title: Commission Decision No 307/2000/ECSC of 10 February 2000 imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of certain hot-rolled flat products of non-alloy steel originating in the People's Republic of China, India and Romania

eurovoc_concepts:
China
India
Romania
anti-dumping duty
flat product
import

formats: html pdf print

text: L 36/4 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 11. 2. 2000 COMMISSION DECISION No 307/2000/ECSC of 10 February 2000 imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of certain hot-rolled flat products of non- alloy steel originating in the People's Republic of China, India and Romania THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, (4) Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community, Having regard to Commission Decision No 2277/96/ECSC of 28 November 1996 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Coal and Steel Community (1), as amended by Commission Decision No 1000/1999/ECSC (2), and in particular Articles 7 and 8 thereof, All exporting producers, as well as most complaining Community producers and importers made their views known in writing. All interested parties who requested a hearing within the time limit set and who indicated that they were likely to be affected by the result of the proceeding and that there were particular reasons why they should be heard, were granted a hearing. After consulting the Advisory Committee, Whereas: A. PROCEDURE (5) (6) (1) (2) (3) On 13 May 1999, the Commission announced by means of a notice (hereinafter referred to as the ‘notice of initiation’) published in the Official Journal of the Euro- pean Communities (3) the initiation of an anti-dumping proceeding with regard to imports into the Community of certain hot-rolled flat products of non-alloy steel originating in the People's Republic of China (hereinafter and referred to as commenced an investigation pursuant to Article 5 of Commission Decision No 2277/96/ECSC (hereinafter referred to as the ‘basic Decision’). and Romania, ‘China’), India The proceeding was initiated as a result of a complaint lodged by Eurofer on behalf of Community producers representing a major proportion of the total Community production of concerned within the meaning of Articles 4(1) and 5(4) of the basic Decision. The complaint contained evidence of dumping of the product concerned and of material injury resulting there- from, which was considered sufficient to justify the initiation of a proceeding. the product the advised officially According to Article 5(11) of the basic Decision, the Commission complaining Community producers, the exporting producers, impor- ters, suppliers and users known to be concerned as well as their representative associations and the representa- tives of the exporting countries of the initiation of the proceeding. Pursuant the basic Decision, the Commission also gave the parties directly concerned the opportunity to make their views known in writing and to request a hearing. to Article 6(5) of (1) OJ L 308, 29. 11. 1996, p. 11. (2) OJ L 122, 12. 5. 1999, p. 35. (3) OJ C 133, 13. 5. 1999, p. 17. In order to allow exporting producers in China to submit a claim for market economy status or individual treatment the Commission sent market economy status/individual treatment claim forms to the Chinese exporting producers known to be concerned. they so wished, if The Commission sent questionnaires to all these parties and to those who made themselves known within the time limit set in the notice of initiation. The Commission received replies to its questionnaires: — from eleven complaining Community producers, — from eight exporting producers in the countries concerned, — from one unrelated importer in the Community, — from one Community importer related to the exporting producers, and — from four user companies in the Community. (7) The Commission sought and verified all the information it deemed necessary for the purpose of a preliminary determination and carried out verification visits, where appropriate, at the premises of the following companies: Complaining Community producers — Aceralia Corporación Sid. , Madrid, Spain — British Steel Plc, London, United Kingdom — Dillinger, Dillingen, Germany — GTS, Dunkerque, France — ILVA SpA, Genova, Italy — Palini and Bertoli, San Giorgio di Nogaro, Italy — Salzgitter, Salzgitter, Germany — Thyssen Krupp Stahl AG, Duisburg, Germany — Trametal, Genova, Italy — Voest Alpine, Linz, Austria 11. 2. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 36/5 Exporting producers (a) C h i n a — Angang New Steel Company Ltd, Anshan City — Jinan Iron & Steel Group Corporation, Jinan — Maanshan Iron & Steel Co. Ltd, Maanshan — Qinhuangdao Shougang Plate Mill Co. Ltd, Qinhuangdao — Shanghai Pu Dong Iron & Steel Co. Ltd, Shanghai — Wuyang Iron and Steel Co. Ltd, Wugang City (10) certain CN codes, quarto plates as described above. imports cover all different types of 2. Like product The investigation has shown that not only the basic physical, technical and chemical characteristics and uses, but also the grades and the range of dimensions of the countries imported product concerned the to or Community-produced products. The same is true when the product exported to the Community is compared to that sold on the domestic markets in India and Romania. from the comparable concerned are identical (8) (9) (b) I n d i a — Steel Authority of India Ltd, New Delhi (c) R o m a n i a — Sidex SA, Galati Unrelated importer(s) — user(s) in the Community — Olan SA, Araia, Spain Importers in the Community related to the exporting producers Romania: Sidex International plc, London, United Kingdom The investigation of dumping covered the period from 1 January 1998 to 31 March 1999 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘investigation period’ or ‘IP’). The examination of injury covered the period from 1995 up to the end of the dumping investigation period (hereinafter also referred to as the ‘period examined’). B. PRODUCT CONCERNED AND LIKE PRODUCT (12) 1. Product concerned (13) The product concerned is flat products of non-alloy steel, not in coils, not further worked than hot-rolled, without patterns in relief, with a thickness of more than 10 mm and a width of 600 mm or more falling within CN codes ex 7208 51 30 (TARIC code 7208 51 30*10), 7208 51 50*10), ex 7208 51 50 ex 7208 51 91 (TARIC code 7208 51 91*10) and ex 7208 51 99 (TARIC code 7208 51 99*10), or with a thickness of 4,75 mm up to 10 mm and a width of CN code 2 050 mm or more ex 7208 52 91 (TARIC code 7208 52 91*10) and originating in China, India or Romania. falling within (TARIC code imports Quarto plates are generally produced by hot-rolling slabs and can be of various grades and dimensions. The majority of into the Community consist of standard grades such as ‘struc- (e. g. S235, S275 and S355 according to tural steels’ ‘Euronorm’ EN 10025), shipbuilding grades and boiler grades (according to EN 10207). from third countries (11) On this basis, it was concluded that quarto plates produced in the countries concerned and sold on the Indian and Romanian domestic markets, or exported to the Community from all three countries, or produced and sold by the Community industry on the Community market, are alike within the meaning of Article 1(4) of the basic Decision. C. DUMPING 1. Normal value 1. 1. China 1. 1. 1. M a r k e t e c o n o m y t r e a t m e n t in Pursuant to Article 2(7)(b) of the basic Decision, anti-dumping investigations concerning imports from China, normal value shall be determined in accordance with paragraphs 1 to 6 of the said Article for those producers which can show that they meet the criteria laid down in Article 2(7)(c), i. e. that market economy conditions prevail for them. Six Chinese companies applied for market economy treatment. The investigation at their premises showed, however, that all were operating under significant State influence. In fact, it was found that with regard to raw materials sourcing, State interference, auditing of the accounts, barter trade and land ownership, the criteria in Article 2(7)(c) of the Basic Decision were not met. More specifically, the criteria of the first indent of Article 2(7)(c) were not met by five companies, those of the second indent were not met by two companies, those of the third indent were not met by four companies and those of the fourth indent were not met by three compa- nies. these companies were either completely or majority State-owned. In addition, all For these reasons, it was concluded that none of these companies could be granted market economy treatment. The investigation has shown that, although imports from the countries in question are concentrated in (14) The companies concerned and the Community industry were informed of the conclusions and were given the possibility to submit comments. L 36/6 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 11. 2. 2000 1. 1. 2. A n a l o g u e c o u n t r y tions was not lower than 10 % of sales. Subsequently, a weighted average normal value per CN code was calcu- lated. (15) (16) In accordance with Article 2(7) of the basic Decision, in order to establish normal value for the Chinese compa- nies not operating under market economy conditions, an analogue market economy country had to be selected for the establishment of normal value. For this purpose, the complainant suggested Taiwan or Mexico and the Commission proposed Taiwan. Within the time limit specified in the notice of initiation, the Chinese com- panies objected to this approach and suggested using India instead. They underlined that India was a large steel producer with production characteristics similar to those in China. India had production costs comparable to those in China because, like China, it had its own coal and iron ore mines. Since the producers in Taiwan and Mexico did not agree to cooperate, the Commission considered India and Romania. Of these two countries India was considered to be the more appropriate choice since the Indian domestic market was the largest in size and was charac- terised by a significant number of competing local producers. Moreover, as explained in more detail below, the domestic sales in India were representative for exports from China to the Community, both in terms of volume and in terms of product types. 1. 1. 3. D e t e r m i n a t i o n o f n o r m a l v a l u e (17) As explained above, normal value was established on the basis of the domestic prices of the Indian exporting producer. (18) (19) In accordance with Article 2(2) of the basic Decision, domestic sales of the like product by the Indian exporting producer during the investigation period were made in sufficient quantities since they accounted overall and per type for more than 5 % of the quantities of the to the concerned exported from China product Community. The Commission further assessed on a type-per-type basis whether Indian sales of the like product had been made in the ordinary course of trade in accordance with Article 2(4) of the basic Decision. For this purpose the full cost of production per unit during the investigation period was compared with the unit price of each domestic sales transaction made during that period. Where, per product type, the volume of domestic sales above unit cost represented at least 80 % of sales and where the weighted average price was equal to or higher than the weighted average cost, normal value was estab- lished on the basis of the weighted average prices actually paid for all domestic sales. Otherwise, normal value was established on the basis of the weighted average prices actually paid for the remaining profitable domestic sales, since the volume of profitable transac- 1. 2. India and Romania (20) (21) (22) In order to establish normal value, it was first deter- mined for each of the cooperating exporting producers whether the total volume of the domestic sales of the product concerned was representative in accordance with Article 2(2) of the basic Decision, i. e. whether these sales represented 5 % or more of the sales volume of the product concerned exported to the Community. It was found for all cooperating exporting producers that their volumes of domestic sales represented more than 5 % of export sales. It was then examined for each exporting producer whether type constituted 5 % or more of the sales volume of the same type exported to the Community. total domestic sales of each product For those product types meeting the 5 % test, it was established whether sufficient sales had been made in the ordinary course of trade in accordance with Article 2(4) of the basic Decision. (23) Where, per product type, the volume of domestic sales above unit cost represented at least 80 % of sales and where the weighted average price was equal to or higher than the weighted average cost, normal value was estab- lished on the basis of the weighted average prices actually paid for all domestic sales. Otherwise, normal the weighted value was established on the basis of average prices actually paid for the remaining profitable domestic sales, provided that the volume of profitable transactions was lower than 80 % but not lower than 10 % of sales. (24) For those product types where the volume of domestic sales was lower than 5 % of the volume exported to the Community, or where the volume of profitable domestic sales was less than 10 %, domestic sales of those product types were considered insufficient within the meaning of Article 2(4) of the basic Decision and were therefore In these cases, as there were no repres- disregarded. entative domestic sales by other producers in the country concerned, normal value was constructed on the basis of the costs of manufacturing incurred by the exporting producer concerned for the exported product type in question plus a reasonable amount for SG&A costs and profits in accordance with Article 2(3) and (6) of the basic Decision. For each exporting producer, the SG&A were based on its representative domestic sales and the profit margin based on its representative domestic sales made in the ordinary course of trade. 11. 2. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 36/7 (25) As to the Indian exporting producer, its domestic sales of the product concerned were divided into so-called sales are ‘direct dispatched directly from the plant to the unrelated customer while stockyard sales are dispatched from a network of branches located all over India. sales’ and ‘stockyard sales’. Direct During the on-spot investigation it was found that the quality of the product deteriorated during its stay in the stockyard and a large number of discounts were granted on these sales for various reasons, one of the most frequent being for second quality. Moreover, as these discounts were granted in different ways, the company was not able to identify the transactions for which a quality discount had been given. Furthermore, export sales covered only first quality products. For these reasons it was decided to provisionally estab- lish normal value on the basis of the direct sales since it was found that they were comparable with the export sales in terms of quality and were sold in sufficient quantities. 2. Export price 2. 1. China (26) The investigation showed that all export sales of the product concerned were made to unrelated customers in the Community. The export prices were therefore calcu- lated in accordance with Article 2(8) of the basic Decision, i. e. on the basis of the prices actually paid or payable by these independent customers. (27) As the comparison of the data concerning exports to the Community provided by the cooperating Chinese exporting producers and Eurostat statistics indicated that these exports represented only 74 % of those reported by Eurostat, it was concluded that the remaining sales should be established on the basis of Eurostat data which were considered representative for this purpose. 2. 2. India and Romania (28) Where export sales to the Community were made directly to independent importers export prices were established on the basis of the prices actually paid or payable by these importers in accordance with Article 2(8) of the basic Decision. related to the (29) Where export sales were made to importers in the Community which were exporting producer, the export prices were constructed on the basis of the prices at which the imported products were first resold to independent buyers in the Community, in accordance with Article 2(9) of the basic Decision. Adjustments were made for all costs incurred between importation and resale, including a reasonable margin (30) (31) (32) (33) for SG&A plus a profit margin of 5 % considered provi- sionally on the basis of the information available. 3. Comparison For the purposes of a fair comparison due allowance, in the form of adjustments, was made for differences claimed under Article 2(10) of the basic Decision and demonstrated to affect price comparability. On this basis, adjustments were made with regard to rebates, transport, loading and ancillary insurance, handling, costs, credit and commissions. to Article 2(10)(b) of The company in India claimed an allowance for import charges. Pursuant the basic Decision this request was refused since it was not proven that the materials on which import duties were payable had been physically incorporated into the prod- ucts concerned sold on the domestic market and that the import duties had not been collected or refunded in respect of the product exported to the Community. 4. Dumping margins 4. 1. General method In accordance with Article 2(10) and (11) of the basic Decision, the dumping margins were established on the basis of a comparison between the weighted average normal value per product type and the weighted average export price at ex-factory level for the same product type and at the same level of trade. With regard to India and Romania the comparison was made at an ex-factory level and for China at fob level. represented by the In order to ensure the effectiveness of the measures, a residual dumping margin had to be determined for each country concerned. For this purpose, the Commission compared for each country concerned the volume of imports cooperating exporting producers with the total volume of imports originating in the exporting countries as shown in Eurostat import statistics. As a result, for India it was found that the level of cooperation was high (86 %). The Commission there- fore considered it appropriate to set the dumping margin for the non-cooperating companies at the level of the highest individual dumping margin established for the cooperating exporting producer in the country concerned. Since for Romania the export volume of the only cooperating exporting producer was only 27 % compared to Eurostat data, the residual anti-dumping margin was set at the level of the highest quarterly dumping margin found in that country for a single product type sold in representative quantities. The above approach was also considered necessary in order to avoid creating a bonus for non-cooperation and an opportunity for circumvention. L 36/8 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 11. 2. 2000 (34) All six Chinese exporting producers claimed individual treatment, the determination of an individual dumping margin on the basis of the individual export prices of the companies. i. e. these companies The Commission verified whether enjoyed in fact and in law the necessary degree of inde- pendence from the Chinese State. None of the companies concerned showed to the satis- faction of the Commission that they fulfilled all the criteria. In particular, the absence of interference by the State could not be guaranteed. Some companies failed to demonstrate that they had full control over their supply of raw materials and inputs in general. In addition, all companies were either wholly or majority State-owned. Consequently, it was decided not to grant individual treatment to any of these companies. (35) The dumping margins, expressed as a percentage of the CIF price at Community frontier level, are: 4. 2. China 34,3 % (36) As the six cooperating exporting producers were not granted market economy status nor individual treat- ment, their export prices were taken together with Euro- stat in order to cover China's total exports to the Community. Consequently, the comparison could only be made by customs code (CN code). independently. the structure of It was found that none of the producers cited had itself imported the product in question. One trading company belonging to the same corporate group as a complaining Community producer had, however, made such imports during the investigation period. This company which including from purchased steel throughout the world, the producer belonging to the same group, and sold mainly in third countries on its own account was found to act the In fact, grouping to which both companies, belong is such that each maintains its own financial accounts, submits sepa- rate annual reports, and has no profit and loss transfer agreement with the holding company. Furthermore, separate income tax returns are filed, each has its own board of directors, and business relations with other companies in the group are carried out at arms length on identical terms to those applicable to other compa- nies where no legal relationship exists. These purchases could not, therefore, affect the status of the producer concerned, and it was considered that there were no grounds for excluding any producer of hot-rolled flat products of non-alloy steel from the definition of the Community production. (41) The 18 Community producers of hot-rolled flat products of non-alloy steel mentioned above, therefore, constitute the Community production within the meaning of Article 4(1) of the basic Decision. 4. 3. India (37) Steel Authority of India Ltd Residual 4. 4. Romania (38) Sidex SA Residual 51,1 % 51,1 % 14,4 % 52,6 % 1. 2. Community industry (42) Of the 12 producers who lodged the complaint, ten replied to the Commission's questionnaires, allowed on- spot investigations and provided the Commission with additional information when requested; they were there- fore considered as cooperating in the investigation. D. INJURY 1. Definition of the Community industry 1. 1. Total Community production (39) Within the Community, the product concerned is manu- factured by: — 12 producers which lodged the complaint, — five Community producers supporting the (43) complaint, and — one Community producer which did not support the complaint. (40) that argued exporting producers Some certain complaining Community producers had imported hot- rolled flat products of non-alloy steel from the countries concerned by the proceeding during the ‘investigation period’. The Commission therefore examined whether any of them should be excluded from the definition of the Community production. These 10 Community producers are: Aceralia (Spain), British Steel (United Kingdom), Dillinger (Germany), GTS (France), ILVA (Italy), Palini and Bertoli (Italy), Salzgitter (Germany), Thyssen (Germany), Trametal (Italy), Voest Alpine (Austria). These companies accounted for more than 75 % of total Community production in the IP, and thus represented a major proportion of the Community production within the meaning of Article 5(4) of the basic Decision, and are hereinafter referred to as ‘the Community industry’. Eight of these companies are fully integrated, i. e. they produce or buy within the group they belong to, the steel slabs used for rolling the product concerned. The two remaining companies are so-called re-rollers, which buy steel slabs on the free market for manufacturing the product concerned. For the purpose of the provisional findings, on-spot investigations were carried out at the premises of seven complaining producers. The total production of these seven companies represented about 80 % of the total output of the Community industry. 11. 2. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 36/9 1. 3. Other Community producers two remaining The complainant producers, with production accounting for less than 2 % of the total output of the 12 complaining producers, did not reply to the Commission's questionnaires; they were therefore considered not to be cooperating in the framework of the current the Community industry. investigation and thus not part of the six other producers, one supporter replied Of partially to the Commission's questionnaires and in prin- ciple allowed on-spot investigations, while the other five companies did not reply at all to the Commission's questionnaires. These eight companies are referred to hereinafter as ‘other Community producers’. (47) 2. Consumption In detail, both the same period in 1997 and the second six months of 1998. six-monthly apparent consumption expressed in tonnes per month developed as follows: 577 795 in the second half of 1997, 660 000 in the first half of 1998, 571 000 in the second half of 1998. 3. Imports from the countries concerned 3. 1. Cumulation from the other Romanian authorities and some exporting producers alleged that their imports should not be cumulated with those to the proceeding, because the level of prices or the trends in the volume of their sales were not similar. In particular, the Romanian exporting producer it decreased its exports to the Community in the course of the IP. argued that countries subject (44) (45) cumulated volume of Community consumption was calculated on the basis of the the Community market by the Community industry and by the other Community producers, as well as of total import volumes. sales destined for The volume of sales of the other Community producers was estimated on the basis of the information contained in the complaint and of the reply to the Commission's questionnaire producer mentioned in recital 44. Imports were assessed on the basis of data obtained from Eurostat or contained in the reply to the Commission's questionnaire for exporting producers. submitted other the by (46) On this basis, Community consumption expressed in tonnes per month, developed from 573 097 in 1995 to 522 349 in 1996, 558 569 in 1997 and 604 929 in the IP. for the Community market the product In 1995, concerned was marked by strong demand and a sustained level of prices. consumption decreased by 8,9 % and then increased by 10,7 % in 1997 and a further 7,9 % in the investigation period, a level above that reached in 1995 (+ 5,2 %). In 1996, As far as consumption during the IP is concerned, the investigation has shown that it was particularly strong during the first six months of 1998 as compared with 3. 2. Volumes, market shares and prices (48) Having carefully examined these allegations and taking into account the conditions laid down in Article 3(4) of the basic Decision, the dumping margins found for China, India and Romania were 34,3 %, 51,1 % and 52,6 % respectively, i. e. well above the de minimis level. the Commission recalls that above significant all, hold a In addition, between 1995 and the IP, imports from the three countries concerned all showed an upward trend, the and, Community market. Indeed, despite a slight decrease in the course of the IP, the volume of imports from each of the three countries and corresponding market shares found during the IP were significantly above the de minimis level. Furthermore, the prices of these imports were all in the same range. share of the Commission's analysis revealed that Finally, the products concerned imported from the countries under entirely interchangeable between investigation were themselves and with those produced and sold by the Community industry. All imported products were also sold with similar pricing policies to the same customers. It was therefore concluded that a cumulative assessment of the effects of the imports from China, India, and Romania was appropriate, in accordance with Article 3(4) of the basic Decision. (49) Data on volumes, market shares and prices were extracted from Eurostat imports statistics and replies to Commission's questionnaires: Total imports from countries concerned 1995 1996 1997 Investigation period (1/1998-3/1999) Volume in tonnes per month 49 709 53 374 61 243 80 045 Market shares in % Average price in ECU per tonne 8,7 288 10,2 298 11 315 13,6 321 L 36/10 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 11. 2. 2000 During the period under consideration the cumulated volume of the dumped imports increased by more than 66 %, the corresponding cumulated market shares increasing by 4,9 percentage points over the period. Over the same period, prices increased by 10,1 % reaching a level of 321 EUR per tonne. On a per semester basis, volumes (expressed in tonnes per month) and prices (expressed in ECU per tonne) of cumulated dumped imports developed as follows: 1995 1-6 1995 7-12 1996 1-6 1996 7-12 1997 1-6 1997 7-12 1998 1-6 1998 7-12 1999 1-3 Volumes 46 313 53 105 62 904 43 843 52 392 70 095 116 754 66 190 45 656 Prices 267 305 307 286 296 330 340 311 249 3. 3. Price undercutting (50) For the purposes of determining price undercutting, the Commission analysed data referring to the IP. In view of the wide range of hot-rolled flat products under invest- igation, the product concerned sold by the Community industry and imported from the exporting countries was classified into categories, according to three criteria: the width, the thickness and the quality of steel. Comparison was then made on a quarterly basis between the weighted average selling prices of imported products per category with the weighted average sales prices of the Community industry in the same category. Prices used were those charged to the first independent customer, free of all rebates, and where appropriate, to ex-works for adjusted in terms of Community industry products and to CIF Community frontier level, duty paid for imported products. In addi- tion, the import prices were adjusted to include customs clearance costs and post importation costs. The latter were determined on the basis of the results of the invest- igation carried out with respect to unrelated importers. transport cost (51) The levels of price undercutting were found to be as follows: India: Steel Authority of India Limited China Romania Sidex Other 12,6 % 15,4 % 11,4 % 19,0 % 4. Situation of the Community industry 4. 1. Production (52) During the ‘period examined’, production (expressed in tonnes per month) remained almost stable, decreasing slightly from 407 320 in 1995 to 397 647 in 1996, peaking at 428 761 in 1997 and decreasing again by 6,7 % thus reaching 400 015 in the IP. 4. 2. Capacity and utilisation rate of capacity for all hot-rolled flat (product concerned and other steel products) (53) Given that the production facilities used in the manufac- turing of the product concerned are also used for the production of a wide variety of hot-rolled plates not concerned by this proceeding, it was not possible nor to establish capacity and utilisation of meaningful capacity figures specific to the product concerned. Production and capacities declared to the Commission for all hot-rolled flat products (product concerned and other steel products) in the framework of the ECSC Treaty were therefore taken into consideration. The other steel products represent around 25 % of total sizeable production and are destined for different, markets not subject to the same conditions applying on the market for the product concerned. Information was only available on a yearly basis until 1998. (54) Development of the capacity utilisation rate (ratio between production and capacity) showed a significant increase between 1996 and 1997, from 71,6 % to 80,8 %, a level maintained in 1998 at 80,3 %. (55) industry is capital In addition, as the steel intensive, producers need to keep capacity utilisation as high as possible, in order to reduce the effect of the high-fixed costs. Eight of the 10 producers constituting the Community industry are integrated. The major part of the steel they use is produced from blast furnaces, a process that can not easily be adapted to the fluctuations of the market. In any case, the rate of capacity utilisation achieved in 1997 and 1998 can not be considered as high for an industry of this type and it is clear that the Community industry had large reserves of capacity avail- able in the ‘period examined’. (57) (58) (59) 11. 2. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 36/11 4. 3. Stocks (56) The Community industry's closing stocks decreased from 559 293 tonnes in 1995 to 549 598 tonnes in 1996 and to 535 812 tonnes in 1997. During the IP, they sharply increased, reaching a level of 565 697 tonnes in 1998 and of 568 890 tonnes at the end of March 1999. 4. 4. Volume of sales in the Community and cor- responding market shares The volume of sales on the Community market, expressed in tonnes per month, decreased from 340 757 in 1995 to 315 323 in 1996 and then increased to in line with development of 344 855 in 1997, consumption. However, in the IP it decreased by 2 % to reach a level of 337 841, while consumption increased by 7,9 % in the same period. Between 1995 and the IP, this represents overall a decrease of 0,9 % of Community sales on the Community market, while industry's consumption rose by 5,2 %. the ‘period examined’ from 59,5 % in 1995, The corresponding market share of the Community industry increased regularly during the first three years of to 60,4 % in 1996 and to 61,7 % in 1997 before dropping in the IP by 5,9 percentage points, reaching a share of 55,8 %. This represents an overall loss of market share of 3,7 % between 1995 and the IP while, as mentioned above, dumped imports increased their market share by 4,9 percentage points. (61) On the same annual basis, profitability decreased from 13,3 % in 1995 to 6,4 % in 1996 and 6,1 % in 1997, before improving to 8,5 % in the IP, without reaching however its level of 1995. 4. 5. 2. Half-yearly analysis (62) An analysis of weighted average prices and profitability half year by half year for the years 1995 to 1998 and for the last six months of the IP, corresponding to the period from the fourth quarter 1998 to the first quarter 1999, was made. (63) With regard to the weighted average prices of the Community industry, it was found that between 1995 fluctuated around an average of and 1997 prices ECU 378 per tonne, with a maximum variance of 9 %. In the first half of 1998, an exceptionally high level of ECU 412 per tonne was achieved followed by a sharp decrease to ECU 384 per tonne in the second half of 1998 and to ECU 332 per tonne in the last six months of the IP. (64) During the same period, profitability followed similar trends varying from a minimum of + 2,7 % in the second half of 1996 to a maximum of 15 % in the first half of 1998. In the last six months of the IP, the Community industry suffered losses of – 4,3 %. 4. 5. 3. Quarterly analysis in the IP 4. 5. Average sales prices in the Community and prof- itability (65) The weighted average prices and profitability in the IP were also examined on a quarter-by-quarter basis. of prices It became apparent during the investigation that an examination the Community industry confined to the IP as a whole (a period of 15 months) would lead to inappropriate conclusions, as the Community market experienced pronounced changes over this period. profitability and of Therefore, in order to assess the development of sales prices in the Community and corresponding profit- ability, data were analysed first on a yearly basis, between 1995 and the overall IP, then on a half-yearly basis between 1995 and the IP and finally on a quarterly basis during the IP. 4. 5. 1. Year-by-year analysis (60) Weighted average prices (expressed in ECU per tonne) slightly decreased from 381 in 1995, to 367 in 1996, 366 in 1997 and increased to 382 in the IP, the level of 1995. (66) During the first three quarters of 1998, the high prices observed for Community products allowed profits higher than 13 %, a level only achieved in 1995 when the market was characterised by very high levels of demand and similar levels of prices. However, during the third and, more pronounced, during the fourth quarter of 1998, prices started to decrease sharply to ECU 361 per tonne, a level notice- ably below the average price of ECU 378 per tonne observed during the period from 1995 to 1998. In the first quarter of 1999, prices decreased by a further 15,5 % as compared to the prices of the fourth quarter of 1998. A comparison of prices between the first quarter 1998 and the first quarter 1999 shows a decrease of more than 25 %. In parallel, profitability decreased by 9,7 percentage points between the third and the fourth quarter 1998 and by a further 11,6 percentage points in the first quarter 1999. Profitability between the first quarter 1998 and the first quarter 1999 shows a decrease of more than 22,1 percentage points. L 36/12 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 11. 2. 2000 Detailed quarterly data on prices and profitability are contained in the following table: I/1998 II/1998 III/1998 IV/1998 I/1999 Prices in ECU per tonne 407 417 406 P/L in % + 14,1 + 15,9 + 13,3 361 + 3,6 305 – 8 4. 6. Employment E. CAUSATION (67) Employment fell from 6 943 employees in 1995, to 6 708 in 1996, to 6 290 in 1997 and to 6 008 in the IP, which represents an overall decrease of more than 13 %. 1. Introduction 4. 7. Conclusion on injury (68) The investigation has the Community industry was subject to significant price undercutting from the dumped imports which increased substantially in terms of volumes and market shares. shown that At the same time, in a market which expanded signifi- cantly since 1996 and despite the reserves of capacity available, the Community industry was not able to increase its production between 1997 and the IP. On the contrary, forced to reduce production and it was increase the level of stocks. Between 1995 and the IP, the volume of the Community industry's sales on the Community market remained almost stable while consumption increased by more than 5 %. Between 1997 and the IP, the volume of sales decreased by 2 % while consumption expanded by more than 7,9 %. This resulted in an overall decrease of the share in the period Community industry's market considered (– 3,7 %). Between 1997 and the IP, the Community industry's market share dropped by 5,9 percentage points. Up to the middle of 1998, as a result in particular of high demand, the Community industry experienced high prices and high profits. However, thereafter and in particular in the fourth quarter 1998 and the first quarter 1999, i. e. in the last six months of the IP, the situation of the Community industry significantly deteri- orated, in particular as regards prices and financial results. In this period, prices dropped sharply by about 18 % below the average price observed during the preceding quarter and financial results were at a loss- making level (– 4,3 %). In the first quarter 1999, prices decreased by – 25 % as compared to prices in the first quarter 1998 and financial results deteriorated to about – 8 %. (69) (70) (71) the Commission examined whether In accordance with Article 3(6) and 3(7) of the basic Decision, the material injury suffered by the Community industry had been caused by the dumped imports from India, China and Romania; it also examined other known factors in order to ensure that injury caused by these factors was not attributed to the dumped imports. In any analysis of the steel market, it has to be borne in mind that steel is a major commodity product and that its base price, which is published in specialised media, is well known by all market operators. The product concerned by this investigation, either produced or sold by the Community industry or imported from the coun- tries concerned, is therefore highly price sensitive and fluctuations in price are rapidly transmitted throughout the market. It should also be recalled that the market for product concerned by this investigation is order-driven, in that the production of a range of products which differs widely in qualities, widths and thicknesses requires that products are produced on demand. The impact of any factor, in the Community by the Community industry can, therefore, only be assessed by taking into account a certain time lag. including dumping, on the sales 2. Effect of the dumped imports 2. 1. Volume of dumped imports (72) In 1995, 49 709 tonnes per month were imported from the three countries concerned, representing about 38 % imports in the Community. The tonnage of of total dumped imports increased sharply in the following years (+ 7,3 % between 1995 and 1996, + 14,7 % between 1996 and 1997, + 34,4 % between 1997 and the IP). In the latter period, dumped imports represented more than 47,5 % of total imports. In the light of the foregoing analysis, it is therefore provisionally concluded that the Community industry suffered material injury within the meaning of Article 3(1) of the basic Decision. (73) Volumes of dumped imports were also analysed in abso- lute terms as well as compared to the production of the Community industry, on a half-yearly basis. 11. 2. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 36/13 (74) From a level of 52 392 tonnes per month in the first half of 1997 volume of dumped imports increased sharply to 70 045 tonnes per month in the second half of 1997, then peaked at 116 754 tonnes per month in the first half of 1998 (i. e. more than doubling the level of the first half of 1997). In the second six months of 1998, imports dropped to 66 190 tonnes per month, a level still well above the average observed in the period 1995 to the first half of 1997 and dropped again in the first quarter of 1999, falling to 45 656 tonnes per month, a level close to the volumes imported between 1995 and the beginning of 1997. (75) A comparison of the volumes of the dumped imports with the production of the Community industry reveals from the three countries a ratio between imports concerned and the total average production of the Community industry varying between 11 % in the second half of 1996 and 16,5 % in the second half of 1998 with the exception of the first six months of the IP, in which imports represented more than 29,2 % of the total average production of the Community industry. (76) (77) In relation to consumption, which averaged around 570 000 tonnes per month between 1995 and 1997, the level of dumped imports in the first half of 1998, at 116 754 tonnes per month was more than 46 000 tonnes per month higher than the figure of the previous six months, representing an exceptional additional pene- tration of more than 8,5 % of the market. These imports fed a particularly strong apparent consumption during the same period. However, during the remaining IP when it became apparent that users where not able to absorb this increase in apparent consumption, prices and profits deteriorated significantly. It is clear from the above that this increased volume of dumped imports contributed disproportionately to the increase in apparent consumption as the Community industry lost orders and was forced to increase stocks from 535 812 tonnes at the end of 1997 to 565 697 tonnes at the end of 1998 and 568 890 tonnes on the 31 March 1999 and progressively reduce output from 428 761 tonnes per month in 1997 to 400 015 tonnes per month in the IP. 2. 2. Prices of dumped imports (78) In 1997, the price differential between the prices of the dumped imports and those of the Community industry ranged about ECU 50 per tonne. However, this price differential widened to more than ECU 70 per tonne in 1998 and then reduced to about ECU 56 per tonne in the first quarter of 1999. The large increase in import volumes during the first semester of the IP, given the economics of the steel industry which operates with a certain time lag, caused a swift destabilisation of the market depressing the prices the IP. In this respect, the during the remainder of Community industry was obliged, in an attempt to cover fixed costs, to maintain output levels and sell at these dumping-induced prices. As a result, profitability in first quarter of 1999 fell well below the break-even point. Indeed, the movement in profits in the IP is remarkable; from a return on sales of more than 14 % in the first quarter of 1998 to a loss of 8 % in the first quarter of 1999, a turnaround of more than 22 percentage points. 2. 3. Conclusion (79) Taking into account the considerable inflow of dumped imports which were disproportionate to what, in the long run, the market could absorb and the consequent increased price differential between the prices of dumped imports and those of the Community industry together with the deterioration of the situation of the Community industry, is concluded that dumped imports from China, India and Romania caused material injury to the Community industry, within the meaning of Article 3(6) of the basic Decision. it 3. Effect of other factors 3. 1. Consumption (80) The Commission analysed whether the development of consumption affected the situation of the Community industry. In this respect, it is recalled that between 1995 and the IP, consumption increased by 5,2 % while Community indusfry's sales slightly decreased. (81) The development of consumption cannot therefore be considered as having had any adverse effect on the situation of the Community industry. 3. 2. Situation of the other Community producers (82) The situation of the other Community producers was also taken into consideration. For this purpose, it is recalled that the Commission had at its disposal the information contained in the complaint; partial coopera- tion from one of the other Community producers had also been obtained. On the basis of this information, the development of the tonnage sold by other Community producers was calcu- lated, thus allowing the establishment of consumption and market shares during the period in consideration. (83) Tonnage sold by other Community producers on the Community market, expressed in tonnes per month, decreased from 102 778 in 1995 to 91 210 in 1996 to 65 470 in 1997 and increased to 93 662 in the IP. The corresponding market shares varied from 17,9 % in 1995 to 17,5 % in 1996 to 11,8 % in 1997 and to 15,5 % in the IP. L 36/14 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 11. 2. 2000 The drop in tonnage sold and in market share observed between 1996 and 1997 was due to the withdrawal from the market of one producer in the Community. The reappearance of this producer in the investigation period did not permit however other Community produ- cers to regain their previous market share which in fact fell by 2,4 percentage points between 1995 and the IP. 3. 3. Oversupply (84) Some exporting producers in the countries concerned argued that the market in the IP was characterised by oversupply and overcapacity which were responsible for any fall in performance experienced by the Community industry. The Commission found that the market was indeed saturated in the IP and that this was due to the excep- tional increase of dumped imports between 1997 and 1998 (+ 34,4 %). This caused Community industry to reduce production and to lose market share. Indeed, it was the increasing dumped imports that caused over- supply on the market and led to material injury for the Community industry. (85) (86) (87) 3. 4. Anti-competitive behaviour of the Community industry Some exporting producers alleged that the Community industry's involvement in anti-competitive activity made injury assessment impossible, as the market situation had been completely distorted by such activity. Their argumentation referred first to a Commission Decision (98/247/ECSC of 28 January 1998, alloy surcharge case), which condemned anti-competitive behaviour in the stainless steel sector. In this respect, it is recalled that investigation concerns a product made of non-alloy steel, which is destined for a market different from that of stainless steel. This argu- ment is therefore not relevant. the current In this Decision, system in question infringed the they argued that an information exchange Secondly, trade association system used by the German steel existed. This assertion was based on a Commission Decision of 26 November 1997 relating to a proceeding pursuant to Article 65 of the ECSC Treaty (case of Wirtschaftsvereinigung Stahl). the Commission concluded that, although the information exchange anti- competition rules, it was not implemented by the parties concerned following the warning letter which the Commission sent to them on 8 July 1996. Taking into account the time that has elapsed (two years before the investigation period) and the fact that no documented/ substantiated information was submitted in this inves- tigation contradicting the the Commission, it can be concluded that the second argu- ment is also not relevant. findings of earlier (88) (89) 3. 5. Imports from other third countries The Commission also analysed the effect on the situa- tion of the Community industry of imports from other countries not subject to the current investigation. Some exporting producers argued that Poland, the Czech Republic, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Bulgaria and the Ukraine were causing injury to the Community industry and that any measure imposed only on imports from India, China and Romania would be discriminatory. 3. 5. 1. Imports from other third countries considered as a whole The volume of such third country imports and cor- responding market shares increased during the ‘exam- ined period’ from 13,9 % in 1995 to 15,1 % during the IP. However, between 1997 and the IP, at a time when the highest volume of dumped imports from the coun- tries subject to investigation penetrated the Community market, increasing their market share by 2,3 percentage points, the market share of other imports decreased by 0,4 percentage points. remained almost (90) Over the period in consideration, the price of other stable, varying between imports ECU 306 per tonne in 1996 and ECU 325 per tonne in the IP. In 1997, price of dumped imports, having progressively increased since 1995, reached the level of price of other third countries in that period (ECU 313 against ECU 315 per tonne). However, in the IP, the price of dumped imports decreased again, thus under- cutting the price of other imports (ECU 317 against ECU 325 per tonne). (91) Concerning imports originating in individual countries, the following was determined: 3. 5. 2. Poland and the Czech Republic (92) The volume of imports from Poland decreased by 24,5 % between 1995 and the IP, and imports from the Czech Republic rose from 16 234 tonnes per month in 1995 to 25 175 tonnes per month in 1997 and then sharply fell to 19 955 tonnes per month in the IP. In the latter period, market share of imports from Poland and the Czech Republic were respectively 1,8 % and 3,3 %, with prices below those of the Community industry, but higher than those of dumped imports. 3. 5. 3. The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) (93) On the basis of the information available from Eurostat, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia increased its exports to the Community during the period in consid- eration. In the IP, its market share was 1,9 % and its prices were lower the Community industry, but higher than those of dumped imports. than those of 11. 2. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 36/15 3. 5. 4. Bulgaria and the Ukraine (94) Exports from Bulgaria decreased between 1995 and the IP, while those from the Ukraine increased regularly over the same period. Their respective market shares were 2 % and 1,5 % in the IP, while their prices remained below those of Community producers and at a level similar to that of dumped imports. (99) Although export prices decreased in the IP, they dropped in proportion by far less than Community prices. In the first quarter of 1999, export prices were still at a level of ECU 370 per tonne, a level in the vicinity of the average Community price observed between 1995 and 1998 (ECU 378 per tonne) which still allowed Community industry to make profits. 3. 5. 5. Cumulated market share of Poland, the Czech Republic, the FYROM, Bulgaria and the Ukraine (95) The cumulated market share of Poland, the Czech Republic, the FYROM, Bulgaria and Ukraine peaked at 12,6 % in 1997. However, it dropped by 2,1 percentage points in the IP, thus reaching a level of 10,5 %. 3. 5. 6. Conclusion (96) the Czech Republic, Based on the above analysis, it cannot be excluded that the imports from Poland, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Bulgaria and the Ukraine may have contributed to the injury suffered by the Community industry. This alone however is not sufficient to break the causal link between the dumped imports subject to this investigation and the injury suffered by the Community industry, particularly in view of the fact that dumping margins were substantial, as were the quantities of these imports throughout the period under consideration, gaining a market share of 13,3 % in the investigation period. 3. 6. Export activity of the Community industry (97) During the period in consideration, the Community industry's exports, represented on average about 20 % of its total sales. Exports expressed in tonnes per month, increased from 62 548 in 1995 to 83 132 in 1996, to 85 055 in 1997 and then dropped to 59 969 during the IP. Over the same period, export prices expressed in ECU per tonne varied from 390 in 1995, to 347 in 1996, to 379 in 1998 and 412 in the IP, i. e. always higher, except in 1996, than prices in the Community market. (98) Analysis of the available data on a half yearly basis, in 1997 and in the IP, shows however that the difference between Community the and Community industry progressively increased over the period. export prices of in volumes, the Community industry's Despite a fall exports continued to be made at relatively sustained prices during the investigation period. Based on the above, it is therefore concluded, that the deterioration of the situation of the Community industry was not used by its export activity. 3. 7. Situation of the world market (100) Some exporting producers argued the overall instability of the world steel market in 1998 was the main cause of any fall in the performance of the Community industry. In particular, it was claimed that the Asian crisis had disrupted international trade, with former net importer countries becoming net exporters. This resulted in a general oversupply and a consequent fall in prices. (101) It is recalled that the steel industry is capital intensive, and changes in demand in a region often result in rapid changes in geographical sales patterns. Steel producers seek to maintain high rates of capacity utilisation and when demand levels in one part of the world market do not allow this, producers tend to increase sales to other parts of the world to achieve desired levels of produc- tion. International steel trade being very developed, rapid changes in quantities traded result in equally rapid movements in price levels. It is not contested, therefore, that fluctuations in world prices and general over supply, in particular in 1998, influenced the Community market for hot-rolled plates and had a negative effect on the situation of the Community industry. Indeed, such negative effects were worldwide and not confined to the Community market. This cannot, however, explain the sharp price depression in profitability suffered by the and consequent fall its sales in the Community industry in respect of Community. As established above, the Community industry's prices dropped more sharply in the IP than its export prices, with the consequent deterioration in prof- itability observed in respect of Community sales. In addition, the deterioration of the situation on the world steel market cannot justify the increase in imports from China, India and Romania at unfairly set prices. L 36/16 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 11. 2. 2000 (102) 4. Conclusion on causation imports from Poland, It cannot be excluded that certain factors other than dumped imports, such as the worldwide instability of the steel market, the Czech Republic, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Bulgaria and Ukraine or the behaviour of other Community producers may have contributed to the difficult condition of the Community industry. This however does not detract from the fact that imports of hot-rolled steel plates of non-alloy steel originating in India, China and Romania, taken in isolation, have caused material injury to the Community industry. This conclusion is drawn in particular in view of the loss of market share and the price depression and consequent deterioration the Community industry, coinciding with the significant increase in the quantities of dumped imports, which gained market share and constantly undercut the prices of the Community industry. experienced profitability by in F. COMMUNITY INTEREST 1. Preliminary remarks (103) The Commission also examined whether, despite the injurious effects of dumped imports, there were compel- ling reasons to conclude that it would not be in the Community interest to impose measures in this case. Pursuant the impact of possible measures on all parties involved in this proceeding, and the consequences of taking or not taking measures, were therefore examined. to Article 21(1) of the basic Decision, (104) For this purpose, the Commission had at its disposal the replies to the Commission's questionnaires submitted by the Community producers and the importers identified in the complaint, or which made themselves known in the course of the investigation. In addition, on initiation of the proceeding, Community producers were invited to provide a list of in the Community, i. e. users of the product concerned. Each of the latter subsequently received a questionnaire espe- cially drawn up for their activity. Although question- naires were sent to a large number of companies (about 90 companies), very few responses were received. their main customers (105) Finally, to complete its analysis, the Commission exam- the ECSC ined data submitted in the framework of Treaty, in particular as regards the importance of the production of the product concerned in the total steel activity of the Community industry. Data on deliveries made by Community producers on their national markets were also considered in order to identify the main consumer industries. 2. Impact on the Community industry and its related activities (106) To recapitulate, the Community industry is composed of them are medium-sized, two 10 producers, belonging to larger steel groups, while eight of the remaining are fully independent small-sized companies. They are located in six Member States, Austria, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom. the Community The investigation has industry faced difficulties linked to the massive inflow of dumped imports from the three countries concerned. shown that In the absence of protective measures, the Community industry would continue to be confronted by price undercutting and subsequent price depression that led to a marked deterioration in its financial situation. Compa- nies would therefore be obliged to close down certain production lines, thus putting in danger the steel groups to which they belong. The Community industry is a significant consumer of crude steel, and any reduction in its production has a direct negative impact on upstream steel production, and consequently on the employment situation in the Community. It is therefore vital for the steel sector to maintain the viability of the Community industry. The imposition of anti-dumping measures is expected to restore fair competition and allow Community industry to benefit from the strong efforts already undertaken to improve efficiency. 3. Impact on users (107) As mentioned above, the few responses to the question- naires from users of the product concerned revealed a lack of interest in the proceeding. The analysis of available data in the framework of the ECSC Treaty showed that deliveries of the Community industry are mainly destined for merchants, which resell the product concerned after recutting. The rest is sold to user industries such as, in decreasing order of impor- tance in terms of volume, shipbuilding, the steel tube industry, structural steel work, or boilers and other metal containers. that the product after resell recutting Companies the unfair prices practised by the complained about exporting countries concerned, which led to a serious deterioration of prices and lowered their margins. They clearly expressed themselves in favour of protective measures that would restore fair competition. Other users did not express their views, but, due to the price sensitivity of the market, it is likely that the impo- sition of measures would result in a price increase. The nature of these user industries, however, is such that the product concerned represents a low proportion of their total costs, which may explain their lack of cooperation in the present proceeding. Any increase in price resulting from imposition of measures would therefore be marginal for these industries. 11. 2. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 36/17 4. Impact on importers/traders 1. Injury elimination level (108) The Commission sent out questionnaires to a large number of importers (about 25) in the Community; few usable questionnaire responses were received, and no comment was made on the impact on importers of any protective measures. In any event, the product concerned, which is in general imported by specialised steel importer/traders, represents only a small part in the diverse range of the steel prod- ucts they handle. Given the number of alternative sources of supply not subject to antidumping measures, including the product concerned manufactured by the Community industry, it is considered that the imposition of anti-dumping measures would have no more than a minimal impact on the overall situation of the importer/ traders in question. 5. Conclusion on Community interest (109) Given the increase of dumped imports in the period considered, and the significant price undercutting found, it is likely that this trend would continue and that the absence of measures would lead to a further deteriora- tion of the Community industry situation. Imposition of measures, on the other hand, would help to restore fair competition and assist the Community industry to restore profitability and limit the threat of closures and staff reductions. As regards recutters, adoption of protective measures reasonable would lead to the margins. re-establishment of In respect of user industries and of importer/traders, any expected price increase would only have a limited impact. It is therefore concluded, that in the present circum- stances, there are no compelling reasons, why it would not be in the Community interest to impose measures. G. PROVISONAL DUTIES (110) Having established that the dumped imports have caused material injury to the Community industry and that there are no compelling reasons not to take action, provisional anti-dumping measures should be adopted. (111) For establishing the level of duty, account has been taken of the dumping margins found and of the amount of the duty necessary to eliminate the injury caused by dumped imports to the Community industry. The neces- sary price increase was determined on the basis of a comparison of the weighted average import price, as established for the price undercutting calculations, with the non-injurious price of the different categories of quarto plates sold by the Community industry on the Community market. (112) It was considered that the amount of duty necessary to remove the effects of injurious dumping should allow the Community industry to cover its costs of production and obtain a reasonable profit on sales. In this respect, it was considered that the profit margin before tax of 8 % on turnover was an appropriate basis, regard being given to the need for long-term investments and for a rate of return, which the Community industry could reasonably expect in the absence of injurious dumping. Accordingly, injury elimination levels were determined by comparison between the weighted average non-injur- ious price per category of the Community industry with the weighted average selling prices of imported products for the same category on a per quarter basis. In the case of Romania, due to the low level of cooperation, the residual injury margin was calculated by reference to the category of products which was exported in repres- entative quantities and for which the highest margin was found. The difference was a percentage of the CIF import price at the Community frontier customs duty unpaid: then expressed as Country/Company Injury margin (%) China India: SAIL Romania: Sidex Others 13,2 21,8 9,6 18,1 2. Level of provisional duties (113) In the light of the foregoing, it is considered that a provisional anti-dumping duty should be imposed at the level of the dumping margin found, but should not be higher than the injury margin set out above in accord- ance with Article 7(2) of the basic Decision. The rates of duty applicable to the free-at-Community- frontier price before duty shall be: L 36/18 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 11. 2. 2000 Country/Company Dumping margin (%) Injury margin (%) China India — SAIL Romania — Sidex 34,3 51,1 51,1 52,6 14,4 13,2 21,8 21,8 18,1 9,6 Proposed anti-dumping duty (%) 13,2 21,8 21,8 18,1 9,6 (114) The individual company anti-dumping duty rate specified in this Decision was established on the basis of the findings of the present investigation. Therefore, it reflects the situation found during that investigation with respect to this company. This duty rate (as opposed to the countrywide duty applicable to ‘all other companies’) is thus exclusively applicable to imports of products originating in the country concerned and produced by the company and thus by the specific legal entity mentioned. Imported products produced by any other company not specifically mentioned in the operative part of this Decision with its name and address, including entities related to those specifically mentioned, cannot benefit from this rate and shall be subject to the duty rate applicable to ‘all other companies’. (115) Any claim requesting the application of this individual company's anti-dumping duty rate (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 (1) forthwith with all relevant information, in particular any modification in the company's activities linked to production, domestic and export sales associated with e. g. that name change or that change in the production and sales entities. The Commission, if appropriate, will, after consultation of the Advisory Committee, amend the Decision accordingly by updating the list of companies benefiting from individual duty rates. H. FINAL PROVISIONS (116) A period should be fixed during which the interested parties may make their views known in writing and request a hearing. Furthermore, it should be emphasised that all findings made for this Decision are provisional and may have to be reconsidered for the purpose of any definitive measures which the Commission may propose, HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: Article 1 A provisional anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on imports of flat products of non-alloy steel, not 1. in coils, not further worked than hot-rolled, without patterns in relief, with a thickness of more than 10 mm and a width of 600 mm or more falling within CN codes ex 7208 51 30 (TARIC code 7208 51 30*10), (TARIC code 7208 51 91*10) and ex 7208 51 99 (TARIC code 7208 51 99*10), or with a thickness of 4,75 mm up to 10 mm and a width of 2 050 mm or more falling within CN code ex 7208 52 91 (TARIC code 7208 52 91*10) and originating in China, India or Romania. 7208 51 50*10), ex 7208 51 91 ex 7208 51 50 (TARIC code The rates of duty applicable to the net free-at-Community-frontier price, before duty, for products 2. produced by the following exporting companies, shall be: (1) European Commission Directorate-General of Trade Directorate C DM 24 — 8/38 Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 200 B-1049 Brussels/Bruxelles. 11. 2. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 36/19 Country Company China India All companies All companies Romania Sidex SA, Smârdan Street 1, 6200 Galati All other companies Rate of anti-dumping duty TARIC additional code (%) 13,2 21,8 9,6 18,1 — — A069 A999 3. Unless otherwise specified, the provisions in force concerning customs duties shall apply. The release for free circulation in the Community of the product referred to in paragraph 1 shall be 4. subject to the provision of a security equivalent to the amount of the provisional duty. Article 2 Without prejudice to Article 20 of Decision No 2277/96/ECSC interested parties may request disclosure of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of which this Decision was adopted, present their views in writing and request a hearing from the Commission within one month of the date of entry into force of this Decision. Pursuant to Article 21(4) of Decision No 2277/96/ECSC, the parties concerned may request a hearing concerning the analysis of the Community interest and may comment on the application of this Decision within one month of the date of its entry into force. This Decision shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. Article 1 of this Decision shall apply for a period of six months. Article 3 This Decision shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 10 February 2000. For the Commission Pascal LAMY Member of the Commission


title: Verordening (EG) nr. 315/2000 van de Commissie van 10 februari 2000 tot vaststelling van de wereldmarktprijs voor niet-geëgreneerde katoen en van het voorschot op de steun

eurovoc_concepts:
EU Member State
cotton
production aid
world market price

formats: pdf print

text: L 36/28 NL Publicatieblad van de Europese Gemeenschappen 11. 2. 2000 VERORDENING (EG) Nr. 315/2000 VAN DE COMMISSIE van 10 februari 2000 tot vaststelling van de wereldmarktprĳs voor niet-geëgreneerde katoen en van het voorschot op de steun DE COMMISSIE VAN DE EUROPESE GEMEENSCHAPPEN, Gelet op het Verdrag tot oprichting van de Europese Gemeen- schap, Gelet op de Akte van Toetreding van Griekenland, en met name op de punten 3 en 10 van Protocol nr. 4 betreffende katoen, laatstelĳk gewĳzigd bĳ Verordening (EG) nr. 1553/95 van de Raad (1), (3) (4) Gelet op Verordening (EG) nr. 1554/95 van de Raad van 29 juni 1995 tot vaststelling van de algemene voorschriften van de steunregeling voor katoen en tot intrekking van Verordening (EEG) nr. 2169/81 (2), laatstelĳk gewĳzigd bĳ Verordening (EG) nr. 1419/98 (3), en met name op de artikelen 3, 4 en 5, Overwegende hetgeen volgt: aangepast, om rekening te houden met de verschillen op grond van de kwaliteit van het geleverde product en de aard van de aanbiedingen en noteringen. In artikel 2 van Verordening (EEG) nr. 1201/89 is bepaald welke aanpas- singen kunnen plaatsvinden. Op grond van bovenbedoelde criteria moet de wereld- marktprĳs voor niet-geëgreneerde katoen op het hier- onder aangegeven niveau moet worden vastgesteld. In artikel 5, lid 3 bis, eerste alinea, van Verordening (EG) nr. 1554/95 is bepaald dat het voorschot op de steun gelĳk is aan de streefprĳs minus de wereldmarktprĳs en een korting die berekend is volgens de formule die wordt toegepast bĳ overschrĳding van de gegarandeerde maximumhoeveelheid, waarbĳ evenwel wordt uitgegaan van een nieuwe raming van de productie van niet- geëgreneerde katoen, verhoogd met ten minste 7,5 %. De nieuwe raming van de productie voor het verkoop- seizoen 1999/2000 en het desbetreffende verhogings- percentage zĳn vastgesteld bĳ Verordening (EG) nr. 2606/1999 van de Commissie (6). Toepassing van deze methode resulteert in de vaststelling van het bedrag van het voorschot per lidstaat op de hieronder aangegeven niveaus, (1) (2) tussen de verhouding Krachtens artikel 3 van Verordening (EG) nr. 1554/95 wordt op gezette tĳden een wereldmarktprĳs voor niet- geëgreneerde katoen bepaald, rekening houdende met de historische in aanmerking genomen wereldmarktprĳs voor geëgreneerde katoen en de berekende prĳs voor niet-geëgreneerde katoen. Deze historische verhouding is vastgesteld in artikel 1, lid 2, van Verordening (EEG) nr. 1201/89 van de Commissie van 3 mei 1989 houdende uitvoeringsbepalingen van de laatstelĳk gewĳzigd bĳ steunregeling voor katoen (4), Verordening (EG) nr. 1624/1999 (5). Als de wereld- marktprĳs niet op die wĳze kan worden bepaald, wordt hĳ bepaald op basis van de laatst vastgestelde prĳs. Krachtens artikel 4 van Verordening (EG) nr. 1554/95 wordt de wereldmarktprĳs voor geëgreneerde katoen bepaald voor een product met bepaalde kenmerken, waarbĳ rekening wordt gehouden met de gunstigste, voor de werkelĳke markttendens representatief geachte aanbiedingen en noteringen. Om deze prĳs te bepalen, wordt het gemiddelde berekend van de aanbiedingen en noteringen op één of meer Europese beurzen voor in een haven van Noord-Europa cif-geleverde producten uit de verschillende, voor de internationale handel als meest representatief beschouwde productielanden. Evenwel is bepaald dat deze criteria voor het bepalen van de wereldmarktprĳs voor geëgreneerde katoen worden (1) PB L 148 van 30. 6. 1995, blz. 45. (2) PB L 148 van 30. 6. 1995, blz. 48. (3) PB L 190 van 4. 7. 1998, blz. 4. (4) PB L 123 van 4. 5. 1989, blz. 23. (5) PB L 192 van 24. 7. 1999, blz. 39. HEEFT DE VOLGENDE VERORDENING VASTGESTELD: Artikel 1 De in artikel 3 van Verordening (EG) nr. 1554/95 voor niet-geëgreneerde katoen 1. bedoelde wereldmarktprĳs wordt vastgesteld op 26,951 EUR/100 kg. 2. Het in artikel 5, lid 3 bis, tweede alinea, van Verordening (EG) nr. 1554/95 bedoelde voorschot op de steun wordt vast- gesteld op: — 42,888 EUR/100 kg voor Spanje; — 38,955 EUR/100 kg voor Griekenland; — 79,349 EUR/100 kg voor de overige lidstaten. Artikel 2 Deze verordening treedt in werking op 11 februari 2000. (6) PB L 316 van 10. 12. 1999, blz. 36. 11. 2. 2000 NL Publicatieblad van de Europese Gemeenschappen L 36/29 Deze verordening is verbindend in al haar onderdelen en is rechtstreeks toepasselĳk in elke lidstaat. Gedaan te Brussel, 10 februari 2000. Voor de Commissie Franz FISCHLER Lid van de Commissie


title: Σύσταση της Ευρωπαϊκής Κεντρικής Τράπεζας, της 10ης Φεβρουαρίου 2000, σχετικά με τους εξωτερικούς ελεγκτές των εθνικών κεντρικών τραπεζών (ΕΚΤ/2000/2)

eurovoc_concepts:
EU Member State
Germany
accountant
central bank
self-employed person

text: 4. 3. 2000 EL ¯(cid:240)(cid:223)(cid:243)(cid:231)(cid:236)(cid:231) ¯(cid:246)(cid:231)(cid:236)(cid:229)æ(cid:223)(cid:228)Æ (cid:244)ø(cid:237) ¯ıæø(cid:240)ÆœŒ(cid:254)(cid:237) ˚(cid:239)Ø(cid:237)(cid:239)(cid:244)(cid:222)(cid:244)ø(cid:237) C 62/21 ¯(cid:213)(cid:209)(cid:217)—`(cid:218)˚˙ ˚¯˝(cid:212)(cid:209)(cid:201)˚˙ (cid:212)(cid:209)`—¯Z` (cid:211)(cid:213)(cid:211)(cid:212)`(cid:211)˙ (cid:212)˙(cid:211) ¯(cid:213)(cid:209)(cid:217)—`(cid:218)˚˙(cid:211) ˚¯˝(cid:212)(cid:209)(cid:201)˚˙(cid:211) (cid:212)(cid:209)`—¯Z`(cid:211) (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) 10(cid:231)(cid:242) (cid:214)(cid:229)(cid:226)æ(cid:239)ıÆæ(cid:223)(cid:239)ı 2000 (cid:243)(cid:247)(cid:229)(cid:244)ØŒ(cid:220) (cid:236)(cid:229) (cid:244)(cid:239)ı(cid:242) (cid:229)(cid:238)ø(cid:244)(cid:229)æØŒ(cid:239)(cid:253)(cid:242) (cid:229)º(cid:229)ªŒ(cid:244)(cid:221)(cid:242) (cid:244)ø(cid:237) (cid:229)Ł(cid:237)ØŒ(cid:254)(cid:237) Œ(cid:229)(cid:237)(cid:244)æØŒ(cid:254)(cid:237) (cid:244)æÆ(cid:240)(cid:229)(cid:230)(cid:254)(cid:237) (¯˚(cid:212)/2000/2) (2000/C 62/07) ¯(cid:213)(cid:209)(cid:217)—`(cid:218)˚˙(cid:211) ˚¯˝(cid:212)(cid:209)(cid:201)˚˙(cid:211) (cid:211)(cid:213)˝(cid:201)(cid:211)(cid:212)`: (cid:212)ˇ ˜(cid:201)ˇ(cid:201)˚˙(cid:212)(cid:201)˚ˇ (cid:211)(cid:213)(cid:204)´ˇ(cid:213)¸(cid:201)ˇ (cid:212)˙(cid:211) (cid:212)(cid:209)`—¯Z`(cid:211), ‚(cid:247)(cid:239)(cid:237)(cid:244)Æ(cid:242) ı(cid:240)(cid:252)ł(cid:231) (cid:244)(cid:239) ŒÆ(cid:244)Æ(cid:243)(cid:244)Æ(cid:244)ØŒ(cid:252) (cid:244)(cid:239)ı ¯ıæø(cid:240)ÆœŒ(cid:239)(cid:253) (cid:211)ı(cid:243)(cid:244)(cid:222)(cid:236)Æ(cid:244)(cid:239)(cid:242) ˚(cid:229)(cid:237)(cid:244)æØŒ(cid:254)(cid:237) (cid:212)æÆ(cid:240)(cid:229)(cid:230)(cid:254)(cid:237) ŒÆØ (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) ¯ıæø(cid:240)ÆœŒ(cid:222)(cid:242) (cid:212)æ(cid:220)(cid:240)(cid:229)(cid:230)Æ(cid:242), ŒÆØ Ø(cid:228)(cid:223)ø(cid:242) (cid:244)(cid:239) (cid:220)æŁæ(cid:239) 27. 1, ¯Œ(cid:244)Ø(cid:236)(cid:254)(cid:237)(cid:244)Æ(cid:242) (cid:244)Æ ÆŒ(cid:252)º(cid:239)ıŁÆ: (1) ˇØ º(cid:239)ªÆæØÆ(cid:243)(cid:236)(cid:239)(cid:223) (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) ¯ıæø(cid:240)ÆœŒ(cid:222)(cid:242) ˚(cid:229)(cid:237)(cid:244)æØŒ(cid:222)(cid:242) (cid:212)æ(cid:220)(cid:240)(cid:229)(cid:230)Æ(cid:242) (¯˚(cid:212)) ŒÆØ (cid:244)ø(cid:237) (cid:229)Ł(cid:237)ØŒ(cid:254)(cid:237) Œ(cid:229)(cid:237)(cid:244)æØŒ(cid:254)(cid:237) (cid:244)æÆ(cid:240)(cid:229)(cid:230)(cid:254)(cid:237) (¯Ł(cid:237)˚(cid:212)) (cid:229)º(cid:221)ª(cid:247)(cid:239)(cid:237)(cid:244)ÆØ Æ(cid:240)(cid:252) Æ(cid:237)(cid:229)- (cid:238)(cid:220)æ(cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:244)(cid:239)ı(cid:242) (cid:229)(cid:238)ø(cid:244)(cid:229)æØŒ(cid:239)(cid:253)(cid:242) (cid:229)º(cid:229)ªŒ(cid:244)(cid:221)(cid:242), (cid:244)(cid:239)ı(cid:242) (cid:239)(cid:240)(cid:239)(cid:223)(cid:239)ı(cid:242) ı(cid:240)(cid:239)(cid:228)(cid:229)ØŒ(cid:237)(cid:253)(cid:229)Ø (cid:244)(cid:239) (cid:228)Ø(cid:239)ØŒ(cid:231)(cid:244)ØŒ(cid:252) (cid:243)ı(cid:236)(cid:226)(cid:239)(cid:253)ºØ(cid:239) (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) ¯˚(cid:212) ŒÆØ (cid:229)ªŒæ(cid:223)(cid:237)(cid:229)Ø (cid:244)(cid:239) (cid:211)ı(cid:236)(cid:226)(cid:239)(cid:253)ºØ(cid:239) (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) ¯ıæø(cid:240)ÆœŒ(cid:222)(cid:242) ‚(cid:237)ø(cid:243)(cid:231)(cid:242). (2) ˇØ (cid:229)(cid:238)ø(cid:244)(cid:229)æØŒ(cid:239)(cid:223) (cid:229)º(cid:229)ªŒ(cid:244)(cid:221)(cid:242) (cid:240)(cid:239)ı ı(cid:240)(cid:239)(cid:228)(cid:229)ØŒ(cid:237)(cid:253)(cid:239)(cid:237)(cid:244)ÆØ (cid:243)(cid:244)(cid:231) (cid:243)(cid:253)(cid:243)(cid:244)Æ(cid:243)(cid:231) ¯˚(cid:212)/1998/5 (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) ¯˚(cid:212) (1) Æ(cid:237)(cid:244)Ø(cid:243)(cid:244)(cid:239)Ø(cid:247)(cid:239)(cid:253)(cid:237) (cid:243)(cid:244)(cid:239)ı(cid:242) (cid:243)(cid:231)(cid:236)(cid:229)æØ(cid:237)(cid:239)(cid:253)(cid:242) (cid:229)º(cid:229)- ªŒ(cid:244)(cid:221)(cid:242) (cid:240)(cid:239)ı (cid:221)(cid:247)(cid:229)Ø (cid:228)Ø(cid:239)æ(cid:223)(cid:243)(cid:229)Ø (cid:231) Œ(cid:220)Ł(cid:229) (cid:243)ı(cid:236)(cid:236)(cid:229)(cid:244)(cid:221)(cid:247)(cid:239)ı(cid:243)Æ ¯Ł(cid:237)˚(cid:212), (cid:247)øæ(cid:223)(cid:242) (cid:237)Æ Ł(cid:223)ª(cid:229)(cid:244)ÆØ (cid:244)(cid:239) (cid:228)ØŒÆ(cid:223)ø(cid:236)Æ (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) ¯˚(cid:212) (cid:237)Æ ı(cid:240)(cid:239)(cid:228)(cid:229)(cid:223)(cid:238)(cid:229)Ø (cid:220)ºº(cid:239)ı(cid:242) (cid:229)(cid:238)ø(cid:244)(cid:229)æØŒ(cid:239)(cid:253)(cid:242) (cid:229)º(cid:229)ªŒ(cid:244)(cid:221)(cid:242) (cid:244)ø(cid:237) ¯Ł(cid:237)˚(cid:212), (cid:252)(cid:240)(cid:239)(cid:244)(cid:229) Æı(cid:244)(cid:252) Æ(cid:240)ÆØ(cid:244)(cid:229)(cid:223) (cid:231) (cid:236)(cid:229)(cid:244)Æ(cid:226)(cid:239)º(cid:222) (cid:244)ø(cid:237) (cid:240)(cid:229)æØ- (cid:243)(cid:244)(cid:220)(cid:243)(cid:229)ø(cid:237). (cid:151) (cid:244)Ø(cid:242) (cid:229)(cid:244)ÆØæ(cid:229)(cid:223)(cid:229)(cid:242) KPMG Deutsche Treuhand-Gesellschaft AG ŒÆØ Ernst & Young Deutsche Allgemeine Treuhand AG ø(cid:242) (cid:229)(cid:238)ø- (cid:244)(cid:229)æØŒ(cid:239)(cid:253)(cid:242) (cid:229)º(cid:229)ªŒ(cid:244)(cid:221)(cid:242) (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) ˇ(cid:236)(cid:239)(cid:243)(cid:240)(cid:239)(cid:237)(cid:228)ØÆŒ(cid:222)(cid:242) (cid:212)æ(cid:220)(cid:240)(cid:229)(cid:230)Æ(cid:242) (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) ˆ(cid:229)æ(cid:236)Æ(cid:237)(cid:223)Æ(cid:242) ªØÆ (cid:244)(cid:239)ı(cid:242) (cid:229)(cid:244)(cid:222)(cid:243)Ø(cid:239)ı(cid:242) º(cid:239)ªÆæØÆ(cid:243)(cid:236)(cid:239)(cid:253)(cid:242) Æ(cid:240)(cid:252) (cid:244)(cid:239) (cid:239)ØŒ(cid:239)(cid:237)(cid:239)(cid:236)ØŒ(cid:252) (cid:221)(cid:244)(cid:239)(cid:242) 2000, (cid:151) (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:237) Æ(cid:237)(cid:220)º(cid:239)ª(cid:231) (cid:244)æ(cid:239)(cid:240)(cid:239)(cid:240)(cid:239)(cid:223)(cid:231)(cid:243)(cid:231) Æ(cid:240)(cid:252) (cid:244)(cid:239) (cid:211)ı(cid:236)(cid:226)(cid:239)(cid:253)ºØ(cid:239) (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) ¯ıæø(cid:240)ÆœŒ(cid:222)(cid:242) ‚(cid:237)ø(cid:243)(cid:231)(cid:242) (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) Æ(cid:240)(cid:252)(cid:246)Æ(cid:243)(cid:231)(cid:242) 1999/70/¯˚ (2) (cid:243)(cid:247)(cid:229)(cid:244)ØŒ(cid:220) (cid:236)(cid:229) (cid:244)(cid:239)ı(cid:242) (cid:229)(cid:238)ø(cid:244)(cid:229)- æØŒ(cid:239)(cid:253)(cid:242) (cid:229)º(cid:229)ªŒ(cid:244)(cid:221)(cid:242) (cid:244)ø(cid:237) (cid:229)Ł(cid:237)ØŒ(cid:254)(cid:237) Œ(cid:229)(cid:237)(cid:244)æØŒ(cid:254)(cid:237) (cid:244)æÆ(cid:240)(cid:229)(cid:230)(cid:254)(cid:237). ˙ (cid:240)Ææ(cid:239)(cid:253)(cid:243)Æ (cid:243)(cid:253)(cid:243)(cid:244)Æ(cid:243)(cid:231) (cid:228)(cid:231)(cid:236)(cid:239)(cid:243)Ø(cid:229)(cid:253)(cid:229)(cid:244)ÆØ (cid:243)(cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:237) ¯(cid:240)(cid:223)(cid:243)(cid:231)(cid:236)(cid:231) ¯(cid:246)(cid:231)(cid:236)(cid:229)æ(cid:223)(cid:228)Æ (cid:244)ø(cid:237) ¯ıæø(cid:240)ÆœŒ(cid:254)(cid:237) ˚(cid:239)Ø(cid:237)(cid:239)(cid:244)(cid:222)(cid:244)ø(cid:237). ˙ (cid:240)Ææ(cid:239)(cid:253)(cid:243)Æ (cid:243)(cid:253)(cid:243)(cid:244)Æ(cid:243)(cid:231) Æ(cid:240)(cid:229)ıŁ(cid:253)(cid:237)(cid:229)(cid:244)ÆØ (cid:243)(cid:244)(cid:239) (cid:211)ı(cid:236)(cid:226)(cid:239)(cid:253)ºØ(cid:239) (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) ¯ıæø(cid:240)ÆœŒ(cid:222)(cid:242) ‚(cid:237)ø(cid:243)(cid:231)(cid:242). (cid:214)æÆªŒ(cid:246)(cid:239)(cid:253)æ(cid:244)(cid:231) (cid:229)(cid:240)(cid:223) (cid:204)(cid:220)Ø(cid:237), 10 (cid:214)(cid:229)(cid:226)æ(cid:239)ıÆæ(cid:223)(cid:239)ı 2000. ˇ (cid:240)æ(cid:252)(cid:229)(cid:228)æ(cid:239)(cid:242) (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) ¯˚(cid:212) Willem F. DUISENBERG (1) ¯¯ C 411 (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) 31. 12. 1998, (cid:243). 11. (2) ¯¯ L 22 (cid:244)(cid:231)(cid:242) 29. 1. 1999, (cid:243). 69


title: Regolamento (CE) n. 315/2000 della Commissione, del 10 febbraio 2000, che fissa il prezzo del mercato mondiale del cotone non sgranato e che stabilisce l'importo dell'anticipo dell'aiuto

text: L 36/28 IT Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee 11. 2. 2000 REGOLAMENTO (CE) N. 315/2000 DELLA COMMISSIONE del 10 febbraio 2000 che fissa il prezzo del mercato mondiale del cotone non sgranato e che stabilisce l'importo dell'anticipo dell'aiuto LA COMMISSIONE DELLE COMUNITÀ EUROPEE, visto il trattato che istituisce la Comunità europea, visto l'atto di adesione della Grecia, in particolare il protocollo n. 4 concernente il cotone, modificato da ultimo dal regola- mento (CE) n. 1553/95 del Consiglio (1), visto il regolamento (CE) n. 1554/95 del Consiglio, del 29 giugno 1995, che stabilisce le norme generali del regime di aiuto per il cotone ed abroga il regolamento (CEE) n. 2169/ 81 (2), modificato da ultimo dal regolamento (CE) n. 1419/ 98 (3), in particolare gli articoli 3, 4 e 5, considerando quanto segue: (1) (2) A norma dell'articolo 3 del regolamento (CE) n. 1554/ 95, si procede periodicamente alla fissazione del prezzo del mercato mondiale del cotone non sgranato in base al prezzo del mercato mondiale constatato per il cotone sgranato, tenendo conto del rapporto storico riscontra- bile tra il prezzo preso in considerazione per il cotone sgranato e quello calcolato per il cotone non sgranato; tale rapporto storico è stato fissato all'articolo 1, para- grafo 2, del regolamento (CEE) n. 1201/89 della Commissione, del 3 maggio 1989, recante modalità di applicazione del regime di aiuti per il cotone (4), modifi- cato da ultimo dal regolamento (CE) n. 1624/1999 (5). Qualora non sia possibile stabilire il prezzo del mercato mondiale secondo tali modalità, tale prezzo viene stabi- lito in base all'ultimo prezzo fissato. A norma dell'articolo 4 del regolamento (CE) n. 1554/ 95, il prezzo del mercato mondiale del cotone sgranato è fissato per un prodotto rispondente a determinate caratteristiche e tenendo conto delle offerte e delle quotazioni che, tra quelle considerate rappresentative della tendenza effettiva del mercato, appaiano le più favorevoli; per tale determinazione si calcola una media delle offerte e delle quotazioni rilevate in una o più borse europee per un prodotto reso cif per un porto dell'Europa del Nord, in provenienza dai vari paesi forni- tori considerati più rappresentativi per il commercio internazionale. Tuttavia sono previsti degli adattamenti a tali criteri per la determinazione del prezzo del mercato (1) GU L 148 del 30. 6. 1995, pag. 45. (2) GU L 148 del 30. 6. 1995, pag. 48. (3) GU L 190 del 4. 7. 1998, pag. 4. (4) GU L 123 del 4. 5. 1989, pag. 23. (5) GU L 192 del 24. 7. 1999, pag. 39. (3) (4) mondiale del cotone sgranato, per tener conto delle differenze giustificate dalla qualità del prodotto conse- gnato o dalla natura delle offerte e delle quotazioni. Tali adattamenti sono fissati all'articolo 2 del regolamento (CEE) n. 1201/89. L'applicazione dei criteri sopra descritti induce a fissare il prezzo mondiale del cotone non sgranato al livello indi- cato dal presente regolamento. secondo A norma dell'articolo 5, paragrafo 3 bis, comma, del regolamento (CE) n. 1554/95, l'importo dell'acconto è pari al prezzo di obiettivo ridotto del prezzo del mercato mondiale, nonché di una riduzione calcolata in base alla formula applicabile in caso di superamento del quantitativo massimo garantito, ma tenendo conto della nuova stima della produzione di cotone non sgranato aumentata almeno del 7,5 %. Il regolamento (CE) n. 2606/1999 della Commissione (6) ha fissato il livello della nuova stima della produzione per la campagna 1999/2000, nonché la relativa percen- tuale di maggiorazione. L'applicazione di questo metodo induce a stabilire ai livelli sotto indicati l'importo dell'ac- conto per Stato membro. HA ADOTTATO IL PRESENTE REGOLAMENTO: Articolo 1 1. Il prezzo del mercato mondiale del cotone non sgranato, di cui all'articolo 3 del regolamento (CE) n. 1554/95, è fissato a 26,951 EUR/100 kg. 2. L'importo dell'acconto sull'aiuto, di cui all'articolo 5 para- grafo 3 bis, secondo comma, del regolamento (CE) n. 1554/95, è pari a: — 42,888 EUR/100 kg per la Spagna, — 38,955 EUR/100 kg per la Grecia, — 79,349 EUR/100 kg per gli altri Stati membri. Articolo 2 Il presente regolamento entra in vigore l'11 febbraio 2000. (6) GU L 316 del 10. 12. 1999, pag. 36. 11. 2. 2000 IT Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee L 36/29 Il presente regolamento è obbligatorio in tutti i suoi elementi e direttamente applicabile in ciascuno degli Stati membri. Fatto a Bruxelles, il 10 febbraio 2000. Per la Commissione Franz FISCHLER Membro della Commissione


title: Recommandation de la Banque centrale européenne, du 10 février 2000, concernant la désignation des commissaires aux comptes extérieurs des banques centrales nationales (BCE/2000/2)

text: 4. 3. 2000 FR Journal officiel des CommunautØs europØennes C 62/21 BANQUE CENTRALE EUROP(cid:201)ENNE RECOMMANDATION DE LA BANQUE CENTRALE EUROP(cid:201)ENNE du 10 fØvrier 2000 concernant la dØsignation des commissaires aux comptes extØrieurs des banques centrales natio- nales (BCE/2000/2) (2000/C 62/07) LE CONSEIL DES GOUVERNEURS DE LA BANQUE CENTRALE EUROP(cid:201)ENNE, vu les statuts du SystŁme europØen de banques centrales et de la Banque centrale europØenne, et notamment leur article 27. 1, considØrant ce qui suit: (1) Les comptes de la Banque centrale europØenne (ci-aprŁs dØnommØe «BCE») et des banques centrales nationales (ci- aprŁs dØnommØes «BCN») sont vØrifiØs par des commis- saires aux comptes extØrieurs indØpendants dØsignØs sur recommandation du conseil des gouverneurs de la BCE et agrØØs par le Conseil de l’Union europØenne. (2) La prØsente recommandation concernant la dØsignation des commissaires aux comptes extØrieurs faisant l’objet de la recommandation de la BCE (BCE/1998/5) (1) tient compte des dØsignations auxquelles ont procØdØ les BCN partici- pantes et ne prØjuge pas du droit qu’a la BCE de recom- mander la dØsignation d’autres commissaires aux comptes extØrieurs des BCN lorsque les circonstances l’exigent, RECOMMANDE: (cid:151) la dØsignation de KPMG Deutsche Treuhand-Gesellschaft AG et de Ernst & Young Deutsche Allgemeine Treuhand AG en tant que commissaires aux comptes extØrieurs de la Deutsche Bundesbank pour la vØrification des comptes annuels (cid:224) compter de l’exercice 2000, (cid:151) que le Conseil de l’Union europØenne modifie en consØ- quence sa dØcision 1999/70/CE concernant les commis- saires aux comptes extØrieurs des banques centrales natio- nales (2). La prØsente recommandation est publiØe au Journal officiel des CommunautØs europØennes. La prØsente recommandation est adressØe au Conseil de l’Union europØenne. Fait (cid:224) Francfort-sur-le-Main, le 10 fØvrier 2000. Le prØsident de la BCE Willem F. DUISENBERG (1) JO C 411 du 31. 12. 1998, p. 11. (2) JO L 22 du 29. 1. 1999, p. 69


title: Règlement (CE) n° 314/2000 de la Commission, du 10 février 2000, relatif aux offres communiquées pour l'importation de maïs dans le cadre de l'adjudication visée au règlement (CE) n° 2776/1999

eurovoc_concepts:
CCT duties
award of contract
import
maize

text: 11. 2. 2000 FR Journal officiel des Communautés européennes L 36/27 RÈGLEMENT (CE) No 314/2000 DE LA COMMISSION du 10 février 2000 relatif aux offres communiquées pour l'importation de maïs dans le cadre de l'adjudication visée au règlement (CE) no 2776/1999 LA COMMISSION DES COMMUNAUTÉS EUROPÉENNES, vu le traité instituant la Communauté européenne, vu le règlement (CEE) no 1766/92 du Conseil du 30 juin 1992 portant organisation commune des marchés dans le secteur des céréales (1), modifié en dernier lieu par le règlement (CE) no 1253/1999 (2), et notamment son article 12, paragraphe 1, (3) (4) Tenant compte notamment des critères prévus aux articles 6 et 7 du règlement (CE) no 1839/95, il n'est pas indiqué de procéder à la fixation d'un abattement maximal du droit. Les mesures prévues sont conformes à l'avis du comité de gestion des céréales, au présent règlement considérant ce qui suit: A ARRÊTÉ LE PRÉSENT RÈGLEMENT: (1) (2) Une adjudication de l'abattement maximal du droit à l'importation de maïs au Portugal a été ouverte par le règlement (CE) no 2776/1999 de la Commission (3). Conformément à l'article 5 du règlement (CE) no 1839/ 95 de la Commission (4), modifié par le règlement (CE) no 1963/95 (5), sur la base des offres communiquées, la Commission peut, selon la procédure prévue à l'article 23 du règlement (CEE) no 1766/92, décider de ne pas donner suite à l'adjudication. Article premier Il n'est pas donné suite aux offres communiquées du 4 au 10 février 2000 dans le cadre de l'adjudication de l'abattement du droit à l'importation de maïs visée au règlement (CE) no 2776/1999. Le présent règlement entre en vigueur le 11 février 2000. Article 2 Le présent règlement est obligatoire dans tous ses éléments et directement applicable dans tout État membre. Fait à Bruxelles, le 10 février 2000. Par la Commission Franz FISCHLER Membre de la Commission (1) JO L 181 du 1. 7. 1992, p. 21. (2) JO L 160 du 26. 6. 1999, p. 18. (3) JO L 334 du 28. 12. 1999, p. 8. (4) JO L 177 du 28. 7. 1995, p. 4. (5) JO L 189 du 10. 8. 1995, p. 22


title: Kommissionens förordning (EG) nr 311/2000 av den 10 februari 2000 om de anbud som meddelats för export av vete inom ramen för den anbudsinfordran som avses i förordning (EG) nr 1707/1999

eurovoc_concepts:
award of contract
common wheat
export refund

text: L 36/24 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning 11. 2. 2000 KOMMISSIONENS FÖRORDNING (EG) nr 311/2000 av den 10 februari 2000 om de anbud som meddelats för export av vete inom ramen för den anbudsinfordran som avses i förordning (EG) nr 1707/1999 EUROPEISKA GEMENSKAPERNAS KOMMISSION HAR ANTAGIT DENNA FÖRORDNING med beaktande av Fördraget om upprättandet av Europeiska gemenskapen, med beaktande av rådets förordning (EEG) nr 1766/92 av den 30 juni 1992 om den gemensamma organisationen av mark- naden för spannmål (1), senast ändrad genom förordning (EG) nr 1253/1999 (2), med beaktande av kommissionens förordning (EG) nr 1501/95 av den 29 juni 1995 om vissa tillämpningsföreskrifter för rådets förordning (EEG) nr 1766/92 vad avser beviljande av exportbidrag och de åtgärder som skall vidtas vid störningar inom spannmålssektorn (3), senast ändrad genom förordning (EG) nr 2513/98 (4), särskilt artikel 4 i denna, och av följande skäl: (1) (2) En anbudsinfordran för bidrag och/eller avgift för export av vete till alla tredje länder har inletts genom kommis- förordning (EG) nr 1707/1999 (5), ändrad sionens genom förordning (EG) nr 2011/1999 (6). I enlighet med artikel 7 i förordning (EG) nr 1501/95 kan kommissionen på grundval av meddelade anbud och i enlighet med det förfarande som föreskrivs i artikel (3) (4) 23 i förordning (EEG) nr 1766/92, besluta att inte full- följa anbudsinfordran. Särskilt med hänsyn till de kriterier som avses i artikel 1 i förordning (EG) nr 1501/95 är det inte uppenbart att ett högsta exportbidrag eller en lägsta exportavgift skall fastställas. De åtgärder som föreskrivs i denna förordning är fören- liga med yttrandet från Förvaltningskommittén för spannmål. HÄRIGENOM FÖRESKRIVS FÖLJANDE. Artikel 1 De anbud som meddelats från och med den 4 till och med den 10 februari 2000 inom ramen för den anbudsinfordran för exportbidrag eller avgift för vete som avses i förordning (EG) nr 1707/1999 skall inte fullföljas. Artikel 2 Denna förordning träder i kraft den 11 februari 2000. Denna förordning är till alla delar bindande och direkt tillämplig i alla medlemsstater. Utfärdad i Bryssel den 10 februari 2000. På kommissionens vägnar Franz FISCHLER Ledamot av kommissionen (1) EGT L 181, 1. 7. 1992, s. 21. (2) EGT L 160, 26. 6. 1999, s. 18. (3) EGT L 147, 30. 6. 1995, s. 7. (4) EGT L 313, 21. 11. 1998, s. 16. (5) EGT L 201, 31. 7. 1999, s. 55. (6) EGT L 248, 21. 9. 1999, s. 23


title: Agenda 2000 : Laajentuminen: Yhteenveto 1999 ehdokasmaiden edistymisestä liittymisvalmisteluissa.

eurovoc_concepts:
Central and Eastern Europe
Cyprus
Malta
Türkiye
accession to the European Union
economic situation
enlargement of the Union
political situation
report


title: Agenda 2000 : Utvidgning: Sammanfattning 1999: Rapport om kandidatländernas framsteg på vägen mot anslutning.


title: Reglamento (CE) n° 314/2000 de la Comisión, de 10 de febrero de 2000, relativo a las ofertas comunicadas para la importación de maíz en el marco de la licitación contemplada en el Reglamento (CE) n° 2776/1999

text: 11. 2. 2000 ES Diario Oficial de las Comunidades Europeas L 36/27 REGLAMENTO (CE) No 314/2000 DE LA COMISIÓN de 10 de febrero de 2000 relativo a las ofertas comunicadas para la importación de maíz en el marco de la licitación contemplada en el Reglamento (CE) no 2776/1999 LA COMISIÓN DE LAS COMUNIDADES EUROPEAS, Visto el Tratado constitutivo de la Comunidad Europea, Visto el Reglamento (CEE) 1766/92 del Consejo, de 30 de junio de 1992, por el que se establece la organización común de mercados en el sector de los cereales (1), cuya última modifi- cación la constituye el Reglamento (CE) no 1253/1999 (2), y, en particular, el apartado 1 de su artículo 12, Considerando lo siguiente: (1) (2) El Reglamento (CE) no 2776/1999 de la Comisión (3) ha abierto una licitación de la reducción máxima del derecho de importación de maíz en Portugal. Con arreglo al artículo 5 del Reglamento (CE) no 1839/ 95 de la Comisión (4), modificado por el Reglamento (CE) no 1963/95 (5), la Comisión, basándose en las ofertas comunicadas, puede decidir, de acuerdo con el procedimiento previsto en el artículo 23 del Reglamento (CEE) no 1766/92, que no dará curso a la licitación. (3) (4) Teniendo en cuenta, en particular, los criterios previstos en los artículos 6 y 7 del Reglamento (CE) no 1839/95, no resulta oportuno proceder a la fijación de una reduc- ción máxima del derecho. Las medidas previstas en el presente Reglamento se ajustan al dictamen del Comité de gestión de los cereales. HA ADOPTADO EL PRESENTE REGLAMENTO: Artículo 1 No se dará curso a las ofertas comunicadas del 4 al 10 de febrero de 2000 en el marco de la licitación para la reducción del derecho de importación de maíz contemplada en el Regla- mento (CE) no 2776/1999. Artículo 2 El presente Reglamento entrará en vigor el 11 de febrero de 2000. El presente Reglamento será obligatorio en todos sus elementos y directamente aplicable en cada Estado miembro. Hecho en Bruselas, el 10 de febrero de 2000. Por la Comisión Franz FISCHLER Miembro de la Comisión (1) DO L 181 de 1. 7. 1992, p. 21. (2) DO L 160 de 26. 6. 1999, p. 18. (3) DO L 334 de 28. 12. 1999, p. 8. (4) DO L 177 de 28. 7. 1995, p. 4. (5) DO L 189 de 10. 8. 1995, p. 22