Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/87 of 21 January 2015 accepting the undertakings offered in connection with the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of citric acid originating in the People's Republic of China
Grade B
mapped from publisher markup. A grade says how a document's structure was obtained, not how reliable the law is.
Address https://gelex.eu/eli/EU/decision/2015/87@2015-01-21/en
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of 30 November 2009 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (the basic Regulation), and in particular Article 8 thereof,
After consulting the Committee established by Article 15(1) of the basic Regulation,
Whereas: PROCEDURE
(1) On 30 November 2013, the European Commission (the Commission) announced by a notice published in the Official Journal of the European Union, the initiation of an expiry review and of partial interim reviews (reviews) of the anti-dumping measures applicable to imports into the Union of citric acid originating in the People's Republic of China (PRC).
(2) The definitive findings and conclusions of the reviews are set out in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/82 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of citric acid originating in the PRC following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation and of partial interim reviews pursuant to Article 11(3) of the basic Regulation.
(3) It is noted that the measures in force have the form of undertakings for five exporting producers including a group of exporting producers which were accepted by the Commission Decision 2008/899/EC (undertakings currently in force).
UNDERTAKINGS
(4) Prior to the adoption of definitive anti-dumping measures, the same five cooperating exporting producers in the PRC who are parties to the undertakings currently in force mentioned in recital 3 above, namely COFCO Biochemical (Anhui), Jiangsu Guoxin Union Energy (previously Yixing-Union Biochemical), the RZBC group, TTCA and Weifang Ensign Industry, offered new price undertakings in accordance with Article 8 of the basic Regulation with the purpose of replacing the undertakings currently in force.
(5) As in the undertakings currently in force, in these revised undertaking offers, the exporting producers have offered to sell citric acid at or above price levels which eliminate the revised injurious effects of dumping.
(6) In addition, the offers provide for the indexation of the minimum import prices given that the prices of citric acid varied significantly before, during and after the investigation period. The indexation is made in accordance with public quotations of corn in the EU, the main raw material normally used in the production of citric acid.
(7) Moreover, the exporting producers, in order to reduce the risk of price violations by means of cross-compensation of prices, offered to report all non-EU sales to those customers whose organisation or structure extends beyond the EU, should the exporting producer sell to such customers in the EU.
(8) The exporting producers will also provide the Commission with regular and detailed information concerning their exports to the EU, meaning that the undertakings can be monitored effectively by the Commission. Furthermore, the sales structure of these companies is such that the Commission considers the risk of circumventing the agreed undertakings to be limited.
(9) It is noted also that the China Chamber of Commerce of Metals, Minerals and Chemicals Importers and Exporters (CCCMC) is joining the five companies mentioned in recital 4, and that therefore the CCCMC will play also an active role in the monitoring of the undertakings.
(10) In view of this, the undertakings offered by the exporting producers and CCCMC are acceptable.
(11) In order to enable the Commission to monitor effectively the companies' compliance with the undertakings, when the request for release for free circulation pursuant to the undertakings is presented to the relevant customs authority, exemption from the anti-dumping duty will be conditional upon the presentation of an invoice containing at least the items of information listed in the Annex to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/82. This level of information is also necessary to enable customs authorities to ascertain with sufficient precision that the shipment corresponds to the commercial documents. Where no such invoice is presented, or when the other conditions provided for by the abovementioned Implementing Regulation are not met, the appropriate rate of anti-dumping duty shall instead be payable.
(12) To further ensure the respect of the undertakings, importers have been made aware by the abovementioned Implementing Regulation that the non-fulfilment of the conditions provided for by that Regulation, or the withdrawal by the Commission of the acceptance of the undertakings, may lead to a customs debt being incurred for the relevant transactions.
(13) In the event of a breach or withdrawal of the undertaking, or in case of withdrawal of the acceptance of the undertaking by the Commission, the anti-dumping duty imposed in accordance with Article 9(4) of the basic Regulation shall automatically apply pursuant to Article 8(9) of the basic Regulation,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The undertakings offered by the exporting producers mentioned below together with the China Chamber of Commerce of Metals, Minerals and Chemicals Importers and Exporters, in connection with the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of citric acid originating in the People's Republic of China, are hereby accepted. Country Company Taric Additional Code People's Republic of China COFCO Biochemical (Anhui) Co., Ltd — No 1 COFCO Avenue, Bengbu City 233010, Anhui Province A874 Manufactured by RZBC Co., Ltd — No 9 Xinghai West Road, Rizhao City, Shandong Province, PRC and sold by its related sales company RZBC Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd — No 66 Lvzhou South Road, Rizhao City, Shandong Province A926 Manufactured by RZBC (Juxian) Co., Ltd — No 209 Laiyang Road (West Side of North Chengyang Road), Juxian Economic Development Zone, Rizhao City, Shandong Province, PRC and sold by its related sales company RZBC Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd — No 66 Lvzhou South Road, Rizhao City, Shandong Province A927 TTCA Co., Ltd — West, Wenhe Bridge North, Anqiu City, Shandong Province A878 Jiangsu Guoxin Union Energy Co., Ltd — No 1 Redian Road, Yixing Economic Development Zone, Jiangsu Province A879 Weifang Ensign Industry Co., Ltd — No 1567 Changsheng Street, Changle, Weifang, Shandong Province A882
Article 2
Decision 2008/899/EC is hereby repealed.
Article 3
This Decision shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Done at Brussels, 21 January 2015. For the Commission The President Jean-Claude Juncker
Versions
Cited by
- Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/704 of 11 May 2016 withdrawing the acceptance of the undertaking for two exporting producers and amending Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/87 accepting the undertakings offered in connection with the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of citric acid originating in the People's Republic of China Regulation · Grade B
Following the reviews, the Commission accepted price undertakings, inter alia, from Weifang and TTCA together with the Chamber, by Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/87.
- Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/704 of 11 May 2016 withdrawing the acceptance of the undertaking for two exporting producers and amending Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/87 accepting the undertakings offered in connection with the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of citric acid originating in the People's Republic of China Regulation · Grade B
Therefore, in accordance with Article 8(9) of the basic Regulation and also in accordance with the relevant clauses of the undertaking authorising the Commission to unilaterally withdraw the undertaking, the Commission has concluded that the acceptance of the undertaking offered by Weifang and TTCA should be withdrawn and Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/87 should be amended. Accordingly, the definitive anti-dumping duty imposed by Article 1 of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/82 should apply to imports of the product concerned produced by the companies Weifang Ensign Industry Co., Ltd (Taric
- Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/704 of 11 May 2016 withdrawing the acceptance of the undertaking for two exporting producers and amending Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/87 accepting the undertakings offered in connection with the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of citric acid originating in the People's Republic of China Regulation · Grade B
The table of Article 1 in Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/87 is replaced by the following table: Country Company Taric Additional Code People's Republic of China COFCO Biochemical (Anhui) Co., Ltd — No 1 COFCO Avenue, Bengbu City 233010, Anhui Province A874 Manufactured by RZBC Co., Ltd — No 9 Xinghai West Road, Rizhao City, Shandong Province, PRC and sold by its related sales company RZBC Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd — No 66 Lvzhou South Road, Rizhao City, Shandong Province A926 Manufactured by RZBC (Juxian) Co., Ltd — No 209 Laiyang Road (West Side of North Chengyang Road), Juxian Economic Developme
- Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/738 of 1 March 2024 withdrawing the acceptance of the undertaking for all exporting producers, amending Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/607 and repealing the Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/87 accepting the undertakings offered in connection with the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of citric acid originating in the People’s Republic of China Regulation · Grade B
The Commission also assessed the breach of trust in the light of the role of the CCCMC in the implementing and monitoring of the undertaking. As it has been noted in the Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/87, the undertakings offered have been accepted due to joining the CCCMC to the companies offering undertakings and its active role in facilitating the monitoring of the undertakings. The CCCMC directly or indirectly confirming the accuracy of the MIP to the third party not only breached its consultation obligation, but also harmed the trust on which the undertakings have been based.
- Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/738 of 1 March 2024 withdrawing the acceptance of the undertaking for all exporting producers, amending Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/607 and repealing the Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/87 accepting the undertakings offered in connection with the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of citric acid originating in the People’s Republic of China Regulation · Grade B
In accordance with Article 8(9) of the basic Regulation and the relevant clauses of the undertakings authorising the Commission to unilaterally withdraw the undertakings, the Commission concluded that the acceptance of the undertakings offered by COFCO, RZBC and Guoxin Union jointly with the CCCMC should be withdrawn and that Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/87 and preceding Decision of 2 December 2008 (2008/899/EC) should be repealed. Accordingly, the definitive anti-dumping duty imposed by Article 1 of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/607 should be collected as regards imports of the product
- Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/738 of 1 March 2024 withdrawing the acceptance of the undertaking for all exporting producers, amending Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/607 and repealing the Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/87 accepting the undertakings offered in connection with the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of citric acid originating in the People’s Republic of China Regulation · Grade B
Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/87 and Decision 2008/899/EC are hereby repealed.
- Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/607 of 14 April 2021 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of citric acid originating in the People’s Republic of China as extended to imports of citric acid consigned from Malaysia, whether declared as originating in Malaysia or not, following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council Regulation · Grade B
The name of the official of the company that has issued the commercial invoice and the following signed declaration: I, the undersigned, certify that the sale for direct export to the European Union of the goods covered by this invoice is being made within the scope and under the terms of the Undertaking offered by (COMPANY), and accepted by the European Commission through Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/87. I declare that the information provided in this invoice is complete and correct.
- Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/82 of 21 January 2015 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of citric acid originating in the People's Republic of China following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 and of partial interim reviews pursuant to Article 11(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 Regulation · Grade B
The Commission, by Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/87, accepted these new undertaking offers replacing the undertakings in force. The new undertaking offers eliminate the injurious effects of dumping and limit to a sufficient degree the risk of circumvention.
- Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/82 of 21 January 2015 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of citric acid originating in the People's Republic of China following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 and of partial interim reviews pursuant to Article 11(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 Regulation · Grade B
Imports declared for release into free circulation which are invoiced by companies from which undertakings are accepted by the Commission and whose names are listed in Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/87 shall be exempt from the anti-dumping duty imposed by Article 1, on condition that:
- Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/82 of 21 January 2015 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of citric acid originating in the People's Republic of China following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 and of partial interim reviews pursuant to Article 11(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 Regulation · Grade B
The name of the official of the company that has issued the commercial invoice and the following signed declaration: I, the undersigned, certify that the sale for direct export to the European Union of the goods covered by this invoice is being made within the scope and under the terms of the Undertaking offered by (COMPANY), and accepted by the European Commission through Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/87. I declare that the information provided in this invoice is complete and correct.
- Request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Hamburg (Germany) lodged on 16 July 2019 — Jebsen & Jessen (GmbH & Co.) KG v Hauptzollamt Hamburg (Case C-543/19) Notice · Grade B
Under the conditions of the dispute in the main proceedings, is the exemption from the anti-dumping duty introduced by Article 1 of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/82 pursuant to Article 2(1) of that regulation precluded if an undertaking invoice pursuant to Article 2(1)(b) of that regulation does not specify Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/87 referred to in point 9 of the annex to that regulation, but specifies rather Decision 2008/899/EC?
- Opinion of Advocate General Hogan delivered on 9 July 2020 Case C‑543/19 Jebsen & Jessen (GmbH & Co.) KG v Hauptzollamt Hamburg (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Hamburg (Finance Court, Hamburg, Germany)) Opinion · Grade B
Article 2 of Implementing Regulation 2015/82 provides: 1. Imports declared for release into free circulation which are invoiced by companies from which undertakings are accepted by the Commission and whose names are listed in [Commission] Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/87 [of 21 January 2015 accepting the undertakings offered in connection with the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of citric acid originating in the People’s Republic of China (OJ 2015 L 15, p. 75)] shall be exempt from the anti-dumping duty imposed by Article 1, on condition that: 2. A customs debt shall be incurred a
- Opinion of Advocate General Hogan delivered on 9 July 2020 Case C‑543/19 Jebsen & Jessen (GmbH & Co.) KG v Hauptzollamt Hamburg (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Hamburg (Finance Court, Hamburg, Germany)) Opinion · Grade B
In accordance with point 9 of the Annex to Implementing Regulation 2015/82, the name of the official of the company that has issued the commercial invoice must be indicated in the commercial invoice accompanying the company’s sales to the European Union of goods which are subject to the undertaking as well as the following signed declaration: I, the undersigned, certify that the sale for direct export to the European Union of the goods covered by this invoice is being made within the scope and under the terms of the Undertaking offered by (COMPANY), and accepted by the European Commission thro
- Opinion of Advocate General Hogan delivered on 9 July 2020 Case C‑543/19 Jebsen & Jessen (GmbH & Co.) KG v Hauptzollamt Hamburg (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Hamburg (Finance Court, Hamburg, Germany)) Opinion · Grade B
Implementing Decision 2015/87
- Opinion of Advocate General Hogan delivered on 9 July 2020 Case C‑543/19 Jebsen & Jessen (GmbH & Co.) KG v Hauptzollamt Hamburg (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Hamburg (Finance Court, Hamburg, Germany)) Opinion · Grade B
Recital 11 of Implementing Decision 2015/87 states that: in order to enable the Commission to monitor effectively the companies’ compliance with the undertakings, when the request for release for free circulation pursuant to the undertakings is presented to the relevant customs authority, exemption from the anti-dumping duty will be conditional upon the presentation of an invoice containing at least the items of information listed in the Annex to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/82. This level of information is also necessary to enable customs authorities to ascertain with sufficient precisio
- Opinion of Advocate General Hogan delivered on 9 July 2020 Case C‑543/19 Jebsen & Jessen (GmbH & Co.) KG v Hauptzollamt Hamburg (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Hamburg (Finance Court, Hamburg, Germany)) Opinion · Grade B
Weifang is mentioned in Article 1 of Implementing Decision 2015/87.
- Opinion of Advocate General Hogan delivered on 9 July 2020 Case C‑543/19 Jebsen & Jessen (GmbH & Co.) KG v Hauptzollamt Hamburg (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Hamburg (Finance Court, Hamburg, Germany)) Opinion · Grade B
In accordance with Articles 2 and 3 of Implementing Decision 2015/87, Commission Decision 2008/899/EC of 2 December 2008 accepting the undertakings offered in connection with the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of citric acid originating in the People’s Republic of China is repealed and Implementing Decision 2015/87 entered into force on 23 January 2015.
- Opinion of Advocate General Hogan delivered on 9 July 2020 Case C‑543/19 Jebsen & Jessen (GmbH & Co.) KG v Hauptzollamt Hamburg (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Hamburg (Finance Court, Hamburg, Germany)) Opinion · Grade B
As the original undertaking invoices referred to Decision 2008/899 and not to Implementing Decision 2015/87, which entered into force on 23 January 2015, the Principal Customs Office refused the requested exemption from anti-dumping duty and, by 12 import duty assessment notices of 10 and 11 March 2015, imposed an anti-dumping duty on the aforementioned imports on the basis of the general anti-dumping duty rate of 42.7%.
- Opinion of Advocate General Hogan delivered on 9 July 2020 Case C‑543/19 Jebsen & Jessen (GmbH & Co.) KG v Hauptzollamt Hamburg (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Hamburg (Finance Court, Hamburg, Germany)) Opinion · Grade B
By letter of 7 August 2015, the applicant contested those decisions in the context of an administrative procedure which is a mandatory prerequisite for a possible later challenge of the decisions in court. As part of that administrative procedure, it submitted corrected undertaking invoices which referred to Implementing Regulation 2015/82 and Implementing Decision 2015/87.
- Opinion of Advocate General Hogan delivered on 9 July 2020 Case C‑543/19 Jebsen & Jessen (GmbH & Co.) KG v Hauptzollamt Hamburg (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Hamburg (Finance Court, Hamburg, Germany)) Opinion · Grade B
On 7 June 2016, the Principal Customs Office partially granted the request of the applicant and applied the individual anti-dumping duty rate. By contrast, on 13 June 2016, it refused exemption from the anti-dumping duties on the ground that the conditions for that exemption to be granted were not fulfilled, since the original undertaking invoices submitted by the applicant contained a reference not to Implementing Decision 2015/87, but to Decision 2008/899.