title: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/111 of 23 January 2017 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

text:
               24.1.2017

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 18/45

         COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2017/111
   of 23 January 2017
   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, 23 January 2017.

            For the Commission,

            On behalf of the President,

         Jerzy PLEWA

            Director-General

            Directorate-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

                  141,3

                  TR

                  157,8

                  ZZ

                  149,6

                  0707 00 05

                  EG

                  250,3

                  MA

                  79,2

                  TR

                  205,3

                  ZZ

                  178,3

                  0709 91 00

                  EG

                  168,8

                  ZZ

                  168,8

                  0709 93 10

                  MA

                  317,4

                  TR

                  251,1

                  ZZ

                  284,3

                  0805 10 22 , 0805 10 24 , 0805 10 28

                  EG

                  66,7

                  MA

                  57,1

                  TN

                  59,7

                  TR

                  78,5

                  ZZ

                  65,5

                  0805 21 10 , 0805 21 90 , 0805 29 00

                  EG

                  97,9

                  IL

                  155,2

                  JM

                  109,6

                  MA

                  65,8

                  TR

                  78,0

                  ZZ

                  101,3

                  0805 22 00

                  IL

                  139,7

                  MA

                  76,2

                  ZZ

                  108,0

                  0805 50 10

                  AR

                  92,5

                  EG

                  93,1

                  TR

                  88,1

                  ZZ

                  91,2

                  0808 10 80

                  US

                  105,5

                  ZZ

                  105,5

                  0808 30 90

                  CN

                  57,6

                  TR

                  151,9

                  ZZ

                  104,8

         (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 1369/2014 of 17 December 2014 approving non-minor amendments to the specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications [Garda (PDO)]

text:
               20.12.2014

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 366/17

         COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 1369/2014
   of 17 December 2014
   approving non-minor amendments to the specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications [Garda (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)

               By virtue of the first subparagraph of Article 53(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission has examined Italy's application for the approval of amendments to the specification for the protected designation of origin ‘Garda’, registered under Commission Regulation (EC) No 2325/97 (2).

               (2)

               Since the amendments in question are not minor within the meaning of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission published the amendment application in the Official Journal of the European Union
                   (3) as required by Article 50(2)(a) of that Regulation.

               (3)

               As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the amendments to the specification should be approved,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
   Article 1
   The amendments to the specification published in the Official Journal of the European Union regarding the name ‘Garda’ (PDO) are hereby approved.
   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, 17 December 2014.

            For the Commission,

            On behalf of the President,

         Phil HOGAN

            Member of the Commission

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

      (2)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 2325/97 of 24 November 1997 (OJ L 322, 25.11.1997, p. 33-35).

      (3)  OJ C 260, 9.8.2014, p. 17.


title: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 883/2014 of 5 August 2014 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Jamón de Serón (PGI))

text:
               14.8.2014

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 242/3

         COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 883/2014
   of 5 August 2014
   entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Jamón de Serón (PGI))
   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)

               Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Spain's application to register the name ‘Jamón de Serón’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union
                   (2).

               (2)

               As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Jamón de Serón’ should therefore be entered in the register,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
   Article 1
   The name ‘Jamón de Serón’ (PGI) is hereby entered in the register.
   The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 1.2. Meat products (cooked, salted, smoked, etc.) as listed in Annex XI to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 (3).
   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, 5 August 2014.

            For the Commission,

            On behalf of the President,

         Martine REICHERTS

            Member of the Commission

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

      (2)  OJ C 101, 5.4.2014, p. 10.

      (3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 of 13 June 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).


title: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1215/2014 of 11 November 2014 concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature

text:
               14.11.2014

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 329/11

         COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 1215/2014
   of 11 November 2014
   concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (1), and in particular Article 9(1)(a) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               In order to ensure uniform application of the Combined Nomenclature annexed to Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87, it is necessary to adopt measures concerning the classification of the goods referred to in the Annex to this Regulation.

               (2)

               Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 has laid down the general rules for the interpretation of the Combined Nomenclature. Those rules apply also to any other nomenclature which is wholly or partly based on it or which adds any additional subdivision to it and which is established by specific provisions of the Union, with a view to the application of tariff and other measures relating to trade in goods.

               (3)

               Pursuant to those general rules, the goods described in column (1) of the table set out in the Annex should be classified under the CN code indicated in column (2), by virtue of the reasons set out in column (3) of that table.

               (4)

               It is appropriate to provide that binding tariff information issued in respect of the goods concerned by this Regulation which does not conform to this Regulation may, for a certain period, continue to be invoked by the holder in accordance with Article 12(6) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 (2). That period should be set at three months.

               (5)

               The Customs Code Committee has not issued an opinion within the time limit set by its Chairman,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
   Article 1
   The goods described in column (1) of the table set out in the Annex shall be classified within the Combined Nomenclature under the CN code indicated in column (2) of that table.
   Article 2
   Binding tariff information which does not conform to this Regulation may continue to be invoked in accordance with Article 12(6) of Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 for a period of three months from the date of entry into force of this Regulation.
   Article 3
   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 2014.

            For the Commission,

            On behalf of the President,

         Heinz ZOUREK

            Director-General for Taxation and Customs Union

      (1)  OJ L 256, 7.9.1987, p. 1.

      (2)  Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ L 302, 19.10.1992, p. 1).

      ANNEX

                  Description of the goods

                  Classification
                  (CN-code)

                  Reasons

                  (1)

                  (2)

                  (3)

                  A solar panel with dimensions of approximately 2 × 2 m, consisting of 25 glass vacuum tubes mounted in parallel and interconnected via a collector pipe. Each vacuum tube is constituted by two concentric pipes, containing heat transfer fluid. The inner pipe of each tube is coated with an absorption layer.
                  The solar energy is absorbed by the layer on the inner pipe of the tubes and converted into heat energy. The heat is then transferred to the heat transfer fluid, which turns into gas, rises and transfers the heat to the collector pipe (a copper manifold).
                  The heat is subsequently transferred from the collector pipe to a water storage tank by way of a tubing system containing heat transfer fluid circulating by means of a pump managed by a controller.
                  The pump, controller, tubing system and water storage tank are not included upon presentation.
                  The solar panel is used in solar water heating systems and is intended to be mounted on the roof.

                  8419 19 00

                  Classification is determined by general rules 1, 2(a) and 6 for the interpretation of the Combined Nomenclature and by the wording of CN codes 8419 and 8419 19 00.
                  The solar panel is considered to have the essential character of a complete or finished article (water heater) as it contains all the necessary components for generating heat. The missing components are used for transferring the heat and storing the water. Consequently, classification under subheading 8419 90 85 as parts of water heaters is excluded.
                  As the solar panel converts solar energy into heat, it cannot be considered a mere heat exchange unit of subheading 8419 50 (see also the Harmonized System Explanatory Notes (HSEN) to heading 8419, group (I) (B)).
                  The solar panel is therefore to be classified under CN code 8419 19 00 as other instantaneous or storage water heaters, non-electric (see also the HSEN to heading 8419, group (I), last paragraph).


title: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1907 of 28 October 2016 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

text:
               29.10.2016

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 295/76

         COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2016/1907
   of 28 October 2016
   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, 28 October 2016.

            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

                  118,3

                  ZZ

                  118,3

                  0707 00 05

                  TR

                  147,7

                  ZZ

                  147,7

                  0709 93 10

                  MA

                  91,2

                  TR

                  154,4

                  ZZ

                  122,8

                  0805 50 10

                  AR

                  46,2

                  CL

                  67,0

                  IL

                  44,6

                  TR

                  98,6

                  UY

                  84,6

                  ZA

                  65,7

                  ZZ

                  67,8

                  0806 10 10

                  BR

                  298,0

                  PE

                  321,1

                  TR

                  142,4

                  ZA

                  228,5

                  ZZ

                  247,5

                  0808 10 80

                  AR

                  260,6

                  AU

                  218,6

                  BR

                  119,9

                  CL

                  139,2

                  NZ

                  135,2

                  ZA

                  131,7

                  ZZ

                  167,5

                  0808 30 90

                  CN

                  58,1

                  TR

                  154,7

                  ZA

                  164,5

                  ZZ

                  125,8

         (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 358/2011 of 12 April 2011 amending the representative prices and additional import duties for certain products in the sugar sector fixed by Regulation (EU) No 867/2010 for the 2010/11 marketing year

text:
               13.4.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 98/11

         COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 358/2011
   of 12 April 2011
   amending the representative prices and additional import duties for certain products in the sugar sector fixed by Regulation (EU) No 867/2010 for the 2010/11 marketing year
   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 Regulation (EC) No 951/2006 of 30 June 2006 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 as regards trade with third countries in the sugar sector (2), and in particular Article 36(2), second subparagraph, second sentence thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               The representative prices and additional duties applicable to imports of white sugar, raw sugar and certain syrups for the 2010/11 marketing year are fixed by Commission Regulation (EU) No 867/2010 (3). These prices and duties have been last amended by Commission Regulation (EU) No 353/2011 (4).

               (2)

               The data currently available to the Commission indicate that those amounts should be amended in accordance with the rules and procedures laid down in Regulation (EC) No 951/2006,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
   Article 1
   The representative prices and additional duties applicable to imports of the products referred to in Article 36 of Regulation (EC) No 951/2006, as fixed by Regulation (EU) No 867/2010 for the 2010/11, marketing year, are hereby amended as set out in the Annex hereto.
   Article 2
   This Regulation shall enter into force on 13 April 2011.

      This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
      Done at Brussels, 12 April 2011.

            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 178, 1.7.2006, p. 24.

      (3)  OJ L 259, 1.10.2010, p. 3.

      (4)  OJ L 97, 12.4.2011, p. 26.

      ANNEX

         Amended representative prices and additional import duties applicable to white sugar, raw sugar and products covered by CN code 1702 90 95 from 13 April 2011

                  (EUR)

                  CN code

                  Representative price per 100 kg net of the product concerned

                  Additional duty per 100 kg net of the product concerned

                  1701 11 10 (1)

                  45,90

                  0,00

                  1701 11 90 (1)

                  45,90

                  1,13

                  1701 12 10 (1)

                  45,90

                  0,00

                  1701 12 90 (1)

                  45,90

                  0,84

                  1701 91 00 (2)

                  48,51

                  2,92

                  1701 99 10 (2)

                  48,51

                  0,00

                  1701 99 90 (2)

                  48,51

                  0,00

                  1702 90 95 (3)

                  0,49

                  0,22

         (1)  For the standard quality defined in point III of Annex IV to Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007.

         (2)  For the standard quality defined in point II of Annex IV to Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007.

         (3)  Per 1 % sucrose content.


title: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1202/2011 of 18 November 2011 concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature

text:
               23.11.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 305/10

         COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 1202/2011
   of 18 November 2011
   concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (1), and in particular Article 9(1)(a) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               In order to ensure uniform application of the Combined Nomenclature annexed to Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87, it is necessary to adopt measures concerning the classification of the goods referred to in the Annex to this Regulation.

               (2)

               Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 has laid down the general rules for the interpretation of the Combined Nomenclature. Those rules apply also to any other nomenclature which is wholly or partly based on it or which adds any additional subdivision to it and which is established by specific provisions of the Union, with a view to the application of tariff and other measures relating to trade in goods.

               (3)

               Pursuant to those general rules, the goods described in column (1) of the table set out in the Annex should be classified under the CN code indicated in column (2), by virtue of the reasons set out in column (3) of that table.

               (4)

               It is appropriate to provide that binding tariff information which has been issued by the customs authorities of Member States in respect of the classification of goods in the Combined Nomenclature but which is not in accordance with this Regulation can, for a period of three months, continue to be invoked by the holder, under Article 12(6) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (2).

               (5)

               The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Customs Code Committee,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
   Article 1
   The goods described in column (1) of the table set out in the Annex shall be classified within the Combined Nomenclature under the CN code indicated in column (2) of that table.
   Article 2
   Binding tariff information issued by the customs authorities of Member States, which is not in accordance with this Regulation, can continue to be invoked for a period of three months under Article 12(6) of Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92.
   Article 3
   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, 18 November 2011.

            For the Commission, On behalf of the President,
         Algirdas ŠEMETA

            Member of the Commission

      (1)  OJ L 256, 7.9.1987, p. 1.

      (2)  OJ L 302, 19.10.1992, p. 1.

      ANNEX

                  Description of the goods

                  Classification
                  (TARIC code)

                  Reasons

                  (1)

                  (2)

                  (3)

                  A liquid crystal display (LCD) panel (so-called "LCD module"), with a diagonal measurement of approximately 66 cm (26 inches), consisting of an active matrix liquid crystal layer sandwiched between two sheets of glass, fitted with connectors.
                  Between the first sheet of glass and the layer of liquid crystal there is a thin film transistor (TFT) matrix that provides the appropriate voltage to the pixels.
                  Between the layer of liquid crystal and the second sheet of glass there is an RGB filter that controls the colours of the picture displayed.
                  Several connectors in the form of straps are attached to the panel. Each connector consists of miniature integrated circuits (so-called "source drivers IC") on flexible printed circuits. The "source drivers IC" allow power and control signals to pass through, as well as convert and transmit data from the printed circuit boards (connected after importation) to the individual pixels of the active liquid crystal matrix.
                  The module is used in the manufacture of monitors or reception apparatus for television of heading 8528.

                  8529909244

                  Classification is determined by General Rules 1 and 6 for the interpretation of the Combined Nomenclature, Note 2(b) to Section XVI and by the wording of CN codes 8529, 8529 90 and 8529 90 92 and TARIC code 8529909244.
                  As the LCD module is equipped with “source drivers IC” which are more than electrical connections (i.e. for the supply of power), classification under heading 9013 as active matrix liquid crystal devices is excluded (see also the HS Explanatory Notes to heading 9013 (1)).
                  As the module consists of a TFT liquid crystal layer sandwiched between two sheets of glass and equipped with control electronics for pixel addressing used in the manufacture of monitors or reception apparatus for television of heading 8528, it is considered to be a part for use solely or principally with apparatus of heading 8528 under CN code 8529 90 92.
                  The product is therefore to be classified under TARIC code 8529909244 as an LCD module solely consisting of one or more TFT glass or plastic cells, not combined with touch screen facilities, with or without backlight unit, with or without inverters and one or more printed circuit boards with control electronics for pixel addressing only.


title: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 406/2011 of 27 April 2011 amending Regulation (EC) No 2380/2001 as regards the composition of the feed additive maduramicin ammonium alpha  Text with EEA relevance

text:
               28.4.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 108/11

         COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 406/2011
   of 27 April 2011
   amending Regulation (EC) No 2380/2001 as regards the composition of the feed additive maduramicin ammonium alpha
   (Text with EEA relevance)
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 on additives for use in animal nutrition (1), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 provides for the possibility to modify the authorisation of a feed additive further to a request from the holder of the authorisation and an opinion of the European Food Safety Authority (the Authority).

               (2)

               The use of maduramicin ammonium alpha belonging to the group of coccidiostats and other medicinal substances, was authorised for 10 years in accordance with Council Directive 70/524/EEC (2) as a feed additive for the use on chickens for fattening by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2430/1999 (3) and for turkeys by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2380/2001 (4).

               (3)

               The holder of the authorisation submitted an application for a modification of the authorisation as regards the composition of the carrier of the feed additive. The holder of the authorisation submitted the relevant data to support its request.

               (4)

               The Authority concluded in its opinion of 8 December 2010 (5) that the use of this new formulation of the additive on turkeys would not be expected to raise any additional concerns for animal health, human health or the environment and is effective in controlling coccidiosis.

               (5)

               The conditions provided for in Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 are satisfied.

               (6)

               Regulation (EC) No 2380/2001 should therefore be amended accordingly.

               (7)

               Since the modifications to the conditions of the authorisation are not related to safety reasons, it is appropriate to allow a transitional period for the disposal of existing stocks of premixtures and compound feed.

               (8)

               The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
   Article 1
   The Annex to Regulation (EC) No 2380/2001 is replaced by the Annex to this Regulation.
   Article 2
   Premixtures and compound feed containing maduramicin ammonium alpha produced in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 2380/2001 may continue to be placed on the market and used until the existing stocks are exhausted.
   Article 3
   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, 27 April 2011.

            For the Commission

            The President

         José Manuel BARROSO

      (1)  OJ L 268, 18.10.2003, p. 29.

      (2)  OJ L 270, 14.12.1970, p. 1.

      (3)  OJ L 296, 17.11.1999, p. 3.

      (4)  OJ L 321, 6.12.2001, p. 18.

      (5)  EFSA Journal 2011; 9(1):1954.

      ANNEX

            ‘ANNEX

                        Identification number of the additive

                        Name of the holder of authorisation

                        Additive
                        (Trade name)

                        Composition, chemical formula, description, analytical method

                        Species or category of animal

                        Maximum age

                        Minimum content

                        Maximum content

                        Other provisions

                        End of period of authorisation

                        mg of active substance/kg of complete feedingstuff with a moisture content of 12 %

                           Coccidiostats and other medicinal substances

                        E 770

                        Alpharma Belgium BVBA

                        Maduramicin ammonium
                        alpha 1 g/100 g
                        (Cygro 1 %)

                                    Additive composition
                                    Maduramicin ammonium alpha: 1 g/100 g
                                    Carboxymethylcellulose sodium: 2 g/100 g
                                    Calcium sulphate dihydrate: 97 g/100 g

                                    Active substance
                                    Maduramicin ammonium α C47H83O17N
                                    CAS number: 84878-61-5, ammonium salt of a polyether monocarboxylic acid produced by a fermentation process by the strain Actinomadura yumaensis (ATCC 31585) (NRRL 12515)

                                    Related impurities:
                                    Maduramicin ammonium β: < 10 %

                        Turkeys

                        16 weeks

                        5

                        5

                                    1.

                                    Use prohibited at least 5 days before slaughter.

                                    2.

                                    Indicate in the instructions for use: ‘Dangerous for equines’.
                                    ‘This feedingstuff contains an ionophore: simultaneous use with certain medicinal substances (e.g. tiamulin) can be contraindicated’.

                        15.12.2011’


title: Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 325/2012 of 12 April 2012 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of oxalic acid originating in India and the People’s Republic of China

text:
               18.4.2012

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 106/1

         COUNCIL IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 325/2012
   of 12 April 2012
   imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of oxalic acid originating in India and 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 9(4) thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal submitted by the European Commission (the Commission) after having consulted the Advisory Committee,
   Whereas:
   1.   PROCEDURE

   1.1.   PROVISIONAL MEASURES

               (1)

               The Commission, by Regulation (EU) No 1043/2011 (2) (‘the provisional Regulation’) imposed a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of oxalic acid originating in India and the People’s Republic of China (‘the PRC’). The provisional anti-dumping duties ranged from 14,6 % to 52,2 %.

               (2)

               The proceeding was initiated as a result of a complaint lodged on 13 December 2010 by the European Chemical Industry Council (CEFIC) on behalf of Oxaquim S.A. (‘the complainant’), representing a major proportion, in this case more than 25 %, of the total Union production of oxalic acid.

               (3)

               As set out in recital 9 of the provisional Regulation, the investigation of dumping and injury covered the period from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2010 (‘investigation period’ or ‘IP’). The examination of the trends relevant for the assessment of injury covered the period from 1 January 2007 to the end of the investigation period (‘period considered’).

         1.2.   SUBSEQUENT PROCEDURE

               (4)

               Subsequent to the disclosure of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of which it was decided to impose provisional anti-dumping measures (‘provisional disclosure’), several interested parties made written submissions making their views known on the provisional findings. The parties who so requested were granted an opportunity to be heard. In particular, one exporting producer from India requested and was afforded a hearing in the presence of the Hearing Officer of the Directorate-General for Trade.

               (5)

               The Commission continued to seek information it deemed necessary for its definitive findings.

               (6)

               Recital 150 of the provisional Regulation invited Chinese companies which had not yet made themselves known but considered that an individual duty should be established for them to come forward within 10 days from publication. No Chinese company did so.

               (7)

               Subsequently, 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 duty on imports of oxalic acid originating in India and the PRC and the definitive collection of the amounts secured by way of the provisional duty (‘final disclosure’). All parties were granted a period within which they could make comments on this final disclosure.

               (8)

               The oral and written comments submitted by the interested parties were considered and were taken into account where appropriate.

         1.3.   PARTIES CONCERNED BY THE PROCEEDING

               (9)

               In the absence of any comments with regard to the parties concerned by the proceeding, recitals 3 to 8 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.

         2.   PRODUCT CONCERNED AND LIKE PRODUCT

   2.1.   PRODUCT CONCERNED

               (10)

               The product concerned is as described in recitals 10 and 11 of the provisional Regulation, i.e. oxalic acid, whether in dihydrate (CUS number 0028635-1 and CAS number 6153-56-6) or anhydrous form (CUS number 0021238-4 and CAS number 144-62-7), and whether or not in aqueous solution, currently falling within CN code ex 2917 11 00 and originating in India and the PRC.

               (11)

               There are two types of oxalic acid: unrefined oxalic acid and refined oxalic acid. Refined oxalic acid, which is produced in the PRC but not in India, is manufactured through a purification process of unrefined oxalic acid, the purpose of which is to remove iron, chlorides, metal traces and other impurities.

               (12)

               Oxalic acid is used in a wide range of applications, for example as a reducing and bleaching agent, in pharmaceutical synthesis and in the manufacture of chemicals.

         2.2.   LIKE PRODUCT

               (13)

               The investigation has shown that oxalic acid produced and sold by the Union industry in the Union, oxalic acid produced and sold on the domestic market of India and the PRC and oxalic acid imported into the Union from India and the PRC have essentially the same basic physical and chemical characteristics and the same basic end uses.

               (14)

               In the absence of any comments regarding the product concerned or like product, recitals 10 to 13 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.

         3.   DUMPING

   3.1.   INDIA

   3.1.1.   PRELIMINARY REMARK

               (15)

               In recital 14 of the provisional Regulation, the Commission found that one Indian exporting producer could not be considered as a cooperating party and accordingly the findings for that company were made on facts available as set out in Article 18 of the basic Regulation.

               (16)

               Following the disclosure of provisional findings to this company, Star Oxochem Pvt. Ltd, it provided additional explanations and clarifications in respect of the information submitted earlier in the investigation by the company. It also requested to be heard by the Commission and by the Hearing Officer of the Directorate-General for Trade. The company argued that, given that it had submitted a questionnaire response and bearing in mind that the Commission services had visited the premises of the company and also in light of the additional explanations and clarifications now provided, it would not be appropriate if it were to continue to be treated like exporting producers who had not cooperated in any way with the investigation.

               (17)

               In light of the above, in particular the additional explanations and clarifications provided, the Commission’s services consider that they can use part of the original information, namely data related to export prices, as they were found to be reliable. It follows from the above considerations that the provisional findings, as set out in recital 14 of the provisional Regulation, are only partially maintained and findings in respect of this company are made partially on facts available and partially on its own export prices in accordance with Article 18(1) and (3) of the basic Regulation.

         3.1.2.   NORMAL VALUE

               (18)

               No comments have been submitted in respect of the methodology to calculate normal value for India. Accordingly, the findings in recitals 15 to 18 of the provisional Regulation are confirmed with regard to the cooperating company.

               (19)

               With regard to Star Oxochem, and taking into account the findings above (recitals 16-17), the normal value was established on the basis of facts available pursuant to Article 18(1) of the basic Regulation. Accordingly, the normal value for this company was based on the weighted average of a representative quantity of domestic sales by the other cooperating company, Punjab Chemicals.

         3.1.3.   EXPORT PRICE

               (20)

               In the absence of any comments, the determination of the export price, as set out in recital 19 of the provisional Regulation, is confirmed with regard to Punjab Chemicals.

               (21)

               In view of the conclusions as set out above in recitals 16-17, the export price for Star Oxochem is, pursuant to Article 2(8) of the basic Regulation, established on the basis of the prices actually paid or payable by independent customers for the product concerned when exported to the Union.

         3.1.4.   COMPARISON

               (22)

               In the absence of any comments with regard to the comparison of the normal value and the export prices, recitals 20 and 21 of the provisional Regulation are confirmed as far as the cooperating producer, Punjab Chemicals, is concerned.

               (23)

               With regard to Star Oxochem, adjustments have been made in accordance to Article 2(10) of the Basic Regulation based on the verified allowances of Punjab Chemicals.

         3.1.5.   DUMPING MARGIN

               (24)

               With regard to the cooperating producer no comments have been made on the Commission’s provisional findings. Therefore, the dumping margin, as set out in recitals 22 and 23 of the provisional Regulation, is confirmed.

               (25)

               With regard to STAR Oxochem and taking into account the above considerations, the dumping margin, expressed as a percentage of the cif Union border price, duty unpaid is 31,5 %.

               (26)

               In view of the low cooperation from India (below 80 %) it was provisionally considered that the highest dumped transaction of the cooperating party was the most appropriate method for establishing the country-wide dumping margin. This transaction is not exceptional in terms of either quantity or price and is therefore considered a representative sample that leads to a reasonable and proportionate result in relation to the dumping margin established for the cooperating producer.

               (27)

               In view of the above the considerations the findings in recitals 24 and 25 of the provisional Regulation are confirmed.

               (28)

               On this basis the definitive dumping margins expressed as a percentage of the CIF Union frontier price, duty unpaid, for India are:

                           Company

                           Definitive dumping margin

                           Punjab Chemicals and Crop Protection Limited

                           22,8 %

                           Star Oxochem Pvt. Ltd

                           31,5 %

                           All other companies

                           43,6 %

         3.2.   PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA

   3.2.1.   MARKET ECONOMY TREATMENT (MET)/INDIVIDUAL TREATMENT (IT)

               (29)

               As set out in the provisional Regulation, one group of Chinese companies requested MET or, failing that, IT, while another group of Chinese companies requested IT only. As set out in recitals 26 to 32 of the provisional Regulation, the claim for MET was rejected whereas both groups of companies were provisionally granted IT.

               (30)

               No comments have been submitted in respect of these provisional finding and recitals 26 to 32 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.

         3.2.2.   ANALOGUE COUNTRY

               (31)

               No comments were received on the provisional choice of analogue country. Accordingly, recitals 33 to 34 of the provisional Regulation are confirmed.

         3.2.3.   NORMAL VALUE

               (32)

               It was explained in the provisional Regulation that the Commission established separate normal values for both unrefined and refined oxalic acid. While the normal value for unrefined oxalic acid was determined on the basis of the normal value established for India, the normal value for refined oxalic acid, which is not produced in India, was constructed on the basis of the manufacturing costs for Indian unrefined oxalic acid, adjusted with an uplift of 12 % to take into account additional manufacturing costs, plus SG&A and profit.

               (33)

               Both cooperating producers from China contested the 12 % uplift for additional manufacturing costs, claiming that these additional costs have never been verified by the Commission and appear to be simply a rough estimation based on a methodology that has not been disclosed to them at the time of the provisional disclosure. One of the exporting producers claimed that it had estimated the additional manufacturing cost at only 5 % although it did not substantiate this claim with any supporting evidence.

               (34)

               It is pointed out that the uplift has been determined on the basis of information provided by the cooperating Chinese exporting producers themselves. First, it is noted that the same company which now alleges that the additional manufacturing cost is only around 5 % had originally explicitly referred to additional costs of 10-15 % in its MET/IT claim form. Second, during the verification visits at the companies’ premises, both cooperating producers confirmed that the additional costs for manufacturing refined oxalic acid as compared to unrefined oxalic acid were in the band of 10-12 %. Third, this latter level of 10-12 % additional manufacturing cost was also supported by calculations of the Union industry. In view of the information provided by the cooperating producers an uplift of 12 % was considered appropriate.

               (35)

               Therefore in the absence of any substantiated information or supporting evidence justifying a lower uplift the findings in recitals 35 to 37 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.

         3.2.4.   EXPORT PRICE

               (36)

               Both exporting producers from the PRC were granted IT, therefore their export prices were based on the prices actually paid or payable by the first independent customer in the Union in accordance with Article 2(8) of the basic Regulation.

               (37)

               In the absence of comments with regard to the export price, recital 38 of the provisional Regulation is hereby confirmed.

         3.2.5.   COMPARISON

               (38)

               One of the cooperating producers claimed that the SG&A expenses of its related trader and commissions should not be removed from the export price as an adjustment under Article 2(10)(i) of the basic Regulation. The producer stated that the direct selling costs of their related trader had already been removed from the export price in order to arrive at an ex-works price to compare with the normal value on the same basis.

               (39)

               The producer argued that their related trader was a wholly owned subsidiary and, in view of the export profit distribution strategy within the group, did not charge any commission. Furthermore, according to the company, the remaining SG&A expenses represented the combined costs of operating the company and were not expenses directly related to sales and should therefore not be removed from the export price.

               (40)

               Article 2(10)(i) of the basic Regulation states that commissions are to be understood to include the mark-up received by a trader if the functions of such a trader are similar to those of an agent working on a commission basis. It is therefore irrelevant whether a commission was actually paid or not. What is relevant is whether the trader re-sold the goods with a mark-up and whether the functions of the trader were similar to those of an agent.

               (41)

               Evidence on file, obtained before and during the inspection of the trading company, shows that the trader during the IP sold oxalic acid produced by the related producer to a customer in the EU. At the same time the producer was also exporting directly to the same customer in the EU. The related trader therefore duplicated the effort of the producer with different staff in a different office in a different city, thereby incurring its own costs that are reflected in their export price.

               (42)

               It is also clear from evidence on file that the trading company purchased the exported goods from the related exporting producer and re-sold them, with a mark-up, in its own name, after having itself concluded price negotiations with the final independent customer.

               (43)

               Evidence was also collected regarding the trading company performing the functions of an agent. This evidence firstly shows that the producer sold significant volumes of the product concerned directly to the EU as well as exporting to the EU via their related trading company. Only about one third of sales to the EU were made via this related company. The trader also re-sold oxalic acid from other unrelated producers. Evidence on file shows that over half of the trader’s purchases of oxalic acid were from unrelated suppliers and less than half of their purchases came from their related producer.

               (44)

               The trader could thus not be considered as the internal export sales department of the producing exporter despite its relationship with the exporting producer.

               (45)

               It is also clear from evidence submitted and verified that the trader only pays for the goods supplied from the related exporting producer once the customer in the EU has paid the trader. The financial risk therefore remains with the producer and not the trader.

               (46)

               It was therefore considered that the trader was carrying out functions similar to those of an agent working on a commission basis. Accordingly, the claim that no adjustments should be made for commission under Article 2(10)(i) is rejected.

               (47)

               Also the claim that SG&A expenses should not be taken into account as they do not include direct selling expenses cannot be accepted. Such overhead costs have an impact on the cost structure of the company and therefore affect the export price. Therefore, a portion of these costs was removed from the export price to allow for a fair comparison of normal value and export price, ex-works. This claim is rejected.

               (48)

               The commission has been established on the basis of the profit margin of an unrelated EU importer rather than on the actual mark-up of the trader, which was significantly higher. This methodology was deemed more appropriate as the actual mark-up would have been based on internal transfer prices not reflecting actual market conditions.

               (49)

               In the absence of any further comments with regard to the comparison of the normal value and the export price, recitals 39 to 44 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.

         3.2.6.   DUMPING MARGINS

               (50)

               One group of exporting producers claimed that individual dumping margins should be established separately for unrefined and refined oxalic acid. They argued that although dumping margins were established on the basis of a comparison of the weighted average normal value with the weighted average export price of the product concerned type by type, one common dumping margin for both types of oxalic acid was established. They claimed that it would be more appropriate to establish a dumping margin for each type of oxalic acid as the group consists of two producing companies of which one produces refined oxalic acid while the other produces unrefined oxalic acid.

               (51)

               Unrefined oxalic acid can be substituted by refined oxalic acid. Both types of oxalic acid are included under the same CN code and the different types cannot easily be distinguished from each other. The purity of the oxalic acid is the same, the difference is in the levels of other products in the remaining ‘waste’ product. As they both fall within the definition of the product concerned, one dumping margin has been established in line with usual practice. Given the significant price difference between the two types and the difficulties involved in distinguishing them from each other individual dumping margins for refined and unrefined oxalic acid would lead to an increased risk of circumvention. The claim to have individual dumping margins for refined and unrefined oxalic acid, is rejected and the dumping margins, as established in recitals 45 and 46 of the provisional Regulation, are confirmed.

               (52)

               Finally, the same exporting producer group questioned the different dumping margins established for the two groups of exporting producers from the PRC and requested clarification of the calculation methodology and the classification of refined and unrefined oxalic acid, given the difference in the dumping margins found between the two groups of exporters.

               (53)

               The same methodology has been used in respect of both groups of exporting producers from the PRC and the weighted average export price of the product concerned includes both refined and unrefined oxalic acid. The explanation as to the different dumping margins rests therefore simply on the relative weight of exports of the respective types, considering that refined oxalic acid is normally sold at a higher price than unrefined.

               (54)

               The definitive dumping margins expressed as a percentage of the CIF Union frontier price, duty unpaid, are:

                           Company

                           Definitive dumping margin

                           Shandong Fengyuan Chemicals Stock Co., Ltd and Shandong Fengyuan Uranus Advanced material Co., Ltd

                           37,7 %

                           Yuanping Changyuan Chemicals Co., Ltd

                           14,6 %

               (55)

               In the absence of other comments with regard to the dumping margins, recitals 47 to 48 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.

               (56)

               On this basis the country-wide level of dumping is definitely established at 52,2 % of the CIF Union frontier price, duty unpaid, and recital 49 of the provisional Regulation is hereby confirmed.

         4.   INJURY

   4.1.   UNION PRODUCTION AND UNION INDUSTRY

               (57)

               An exporting producer submitted that the reference to two Union producers constituting the Union industry in recitals 50 and 51 of the provisional Regulation (the complainant and a second non-cooperating producer) did not properly reflect the situation regarding macro economic indicators. It was also argued that data regarding the non-cooperating producer as well as the data from a third Union producer having stopped the production of OA should be disregarded and not be included in some macro indicators (see recitals 72, 74 and 78 of the provisional Regulation). First, it is hereby confirmed that contrary to what was stated in recitals 50 and 51 of the provisional Regulation, there were in fact three producers of the product concerned in the Union during the period considered constituting the Union industry within the meaning of Article 4(1) of the basic Regulation, which thus represent 100 % of the Union production. Second, the claim that figures pertaining to the non-cooperating producer and the third Union producer having ceased its operation in 2008 should be disregarded is rejected, as it is correct to include all known figures related to the period considered for the purpose of the injury analysis in order to achieved the best informed representation of the economic situation of the Union industry as prescribed in Article 4(1) of the basic Regulation.

               (58)

               The same exporting producer also argued that the reasons for which this third producer has ceased its production of the like product were not properly examined during the investigation. However, this matter was examined during the investigation and the company simply invoked the fact that it had stopped the production of the like product for ‘internal reasons’ without giving any further explanations. In addition, one exporting producer concurred with this explanation and claimed that the decision to stop the production was not due to the alleged dumping practices from exporting producers in China, thus contradicting the information which was made available by the complainant in the non-confidential version of the complaint, in which it is stated that ‘[the company] ceased production, once and for all, closing the factory because of aggressive dumping from China and India’. However, the exporting producer did not provide any different information with regard to the alleged production figures related to this third Union producer. Therefore, this issue does not devaluate the fact that the data related to that third EU producer could be used in the current investigation.

               (59)

               Another exporting producer argued that the minimum threshold for the standing at initiation was not properly disclosed and in fact was not met. As mentioned in recital 2 of the provisional Regulation, the complainant represented more than 25 % of the total Union production of oxalic acid and no producer expressing opposition has come forward prior to the initiation of the investigation. An information note was made available in the non-confidential file summarising the results of the standing examination at initiation stage. Furthermore, the injury analysis made pursuant to Article 4(1) of the basic Regulation covered a major proportion of the Union Industry.

               (60)

               In the absence of any further comments concerning the definition of the Union production and the Union industry, recitals 50 and 51 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed subject to the clarification in recital 57 above.

         4.2.   DETERMINATION OF THE RELEVANT UNION MARKET

               (61)

               An exporting producer submitted that captive use of oxalic acid should not be considered in the determination of some injury indicators and in any case the same consistent approach should be applied to all injury indicators. However, the separation made between the captive and the free markets was explained in recitals 52, 53 and 55 of the provisional Regulation and in line with the basic Regulation, the focus of the analysis was primarily on the free market, even though, both the use in the free and the captive markets were included for the determination of some injury indicators as indicated in recital 55. Indeed, some injury indicators can only be examined in regard to the use of the like product in the free market as, given the very nature of captive sales, such indicators can be distorted by the relationship between the seller and buyer. Therefore, this claim is rejected.

               (62)

               In the absence of any other comments concerning the determination of the relevant Union market, recitals 52 to 55 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.

         4.3.   UNION CONSUMPTION

               (63)

               In the absence of any comments concerning the Union consumption, recitals 56 to 58 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.

         5.   IMPORTS FROM THE COUNTRIES CONCERNED

   5.1.   CUMULATIVE ASSESSMENT OF THE EFFECTS OF THE IMPORTS CONCERNED

               (64)

               In the absence of any comments concerning the cumulative assessment of the effects of the imports concerned, recitals 59 to 62 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.

         5.2.   VOLUME AND MARKET SHARE OF DUMPED IMPORTS FROM THE COUNTRIES CONCERNED

               (65)

               In the absence of any comments concerning the volume and the market share of the imports from the countries concerned, recitals 63 and 64 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.

         5.3.   PRICE OF DUMPED IMPORTS AND PRICE UNDERCUTTING

               (66)

               As mentioned in recital 144 of the provisional regulation, in the injury margin calculation, the average import prices of the cooperating exporting producers in the PRC and India have been duly adjusted for importation costs and customs duties. An exporting producer argued however that the Commission failed to include fully an allowance of 6,5 % corresponding to the normal customs duty in the injury margin calculation. This claim was found to be warranted and the injury margins calculations were corrected accordingly for this exporting producer, as well as for the other cooperating exporting producers. However, this had no impact on the proposed definitive measures as indicated in recital 87 below.

               (67)

               In the absence of any other comments concerning the price of dumped imports and price undercutting, recitals 65 to 68 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.

         6.   ECONOMIC SITUATION OF THE UNION INDUSTRY

               (68)

               As mentioned in recital 57 above, an exporting producer submitted that the figures related to a third Union producer which ceased the production of oxalic acid in 2008 should not have been included in some macro indicators (see recitals 72, 74 and 78 of the provisional Regulation). However there are in fact three producers of the like product in the Union constituting the Union industry within the meaning of Article 4(1) of the basic Regulation, representing 100 % of the Union production throughout the whole period considered, even though one producer stopped producing oxalic acid before the IP. The claim that figures pertaining to the third Union producer having ceased its operation in 2008 should be disregarded is rejected, as it is correct to include all production figures related to the period considered for the purpose of determining the economic situation of the Union industry.

               (69)

               The same exporting producer argued that notwithstanding the alleged error mentioned in recital 66 above, the figures related to the number of employees, total yearly wages and average labour costs per employee in Table 6 of the provisional Regulation did not tally. However, the exporting producer did not refer to the correct figure when stating that average wages rose by 21 %, in fact, the right figure is 19 %.

               (70)

               With regard to the economic crisis recitals 95 to 97 of the provisional Regulation clearly show that imports from the countries concerned continued to gain market share despite the decline in consumption and had a negative impact on various injury indicators such as sales volumes, employment, production capacity and market share.

               (71)

               In the absence of any comments regarding recitals 69 to 94 of the provisional Regulation, these recitals are hereby confirmed.

         7.   CONCLUSION ON INJURY

               (72)

               An exporting producer argued that contrary to the provisional findings, the Union industry did not suffer material injury. It was claimed that, overall, the negative trends regarding the Union industry were due to the effects of the economic crisis in 2008 and the erroneous inclusion of the information related to the third Union producer having ceased its production in 2008, which contributed to give a vitiated representation of the injury situation. However, as mentioned above the inclusion of the third producer was considered to be correct and market share of the countries concerned continued to increase despite the crisis.

               (73)

               Therefore, recitals 94 to 98 of the provisional Regulation concluding that the Union industry suffered material injury within the meaning of Article 3(5) of the basic Regulation are hereby confirmed.

         8.   CAUSATION

               (74)

               One exporting producer stated that the inclusion of data related to a third Union producer having ceased its production of oxalic acid in 2008 was distorting the provisional conclusions regarding the causal link analysis, which should be based on current producers only. Similarly to the injury analysis above, it was found that conversely, not to include this third producer would distort the conclusions in relation to the like product. However, as mentioned in recital 57 above, relevant data for this company should also be included in the analysis of the situation of the Union industry and this claim is therefore rejected.

               (75)

               One exporting producer argued that as the import volume of the dumped imports increased at the same time as the profitability situation of the Union industry has improved, the dumped imports could not be the main cause of injury. However, this minor improvement regarding profitability does not devalue the conclusion that the overall profitability remained very low and under the normal profit of 8 %. Furthermore, despite the fact that consumption increased substantially in 2008 and again during the IP the Union industry lost 9 % market share against the Chinese imports during the period considered.

               (76)

               Another exporting producer argued that based on the information available, the Union industry achieved in the IP, a profit which was very close to the target profit of 8 %. As the information regarding profits relates to only one Union producer, the precise profit levels cannot be published. However, as stated in recital 88 of the provisional regulation, the complainant made a small profit in the IP, after having made a loss in 2009. The assumptions that the exporting producer used to conclude that the profit in the IP was allegedly close to the target profit were in fact not correct as they did not include the relevant financial and production data of the complainant, which for confidential reasons could not be disclosed. The profit level of the complainant has been thoroughly verified, including during an on-spot verification visit and therefore, allegations that the profit achieved in the IP was very close to the target profit were found to be incorrect.

               (77)

               In the absence of any other comments concerning causation, recitals 99 to 122 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.

         9.   UNION INTEREST

               (78)

               Two importers argued that the measures could lead to shortages of oxalic acid in the EU. Allegedly, the Union industry cannot meet the demand in the EU for oxalic acid.

               (79)

               The investigation revealed that during the IP, the complainant had spare capacities. Furthermore, the complainant stated that currently it is increasing its production, even though, as the production of the product concerned is based on chemical reactions, increasing capacity utilisation requires some time. However, based on the EU consumption data and the total EU capacity, it can be considered that the complainant is capable of meeting total Union demand for unrefined oxalic acid once it is producing close to full capacity. With regard to refined oxalic acid it is recalled that most of the refined oxalic acid is used in the production of products that are subsequently exported, the users could operate under the inward processing regime. In addition, the main Chinese exporter of refined oxalic acid is the one with the lowest proposed duty (14,6 %).

               (80)

               In addition, the complainant argued that the global oxalic market (unrefined) is dominated by the Chinese producers which are setting the price level for this product. Currently the Chinese producers are more preoccupied with their domestic market and it cannot be excluded that in the absence of measures and the probable disappearance of the only remaining EU producer of unrefined oxalic acid, users in the EU would face security of supply problems potentially with chronic shortages and oligopolistic prices.

               (81)

               Another importer/user operating in a different downstream market segment than the previous one alleged that the existence of provisional measures had a negative impact on the profitability of its own products for which oxalic acid is the main raw material, without however, providing any further details. The company was invited to attend a hearing to further develop these concerns and provide evidence, but did not react. Therefore, these allegations could not be verified.

               (82)

               In the absence of any other comments concerning the Union interest, recitals 123 to 139 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.

         10.   DEFINITIVE ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES

   10.1.   INJURY ELIMINATION LEVEL

               (83)

               As mentioned above in recital 66 an exporting producer argued that the Commission failed to include an allowance of 6,5 % corresponding to the normal customs duty in the injury margin calculation. This claim was found to be partially correct as for some imports that were delivered to the EU customer on a duty paid basis, the duty had been underestimated. Therefore the injury margins were corrected accordingly, without however having, any significant impact on the proposed definitive measures (see recital 87 below).

               (84)

               In view of the conclusions reached with regard to Star Oxochem, an injury margin was also established for this exporting producer on the basis of the same calculation methodology as laid down in recitals 142 to 144 of the provisional Regulation.

               (85)

               In the absence of comments on the injury elimination level, recitals 145 to 148 of the provisional Regulation are confirmed.

         10.2.   FORM AND LEVEL OF THE DUTIES

               (86)

               In the light of the foregoing and in accordance with Article 9(4) of the basic Regulation, a definitive anti-dumping duty should be imposed at the level of the dumping margins found, since for all the exporting producers concerned the injury margins were found to be higher than the dumping margins.

               (87)

               On the basis of the above, the dumping and injury margins established are as follows:

                           Company/group name

                           Injury margin (%)

                           Dumping margin (%)

                           Provisional duty (%)

                           Proposed duty (%)

                           India

                           Punjab Chemicals and Crop Protection Limited (PCCPL)

                           38,9

                           22,8

                           22,8

                           22,8

                           Star Oxochem Pvt. Ltd

                           32,3

                           31,5

                           43,6

                           31,5

                           All other companies

                           47,9

                           43,6

                           43,6

                           43,6

                           PRC

                           Shandong Fengyuan Chemicals Stock Co., Ltd and Shandong Fengyuan Uranus Advanced Material Co., Ltd

                           53,3

                           37,7

                           37,7

                           37,7

                           Yuanping Changyuan Chemicals Co., Ltd

                           18,7

                           14,6

                           14,6

                           14,6

                           All other companies

                           63,5

                           52,2

                           52,2

                           52,2

               (88)

               The individual company’s anti-dumping duty rates specified in this Regulation were established on the basis of the findings of the present investigation. Therefore, they reflect the situation found during that investigation with respect to these companies. These duty rates (as opposed to the countrywide duty applicable to ‘all other companies’) are thus exclusively applicable to imports of products originating in India and the PRC and produced by the companies and thus by the specific legal entities mentioned. Imported products produced by any other company not specifically mentioned in the operative part of this Regulation with its name and address, including entities related to those specifically mentioned, cannot benefit from these rates and shall be subject to the duty rate applicable to ‘all other companies’.

               (89)

               Any claim requesting the application of these individual anti-dumping duty rates (e.g. following a change in the name of the entity or following the setting up of new production or sales entities) should be addressed to the Commission (3) forthwith with all the relevant information, in particular any modification in the company’s activities linked to production, domestic and export sales associated with, for example, that name change or that change in the production and sales entities. If appropriate, the Regulation will then be amended accordingly by updating the list of companies benefiting from individual duty rates.

               (90)

               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 duty on imports of oxalic acid originating in the PRC and India. They were also granted a period of time within which they could make representations subsequent to the final disclosure.

               (91)

               The comments submitted by the interested parties were duly considered. None of the comments was such as to alter the findings of the investigation.

               (92)

               In order to ensure a proper enforcement of the anti-dumping duty, the residual duty level should not only apply to the non-cooperating exporters, but also to those companies which did not have any exports during the IP. However, the latter companies are invited, when they fulfil the requirements of Article 11(4) of the basic Regulation, second paragraph, to present a request for a review pursuant to that Article in order to have their situation examined individually.

         10.3.   DEFINITIVE COLLECTION OF PROVISIONAL DUTIES

               (93)

               In view of the magnitude of the dumping margins found and in the light of the level of the injury caused to the Union industry, it is considered necessary that the amounts secured by way of the provisional anti-dumping duty, imposed by the provisional Regulation should be definitively collected to the extent of the amount of the definitive duties imposed. Where the definitive duties are lower than the provisional duties, the amount provisionally secured in excess of the definitive rate of anti-dumping duties should be released.

         11.   UNDERTAKINGS

               (94)

               One exporting producer in India and two exporting producers in the People’s Republic of China offered price undertakings in accordance with Article 8(1) of the basic Regulation.

               (95)

               The product concerned has shown in the last years a considerable volatility in prices and therefore it is not suitable for a fixed price undertaking. In order to overcome this problem, the Indian exporting producer offered an indexation clause without, however, determining the respective minimum price (MIP). In this respect it is noted that no direct link between the fluctuation of prices and that of the main raw material could be established and, thus, indexation is not considered appropriate. In addition, the level of cooperation of this company throughout the investigation and the accuracy of the data it had provided was not ideal. Accordingly, the Commission was not satisfied that an undertaking from this company could be effectively monitored.

               (96)

               Moreover, in relation to the exporting producers in the PRC, the investigation established that there are different types of the product concerned which are not easily distinguishable and have considerable differences in prices. The single MIP for all product types offered by one of the Chinese exporting producers would therefore not eliminate the injurious effect of dumping. Furthermore, both exporting producers concerned in the PRC are producers of different types of other chemical products and may sell these products to common customers in the European Union via related trading companies. This would create a serious risk of cross-compensation and would render extremely difficult to monitor effectively the undertaking. The different MIPs proposed by the other Chinese exporting producer would also render the monitoring impracticable due to the complexity of distinction between the various product types. On the basis of the above, it was concluded that the undertaking offers cannot be accepted,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
   Article 1
   1.   A definitive anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on imports of oxalic acid, whether in dihydrate (CUS number 0028635-1 and CAS number 6153-56-6) or anhydrous form (CUS number 0021238-4 and CAS number 144-62-7) and whether or not in aqueous solution, currently falling within CN code ex 2917 11 00 (TARIC code 2917110091) and originating in India and the People’s Republic of China.
   2.   The rate of the definitive anti-dumping duty applicable to the net, free-at-Union-frontier price, before duty, of the product described in paragraph 1 and produced by the companies below, shall be as follows:

               Country

               Company

               Anti-dumping duty rate %

               TARIC additional code

               India

               Punjab Chemicals and Crop Protection Limited

               22,8

               B230

               Star Oxochem Pvt. Ltd

               31,5

               B270

               All other companies

               43,6

               B999

               PRC

               Shandong Fengyuan Chemicals Stock Co., Ltd; Shandong Fengyuan Uranus Advanced Material Co., Ltd

               37,7

               B231

               Yuanping Changyuan Chemicals Co., Ltd

               14,6

               B232

               All other companies

               52,2

               B999

         3.   The application of the individual duty rate specified for the companies listed in paragraph 2 of this Article shall be conditional upon presentation to the customs authority of the Member States of a valid commercial invoice, which shall conform with the requirements set out in the Annex. If no such invoice is presented, the duty applicable to all other companies shall apply.
   4.   Unless otherwise specified, the provisions in force concerning customs duties shall apply.
   Article 2
   The amounts secured by way of the provisional anti-dumping duty pursuant to Commission Regulation (EU) No 1043/2011 shall be definitively collected. The amounts secured in excess of the amount of the definitive anti-dumping duties shall be released.
   Article 3
   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, 12 April 2012.

            For the Council

            The President

         N. WAMMEN

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

      (2)  OJ L 275, 20.10.2011, p. 1.

      (3)

               European Commission,

               Directorate-General for Trade,

               Directorate H, Office: N105 04/092,

               1049 Bruxelles/Brussel,

               BELGIQUE/BELGIË

      ANNEX
      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 which has issued the commercial invoice.

                  (2)

                  The following declaration:
                  ‘I, the undersigned, certify that the (volume) of oxalic acid sold for export to the European Union covered by this invoice was manufactured by (company name and address) (TARIC additional code) in (country concerned). I declare that the information provided in this invoice is complete and correct.’

            Date and signature