)

               On the basis of the communications from Croatia, sugar surplus quantities should be determined in accordance with that method.

               (5)

               For the determination of surplus quantities of isoglucose and fructose, the same method was applied. As a result, no surplus quantities of fructose and isoglucose need to be determined.

               (6)

               The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for the Common Organisation of the Agricultural Markets,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
   Article 1
   The quantities of sugar exceeding the quantity considered as being normal carry-over stock at 1 July 2013 and which have to be eliminated from the Union market at the expense of Croatia in accordance with Article 9 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 170/2013 are 37 138 tonnes.
   Article 2
   This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following that of 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 Brussels, 17 December 2014.

            For the Commission

            The President

         Jean-Claude JUNCKER

      (1)  OJ L 55, 27.2.2013, p. 1.


title: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1090 of 6 July 2015 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

text:
               7.7.2015

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 176/38

         COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2015/1090
   of 6 July 2015
   establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (1),
   Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors (2), and in particular Article 136(1) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in Annex XVI, Part A thereto.

               (2)

               The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
   Article 1
   The standard import values referred to in Article 136 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 are fixed in the Annex to this Regulation.
   Article 2
   This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of 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 Brussels, 6 July 2015.

            For the Commission,

            On behalf of the President,

         Jerzy PLEWA

            Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

      (1)  OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671.

      (2)  OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.

      ANNEX

         Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

                  (EUR/100 kg)

                  CN code

                  Third country code (1)

                  Standard import value

                  0702 00 00

                  AL

                  20,6

                  MA

                  149,4

                  MK

                  73,7

                  ZZ

                  81,2

                  0709 93 10

                  TR

                  117,8

                  ZZ

                  117,8

                  0805 50 10

                  AR

                  108,6

                  BO

                  144,3

                  UY

                  135,9

                  ZA

                  138,2

                  ZZ

                  131,8

                  0808 10 80

                  AR

                  114,8

                  BR

                  103,0

                  CL

                  130,3

                  NZ

                  155,0

                  US

                  117,1

                  ZA

                  125,9

                  ZZ

                  124,4

                  0808 30 90

                  AR

                  117,6

                  CL

                  134,8

                  NZ

                  235,1

                  ZA

                  113,5

                  ZZ

                  150,3

                  0809 10 00

                  IL

                  315,1

                  TR

                  245,3

                  ZZ

                  280,2

                  0809 29 00

                  TR

                  267,3

                  ZZ

                  267,3

                  0809 30 10, 0809 30 90

                  CL

                  181,4

                  ZZ

                  181,4

                  0809 40 05

                  CL

                  126,8

                  IL

                  241,9

                  ZZ

                  184,4

         (1)  Nomenclature of countries laid down by Commission Regulation (EU) No 1106/2012 of 27 November 2012 implementing Regulation (EC) No 471/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council on Community statistics relating to external trade with non-member countries, as regards the update of the nomenclature of countries and territories (OJ L 328, 28.11.2012, p. 7). Code ‘ZZ’ stands for ‘of other origin’.


title: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/392 of 9 March 2015 terminating a ‘new exporter’ review of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1389/2011 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of trichloroisocyanuric acid originating in the People's Republic of China, re-imposing the duty with regard to imports from the exporter and terminating the registration of these imports

text:
               10.3.2015

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 65/18

         COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2015/392
   of 9 March 2015
   terminating a ‘new exporter’ review of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1389/2011 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of trichloroisocyanuric acid originating in the People's Republic of China, re-imposing the duty with regard to imports from the exporter and terminating the registration of these imports
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of 30 November 2009 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (‘the basic Regulation’) (1) and in particular Article 11(4) thereof,
   Whereas:
   1.   Measures in force

               (1)

               In October 2005, the Council imposed definitive anti-dumping measures on imports of trichloroisocyanuric acid and preparations thereof (‘TCCA’), originating in the People's Republic of China (‘PRC’) by Regulation (EC) No 1631/2005 (2) (‘the original Regulation’). The anti-dumping duty rates ranged from 7,3 % to 42,6 %.

               (2)

               By Implementing Regulation (EU) No 855/2010 (3), the Council amended the original Regulation by lowering the anti-dumping duty rate for one exporting producer to 3,2 %.

               (3)

               Following an expiry review, pursuant to Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation, the Council imposed definitive anti-dumping measures consisting of individual duties ranging from 3,2 % to 40,5 % with a residual duty of 42,6 % on imports of TCCA originating in the PRC by Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1389/2011 (4).

               (4)

               By Implementing Regulation (EU) No 569/2014 (5), the Commission imposed an individual duty rate of 32,8 % on one new exporting producer.

         2.   Current investigation

               (5)

               On 4 January 2014, the European Commission (‘the Commission’) received a request to initiate a ‘new exporter’ review pursuant to Article 11(4) of the basic Regulation. The request was lodged by Juancheng Kangtai Chemical Co. Ltd (‘the applicant’), an exporting producer of TCCA in the PRC. The applicant claimed that it did not export TCCA to the European Union during the period of investigation of the original investigation and started exporting only after the end of that period. It also claimed that it was not related to any of the exporting producers of TCCA which are subject to the measures in force.

               (6)

               The Commission considered that the prima facie evidence submitted by the applicant was sufficient to justify the initiation of a review pursuant to Article 11(4) of the basic Regulation. After the Union producers had been given an opportunity to comment, the Commission initiated, by Implementing Regulation (EU) No 727/2014 (6), a review of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1389/2011 with regard to the applicant.

               (7)

               Pursuant to Article 2 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 727/2014, the anti-dumping duty imposed by Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1389/2011 was repealed with regard to the applicant. Simultaneously, pursuant to Article 14(5) of the basic Regulation, the Commission directed the customs authorities to register the applicant's imports.

         3.   Withdrawal of the request

               (8)

               On 28 November 2014, the applicant formally withdrew its request for a ‘new exporter’ review. On this basis, the Commission considered that the review investigation should be terminated.

         4.   Disclosure

               (9)

               The Commission informed the interested parties of the intention to terminate the review investigation, to re-impose a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of TCCA and to levy this duty retroactively on imports subject to registration under Implementing Regulation (EU) No 727/2014. Interested parties were given the opportunity to comment. No comments were received.

         5.   Retroactive levying of the anti-dumping duty

               (10)

               In view of the findings outlined above, the Commission concluded that the review concerning imports of TCCA manufactured by Juancheng Kangtai Chemical Co. Ltd and originating in the People's Republic of China should be terminated. Consequently, the registration of the applicant's imports should cease and the country-wide duty applicable to all other companies (42,6 %) imposed by Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1389/2011 should be levied retroactively on these imports from the date of initiation of this review.

               (11)

               This Regulation is in accordance with the opinion of the Committee established by Article 15(1) of the basic Regulation.

         HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
   Article 1
   1.   The new exporter review initiated by Implementing Regulation (EU) No 727/2014 is hereby terminated and the anti-dumping duty applicable according to Article 1 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1389/2011 to all other companies (TARIC additional code A999) in the People's Republic of China is hereby imposed on imports identified in Article 1 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 727/2014.
   2.   The anti-dumping duty applicable according to Article 1 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1389/2011 to all other companies in the People's Republic of China is hereby levied with effect from 2 July 2014 on imports of trichloroisocyanuric acid and preparations thereof, also referred to as ‘symclosene’ under the international non-proprietary name (INN), which have been registered pursuant to Article 3 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 727/2014.
   3.   The customs authorities are hereby directed to cease the registration of imports carried out pursuant to Article 3 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 727/2014.
   4.   Unless otherwise specified, the provisions in force concerning customs duties shall apply.
   Article 2
   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 Brussels, 9 March 2015.

            For the Commission

            The President

         Jean-Claude JUNCKER

      (1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 51.

      (2)  OJ L 261, 7.10.2005, p. 1.

      (3)  OJ L 254, 29.9.2010, p. 1.

      (4)  OJ L 346, 30.12.2011, p. 6.

      (5)  OJ L 157, 27.5.2014, p. 80.

      (6)  OJ L 192, 1.7.2014, p. 42.