Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of 30 November 2009 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community

• Coming into Force: 11 January 2010
• End of Effective Date: 19 July 2016
• Celex Number: 32009R1225
• ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2009/1225/oj
• Published date: 22 December 2009
• Date: 30 November 2009
• Official Gazette Publication: Official Journal of the European Union, L 343, 22 December 2009

22.12.2009 EN Official Journal of the European Union L 343/51

---

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 1225/2009

of 30 November 2009

on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community

(codified version)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 133 thereof,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1),

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,

Whereas:

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (2), has been substantially amended several times (3). In the interests of clarity and rationality the said Regulation should be codified.

(2) The multilateral trade negotiations concluded in 1994 led to new Agreements on the implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (hereinafter referred to as ‘GATT’). In the light of the different nature of the new rules for dumping and subsidies respectively, it is also appropriate to have a separate body of Community rules in each of those two areas. Consequently, the rules on protection against subsidies and countervailing duties are contained in a separate Regulation.

(3) The agreement on dumping, namely, the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the 1994 Anti-Dumping Agreement’), contains detailed rules, relating in particular to the calculation of dumping, procedures for initiating and pursuing an investigation, including the establishment and treatment of the facts, the imposition of provisional measures, the imposition and collection of anti-dumping duties, the duration and review of anti-dumping measures and the public disclosure of information relating to anti-dumping investigations. In order to ensure a proper and transparent application of those rules, the language of the agreement should be brought into Community legislation as far as possible.

(4) In applying the rules it is essential, in order to maintain the balance of rights and obligations which the GATT Agreement establishes, that the Community take account of how they are interpreted by the Community's major trading partners.

(5) It is desirable to lay down clear and detailed rules on the calculation of normal value. In particular such value should in all cases be based on representative sales in the ordinary course of trade in the exporting country. It is expedient to give guidance as to when parties may be considered as being associated for the purpose of determining dumping. It is expedient to define the circumstances in which domestic sales may be considered to be made at a loss and may be disregarded, and in which recourse may be had to remaining sales, or to constructed normal value, or to sales to a third country. It is also appropriate to provide for a proper allocation of costs, even in start-up situations, and to lay down guidance as to the definition of start-up and the extent and method of allocation. It is also necessary, when constructing normal value, to indicate the methodology to be applied in determining the amounts for selling, general and administrative costs and the profit margin that should be included in such value.

(6) When determining normal value for non-market economy countries, it appears prudent to set out rules for choosing the appropriate market-economy third country to be used for such purpose and, where it is not possible to find a suitable third country, to provide that normal value may be established on any other reasonable basis.

(7) It is appropriate for the Community's anti-dumping practice to take account of the changed economic conditions in Kazakhstan. In particular, it is appropriate to specify that normal value may be determined in accordance with the rules applicable to market economy countries in cases where it can be shown that market conditions prevail for one or more producers, subject to investigation in relation to the manufacture and sale of the product concerned.

(8) It is also appropriate to grant similar treatment to imports from such countries which are members of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) at the date of the initiation of the relevant anti-dumping investigation.

(9) It is appropriate to specify that an examination of whether market conditions prevail will be carried out on the basis of properly substantiated claims by one or more producers subject to investigation who wish to avail themselves of the possibility to have normal value determined on the basis of rules applicable to market economy countries.

(10) It is expedient to define the export price and to enumerate the adjustments which are to be made in those cases where a reconstruction of this price from the first open-market price is deemed necessary.

(11) For the purpose of ensuring a fair comparison between export price and normal value, it is advisable to list the factors which may affect prices and price comparability and to lay down specific rules as to when and how the adjustments should be made, including the fact that any duplication of adjustments should be avoided. It is also necessary to provide that comparison may be made using average prices although individual export prices may be compared to an average normal value where the former vary by customer, region or time period.

(12) It is necessary to lay down clear and detailed guidance as to the factors which may be relevant for the determination of whether the dumped imports have caused material injury or are threatening to cause injury. In demonstrating that the volume and price levels of the imports concerned are responsible for injury sustained by a Community industry, attention should be given to the effect of other factors and in particular prevailing market conditions in the Community.

(13) It is advisable to define the term ‘Community industry’ and to provide that parties related to exporters may be excluded from such industry, and to define the term ‘related’. It is also necessary to provide for anti-dumping action to be taken on behalf of producers in a region of the Community and to lay down guidelines on the definition of such region.

(14) It is necessary to lay down who may lodge an anti-dumping complaint, including the extent to which it should be supported by the Community industry, and the information on dumping, injury and causation which such complaint should contain. It is also expedient to specify the procedures for the rejection of complaints or the initiation of proceedings.

(15) It is necessary to lay down the manner in which interested parties should be given notice of the information which the authorities require, and should have ample opportunity to present all relevant evidence and to defend their interests. It is also desirable to set out clearly the rules and procedures to be followed during the investigation, in particular the rules whereby interested parties are to make themselves known, present their views and submit information within specified time-limits, if such views and information are to be taken into account. It is also appropriate to set out the conditions under which an interested party may have access to, and comment on, information presented by other interested parties. There should also be cooperation between the Member States and the Commission in the collection of information.

(16) It is necessary to lay down the conditions under which provisional duties may be imposed, including the condition that they may be imposed no earlier than 60 days from initiation and no later than nine months thereafter. For administrative reasons, it is also necessary to provide that such duties may in all cases be imposed by the Commission, either directly for a nine-month period or in two stages of six and three months.

(17) It is necessary to specify procedures for accepting undertakings which eliminate dumping and injury instead of imposing provisional or definitive duties. It is also appropriate to lay down the consequences of breach or withdrawal of undertakings and that provisional duties may be imposed in cases of suspected violation or where further investigation is necessary to supplement the findings. In accepting undertakings, care should be taken that the proposed undertakings, and their enforcement, do not lead to anti-competitive behaviour.

(18) It is necessary to provide that the termination of cases should, irrespective of whether definitive measures are adopted or not, normally take place within 12 months, and in no case later than 15 months, from the initiation of the investigation. Investigations or proceedings should be terminated where the dumping is de minimis or the injury is negligible, and it is appropriate to define those terms. Where measures are to be imposed, it is necessary to provide for the termination of investigations and to lay down that measures should be less than the margin of dumping if such lesser amount would remove the injury, as well as to specify the method of calculating the level of measures in cases of sampling.

(19) It is necessary to provide for retroactive collection of provisional duties if that is deemed appropriate and to define the circumstances which may trigger the retroactive application of duties to avoid the undermining of the definitive measures to be applied. It is also necessary to provide that duties

...