COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2023/1596

of 3 August 2023

accepting a request for new exporting producer treatment with regard to the definitive anti-dumping measures imposed on imports of ceramic tableware and kitchenware originating in the People’s Republic of China and amending Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1198

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Union (1) (‘the basic Regulation’),

Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1198 of 12 July 2019 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of ceramic tableware and kitchenware originating in the People’s Republic of China (2), and, in particular, Article 2 thereof,

Whereas,

A.   

MEASURES IN FORCE

(1) On 13 May 2013, the Council imposed a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports into the Union of ceramic tableware and kitchenware (‘the product concerned’) originating in the People’s Republic of China (‘the PRC’) by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 412/2013 (3) (‘the original Regulation’).

(2) On 12 July 2019, following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation, the Commission extended the measures of the original Regulation for another five years by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1198.

(3) On 28 November 2019, following an anti-circumvention investigation pursuant to Articles 13(3) of the basic Regulation, the Commission amended Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1198 by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2131 (4).

(4) In the original investigation, sampling was applied for investigating the exporting producers in the PRC in accordance with Article 17 of the basic Regulation.

(5) The Commission imposed individual anti-dumping duty rates ranging from 13,1 % to 18,3 % on imports of ceramic tableware and kitchenware for the sampled exporting producers from the PRC. For the cooperating exporting producers that were not included in the sample, a duty rate of 17,9 % was imposed. The cooperating exporting producers not included in the sample are listed in Annex 1 of Regulation (EU) 2019/2131. Furthermore, a country-wide duty rate of 36,1 % was imposed on the product concerned from companies in the PRC which either did not make themselves known or did not cooperate with the investigation.

(6) Pursuant to Article 2 of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1198, Annex 1 of that Regulation can be amended by granting a new exporting producer the duty rate applicable to the cooperating companies not included in the sample, namely the weighted average duty rate of 17,9 %, where that new exporting producer in the PRC provides sufficient evidence to the Commission that:

(a) it did not export to the Union the product concerned during the period of investigation on which the measures are based, that is from 1 January 2011 to 31 December 2011 (‘the original investigation period’);

(b) it is not related to any of the exporters or producers in the PRC which are subject to the anti-dumping measures imposed by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1198; and

(c) it has actually exported to the Union the product concerned after the end of the original investigation period or has entered into an irrevocable contractual obligation to export a significant quantity to the Union.

B.   

REQUEST FOR NEW EXPORTING PRODUCER TREATMENT

(7) The company Shenzhen M&G Ceramics Co., Ltd. (‘M&G’ or the ‘applicant’) submitted a request to the Commission to be granted new exporting producer treatment (‘NEPT’) and hence be subject to the duty rate applicable to the cooperating companies in the PRC not included in the sample, which is 17,9 %. The applicant claimed that it met all three conditions set out in Article 2 of Implementing Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1198 (‘the NEPT conditions’).

(8) In order to determine whether the applicant fulfilled the conditions, the Commission first sent a questionnaire to the applicant requesting evidence showing that it met the NEPT conditions.

(9) Following the analysis of the questionnaire reply, the Commission requested further information and supporting evidence, which was submitted by the applicant.

(10) The Commission sought to verify all information it deemed necessary for the purpose of determining whether the applicant met the NEPT conditions. To this end, the Commission analysed the evidence submitted by the applicant in its questionnaire and deficiency letters replies; consulted various online databases, including Orbis (5), D&B (6), and Qichacha (7); and cross-checked company information with information submitted in previous cases. In parallel, the Commission also informed the Union industry about the applicant’s request and invited it to provide any comments if needed. No comments from Union industry were received.

C.   

ANALYSIS OF THE REQUEST

(11) With regard to the condition set out in Article 2(a) of the Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1198 that the applicant did not export the product concerned to the Union during the period of investigation on which the measures are based, that is from 1 January 2011 to 31 December 2011 (‘the original investigation period’), during the investigation the Commission established that the applicant did not exist at the time. The business and export licences confirmed December 2019 as the date of the establishment of the applicant and this was also cross-checked with other publicly available sources. Therefore, the applicant could not have exported the product concerned to the Union during the period of investigation.

(12) Consequently, the Commission concluded that the applicant complies with the condition set out in Article 2(a) of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1198.

(13) With regard to the condition set out in Article 2(b) of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1198 that the applicant is not related to an exporting producer that exported the product concerned to the Union in the original investigation period, during the investigation the Commission established that according to the applicant’s questionnaire and deficiency letter replies, the two shareholders of M&G hold respectively 60 % and 40 % of the shares. This was confirmed by Qichacha. The investigation confirmed that one of the shareholders did not have any link with other companies subject to the above-mentioned anti-dumping measures. The second shareholder was active in four other companies in the industry since 1995, of which three no longer exist. As far as the still existing company is concerned, after clarifications made through replies to deficiency letters as well as further investigation, this shareholder was not found to have links with producers subject to the original anti-dumping measures. Thus, the Commission did not identify any relationship as defined by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/2447 (8).

(14) Consequently, the Commission concluded that the applicant complies with the condition set out in Article 2(b) of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1198.

(15) With regard to the condition set out in Article 2(c) of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1198, that the applicant has actually exported the product concerned to the Union after the original investigation period or has entered into an irrevocable contractual obligation to export a significant quantity to the Union, during the investigation the Commission established that M&G first exported to the Union (Spain) in April 2020, therefore after the original investigation period. The applicant provided the order, the invoice, the packing list, the customs declaration form, the bill of lading and bank payment documents. The products of the order were also identified on the website of the EU importer.

(16) Consequently, the Commission concluded that the applicant complies with the condition set out in Article 2(c) of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1198.

(17) Accordingly, the applicant fulfils all three conditions to be granted NEPT, as set out in Article 2 of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1198 and the request should therefore be accepted. Consequently, the applicant should be subject to an anti-dumping duty of 17,9 % for cooperating companies not included in the sample of the original investigation.

D.   

DISCLOSURE

(18) The applicant and the Union industry were informed of the essential facts and considerations based on which it was considered appropriate to grant the anti-dumping duty rate applicable to the cooperating companies not included in the sample of the original investigation to Shenzhen M&G Ceramics Co., Ltd. (“M&G”).

(19) The parties were granted the possibility to submit comments. No comments were received.

(20) The Regulation is in accordance with the opinion of the Committee established by Article 15(1) of the basic Regulation,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The following company is added to Annex 1 of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2131 containing the list of cooperating companies not included in the sample:

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the

Official Journal of the European Union

.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 3 August 2023.

For the Commission

The President

Ursula VON DER LEYEN

(1)  

OJ L 176, 30.6.2016, p. 21

.

(2)  

OJ L 189, 15.7.2019, p. 8

.

(3)  Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 412/2013 of 13 May 2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of ceramic tableware and kitchenware originating in the People’s Republic of China (

OJ L 131, 15.5.2013, p. 1

).

(4)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2131 of 28 November 2019 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1198 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of ceramic tableware and kitchenware originating in the People’s Republic of China following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council (

OJ L 321, 12.12.2019, p. 139

).

(5)  Orbis is a global data provider of corporate information covering more than 220 million companies across the globe. It mainly provides standardised information on private companies and corporate structures.

(6)  Dun and Bradstreet (D&B) software solution provides commercial data, analytics, and insights for businesses on private companies and corporate structures.

(7)  Qichacha is a private, for-profit Chinese-owned database that delivers business data, credit information, and analytics on China-based private and public companies to consumers/professionals.

(8)  Article 127 of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/2447 of 24 November 2015 laying down detailed rules for implementing certain provisions of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down the Union Customs Code (

OJ L 343, 29.12.2015, p. 558

) (the EU Customs Code), stipulates that two persons shall be deemed to be related if one of the following conditions is fulfilled: (a) they are officers or directors of the other person’s business; (b) they are legally recognised partners in business; (c) they are employer and employee; (d) a third party directly or indirectly owns or controls or holds 5 % or more of the outstanding voting stock or shares of both of them; (e) one of them directly or indirectly controls the other; (f) both of them are directly or indirectly controlled by a third person; (g) together they control a third person directly or indirectly; (h) they are members of the same family. Persons who are associated in business with one another in that one is the sole agent, sole distributor or sole concessionaire, however described, of the other shall be deemed to be related only if they fall within the criteria referred to in the preceding sentence.