Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1924 of 10 October 2022 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of sodium cyclamate originating in the People’s Republic of China and Indonesia following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council

	2018	2019	2020	Review Investigation period
Volume of imports from the PRC under the normal regime	1 206	1 204	2 157	2 116
Index (FY2018 = 100)	100	100	179	175
Market share	[26  % – 33  %]	[26  % – 34  %]	[41  % – 54  %]	[45  % – 59  %]
Index (FY2018 = 100)	100	102	162	177
Volume of imports from the PRC under the inward processing regime	166	268	246	254
Index (FY2018 = 100)	100	162	148	153
Market share	[2  % – 6  %]	[3  % – 10  %]	[3  % – 8  %]	[3  % – 10  %]
Index (FY2018 = 100)	100	165	134	155
Source: Eurostat and Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Eurostat and Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Eurostat and Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Eurostat and Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Eurostat and Questionnaire reply of the Union producer

• (154) 12 % of total imports from the PRC were imported via inward processing system in the review investigation period. Their volume increased by 53 % over the period considered.

5.3.3.   Prices of the imports from the countries concerned and price undercutting

• (155) The Commission established the prices of imports on the basis of Eurostat.

• (156) The weighted average price of imports into the Union from the countries concerned developed as follows:

Table 5

Import prices (EUR/tonne)

	2018	2019	2020	Review Investigation period
The PRC	1 901	1 889	1 678	1 608
Index (FY2018 = 100)	100	99	88	85
Indonesia	1 907	1 864	1 750	2 012
Index (FY2018 = 100)	100	98	92	105
Source: Eurostat (without imports under inward processing)	Source: Eurostat (without imports under inward processing)	Source: Eurostat (without imports under inward processing)	Source: Eurostat (without imports under inward processing)	Source: Eurostat (without imports under inward processing)

• (157) The import price from the PRC had a decreasing trend of the period considered and decreased by 15 % in the review investigation period as compared to the beginning of the period considered.

• (158) The import price from Indonesia decreased by 8 % between 2018 and 2020. For the review investigation period, the Commission notes that the volume of imports from Indonesia were negligible, and therefore, their price cannot be considered representative.

• (159) In view of the non-cooperation of the Chinese and Indonesian exporting producers as stated in recitals 33 and 128, the Commission determined the price undercutting during the review investigation period by comparing the weighted average sales price of the sole Union producer charged to unrelated customers in the Union market, adjusted to an ex-works level and the weighted average export prices from 14(6) database, including the anti-dumping duty, with appropriate adjustments for the post-importation costs. Regarding the imports from the PRC, the price of the volumes of sodium cyclamate imported under the inward processing system were not taken into account as these volumes are not released in free circulation into the Union market.

• (160) The result of the comparison was expressed as a percentage of the sole Union producers’ turnover during the review investigation period. For the PRC, it showed undercutting margin of [17 % – 26 %].

• (161) As explained in recital 150, the volume of imports from Indonesia were negligible and therefore no undercutting margin was calculated for Indonesia.

5.4.   Imports from third countries other than the PRC and Indonesia

• (162) The imports of sodium cyclamate from third countries other than the PRC and Indonesia represent a market share of 1 to 8 % over the period considered. As sodium cyclamate is produced only in the PRC, in Indonesia and in the Union, the Commission considered that these imports were wrongly classified as sodium cyclamate, or their origin was wrongly declared. For this reason, the Commission did not consider these imports further in its injury analysis.

5.5.   Economic situation of the Union industry

5.5.1.   General remarks

• (163) The assessment of the economic situation of the Union industry included an evaluation of all economic indicators having a bearing on the state of the Union industry during the period considered.

5.5.2.   Production, production capacity and capacity utilisation

• (164) The total Union production, production capacity and capacity utilisation developed over the period considered as follows:

Table 6

Production, production capacity and capacity utilisation

	2018	2019	2020	Review Investigation period
Production volume (tonnes)	[2 343 – 2 928 ]	[2 184 – 2 730 ]	[2 147 – 2 684 ]	[1 462 – 1 827 ]
Index (FY2018 = 100)	100	93	92	62
Production capacity (tonnes)	[4 000 – 5 000 ]	[4 000 – 5 000 ]	[4 000 – 5 000 ]	[4 000 – 5 000 ]
Index (FY2018 = 100)	100	100	100	100
Capacity utilisation	[44  % – 70  %]	[41  % – 66  %]	[40  % – 64  %]	[27  % – 44  %]
Index (FY2018 = 100)	100	93	92	62
Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer

• (165) The production volume of the Union industry decreased significantly by 38 % during the period considered, in line with the decrease in sales described in recitals 168 to 170.

• (166) In view of decreasing sales, the Union industry had no incentive to expand capacity. Therefore, the production capacity of the Union industry was maintained at the same level during the period considered.

• (167) The capacity utilisation decreased in line with decrease of the annual production volume described in recital 165, by 38 %.

5.5.3.   Sales volume and market share

• (168) The Union industry’s sales volume and market share developed over the period considered as follows:

Table 7

Sales volume (tonnes) and market share

	2018	2019	2020	Review Investigation period
Total sales volume on the Union market	[2 145 – 2 776 ]	[2 077 – 2 689 ]	[1 705 – 2 206 ]	[1 350 – 1 747 ]
Index (FY2018 = 100)	100	97	79	63
Market share	[57  % – 66  %]	[56  % – 65  %]	[41  % – 48  %]	[36  % – 42  %]
Index (FY2018 = 100)	100	99	72	64
Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer

• (169) The sales volume of the Union industry had a decreasing trend during the whole period considered. Overall, the sales volume decreased significantly by 37 %.

• (170) The market share of the Union industry also decreased significantly by 36 % during the period considered in the favour of the Chinese imports as described in recital 149.

5.5.4.   Growth

• (171) As stated above, while the Union consumption in the free market remained stable over the period considered, the sales volume of the Union industry decreased significantly, by 37 %, which translated into a loss of market share of 36 %.

5.5.5.   Employment and productivity

• (172) Employment and productivity developed over the period considered as follows:

Table 8

Employment and productivity

	2018	2019	2020	Review Investigation period
Number of employees	[15 – 22 ]	[15 – 22 ]	[15 – 22 ]	[15 – 22 ]
Index (FY2018 = 100)	100	100	100	100
Productivity (tonnes/employee)	[119 – 152 ]	[111 – 141 ]	[109 – 139 ]	[74 – 95 ]
Index (FY2018 = 100)	100	93	92	62
Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer

• (173) From 2018 to the end of the investigation period, the Union industry maintained constant its number of employees.

• (174) At the same time, in line with the decrease in production volume, the productivity decreased by 38 % of the same period.

5.5.6.   Magnitude of the dumping margin and recovery from past dumping

• (175) All dumping margins were significantly above the de minimis level. The impact of the magnitude of the actual margins of dumping on the Union industry was substantial, given the continued imports of significant volume of sodium cyclamate at dumped prices of imports from Chinese producers.

• (176) Continuous unfair pricing by exporters from the PRC made it also impossible for the Union industry to recover from the past dumping practices.

5.5.7.   Prices and factors affecting prices

• (177) The weighted average unit sales prices of the sole Union producer to unrelated customers in the Union developed over the period considered as follows:

Table 9

Sales prices and cost of production in the Union (EUR/tonne)

	2018	2019	2020	Review Investigation period
Average unit sales price in the Union	[1 749 – 2 565 ]	[1 797 – 2 636 ]	[1 817 – 2 664 ]	[1 807 – 2 650 ]
Index (FY2018 = 100)	100	103	104	103
Unit cost of production Index (FY2018 = 100)	100	106	97	115
Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer

• (178) The Union industry’s average unit sales price to unrelated customers slightly increased by 3 % over the period considered.

• (179) The cost of production fluctuated during the period considered. It first increased by 6 % between 2018 and 2019, and then decreased by 3 % in 2020 as compared to 2018, due to the decrease in the price of several main raw materials. Throughout the review investigation period, the unit cost of production increased by 15 % due to the fixed costs following the significant decrease in the production volume as stated in recital 165.

5.5.8.   Labour costs

• (180) The average labour costs of the sole Union producer developed over the period considered as follows:

Table 10

Average labour costs per employee

	2018	2019	2020	Review Investigation period
Average labour costs per employee (EUR)	[28 234 – 41 409 ]	[33 039 – 48 457 ]	[32 903 – 48 258 ]	[31 458 – 46 138 ]
Index (FY2018 = 100)	100	117	117	111
Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer

• (181) The Union industry labour costs followed the Spanish law requirements. The average labour costs per employee increased by 11 % over the period considered.

5.5.9.   Inventories

• (182) Stock levels of the sole Union producer developed over the period considered as follows:

Table 11

Inventories

	2018	2019	2020	Review Investigation period
Closing stocks (tonnes)	[165 – 238 ]	[115 – 166 ]	[419 – 606 ]	[157 – 227 ]
Index (FY2018 = 100)	100	70	255	95
Closing stocks as a percentage of production	[6  % – 9  %]	[5  % – 7  %]	[17  % – 25  %]	[10  % – 14  %]
Index (FY2018 = 100)	100	75	278	153
Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer

• (183) Inventories fluctuated over the period considered. It first decreased by 30 % between 2019 and 2018 and then increased by 155 % in 2020 as compared to 2018. This increased in inventories was due to the fact that the Union industry kept its production volume at almost the same level of the previous year despite the loss in sales volume in order to take advantage of the decrease in the price of raw materials and produce at lower cost of production. Overall, the stocks levels decreased by 5 % over the period considered.

5.5.10.   Profitability, cash flow, investments, return on investments and ability to raise capital

• (184) Profitability, cash flow, investments and return on investments of the sole Union producer developed over the period considered as follows:

Table 12

Profitability, cash flow, investments and return on investments

	2018	2019	2020	Review Investigation period
Profitability of sales in the Union to unrelated customers (% of sales turnover) Index (FY2018 = 100)	- 100	- 196	230	- 440
Cash flow (EUR)	[- 203 365 ; -67 788 ]	[- 332 146 ; - 110 715 ]	[8 815 – 2 938 ]	[- 838 886 ; - 279 629 ]
Index (FY2018 = 100)	- 100	- 163	104	- 413
Investments (EUR)	[0 – 50 000 ]	[0 – 50 000 ]	[0 – 50 000 ]	[0 – 50 000 ]
Index (FY2018 = 100)	100	100	100	100
Return on investments	[-41  %; -14  %]	[-90  %; -30  %]	[22  %; 65  %]	[- 139  %; -46  %]
Index (FY2018 = 100)	- 100	- 221	261	- 344
Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer

• (185) The Commission established the profitability of the sole Union producer by expressing the pre-tax net profit of the sales of the like product to unrelated customers in the Union as a percentage of the turnover of those sales. Over the period considered the Union industry was loss making, with the exception of 2020 when the unit cost of production temporarily decreased due to the decrease in the price of several raw materials. However, in the RIP the unit cost of production increased to even higher levels than the previous years.

• (186) The net cash flow is the ability of the Union producer to self-finance its activities. The cash flow was negative during the period considered with the exception of 2020 in line with the profitability. The sale of sodium cyclamate does not generate sufficient cash. In order to be able to maintain production of sodium cyclamate on the Union market the sole Union producer is financing its sodium cyclamate activity from the sale of other products.

• (187) In view of the losses incurred during almost the whole period considered and the negative cash flow, the Union industry made low investments.

• (188) The return on investments is the profit in percentage of the net book value of investments. It followed the same trend as the profitability.

5.6.   Conclusion on injury

• (189) Despite the measures in force, the dumped imports mainly from China continued in significant volume and increasing trend.

• (190) The Union industry is in a difficult financial situation. Almost all of the indicators showed a negative trend.

• (191) Despite the measures in force, the Union industry lost sales in favour of the Chinese imports at dumped prices, which increased their market share and forced the Union industry to register losses almost the whole period considered.

• (192) Based on the above, the Commission concluded that the Union industry suffered material injury within the meaning of Article 3(5) of the basic Regulation during the review investigation period.

6. CAUSATION

• (193) In accordance with Article 3(6) of the basic Regulation, the Commission examined whether the dumped imports from the countries concerned caused material injury to the Union industry. In accordance with Article 3(7) of the basic Regulation, the Commission also examined whether other known factors could at the same time have injured the Union industry. The Commission ensured that any possible injury caused by factors other than the dumped imports from the countries concerned was not attributed to the dumped imports. These factors are: effects of dumped imports, import from third countries, export performance of the Union industry and consumption.

6.1.   Effects of the dumped imports

• (194) Regarding the PRC, the investigation revealed that the volume of imports remained significantly above de minimis levels during the entire period considered. These imports were found to undercut the Union industry prices by [17 % – 26 %] with anti-dumping duties and [27 % – 36 %] without the anti-dumping duty. Furthermore, as the Union industry is loss-making and given the target profit of 10 % as established during the original investigation ⁵⁸, Chinese imports are clearly entering the Union at injurious and decreasing prices. Furthermore, the Chinese imports increase their market share significantly to the loss of the Union industry.

• (195) As regards Indonesia, the investigation revealed that the imports were negligible between 2019 and the review investigation period.

• (196) Considering the above, the Commission concluded that the material injury suffered by the Union industry was caused by the imports from the PRC and it could not have been caused by the imports from Indonesia due to their low volumes.

6.2.   Effects of other factors

6.2.1.   Imports from third countries

• (197) As stated in recital 162, sodium cyclamate is produced only in the PRC, in Indonesia and in the Union and therefore there were no imports of sodium cyclamate from other third countries into the Union during the period considered.

6.2.2.   Export performance of the Union industry

• (198) The volume of exports of the sole Union producer developed over the period considered as follows:

Table 13

Export performance of the Union producer

	2018	2019	2020	Review Investigation period
Export volume (tonnes)	[35 – 51 ]	[32 – 47 ]	[43 – 64 ]	[44 – 64 ]
Index (FY2018 = 100)	100	92	124	126
Average price (EUR/tonne)	[2 739 – 3 652 ]	[2 695 – 3 593 ]	[2 797 – 3 729 ]	[2 684 – 3 579 ]
Index (FY2018 = 100)	100	98	102	98
Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer	Source: Questionnaire reply of the Union producer

• (199) The export volume increased by 26 % over the period considered. However, they remained at low volumes due to the low prices of the Chinese and Indonesian exporters on other markets.

• (200) The average sales prices to third countries were above the average sales prices on the Union market.

6.2.3.   Consumption

• (201) Despite a stable Union consumption as stated in recital 145, the Chinese imports managed to increase their market share to the detriment of the Union industry.

6.3.   Conclusion on causation

• (202) Considering the above, the Commission concluded that the material injury suffered by the Union industry was caused by the imports from the PRC.

7. LIKELIHOOD OF CONTINUATION AND/OR RECURRENCE OF INJURY

7.1.   Likelihood of continuation of injury from the PRC

• (203) The Commission concluded in recital 192 that the Union industry suffered material injury by the dumped imports from the PRC during the review investigation period. Therefore, the Commission assessed, in accordance with Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation, whether there would be a likelihood of continuation of injury caused by those imports if the measures were allowed to lapse.

• (204) In this respect the following elements were analysed by the Commission: the production volume and spare capacity in PRC, the attractiveness of the Union market for Chinese exporting producers, the likely price levels of imports from the PRC in the absence of anti-dumping measures, and their impact on the Union industry.

• (205) As explained in recitals 116 to 124, based on the spare capacity in the PRC and the high attractiveness of the Union market for Chinese exporting producers, there is a strong likelihood that the expiry of the anti-dumping measures would result in an increase of exports.

• (206) Regarding the likely effect of such imports, the Commission examined their likely price levels should measures be allowed to lapse. In this regard, the Commission considered the import price levels during the review investigation period without anti-dumping duty a reasonable indication. On this basis, the Commission established significant undercutting of the Union industry prices of [27 % – 36 %].

• (207) Indeed, Chinese imports have entered the Union at injurious prices throughout the period considered, preventing the Union industry from achieving an appropriate level of profit (10 %) and, in fact, making the industry loss making throughout almost the entire period considered, as noted in recital 185. Those imports not only exerted price pressure on Union prices but also took over volumes from the Union industry by significantly increasing Chinese exporting producers’ market share to the detriment of the Union industry.

• (208) Therefore, the Commission concluded that the situation of the Union industry, which was already of material injury, would further deteriorate should the measures be allowed to lapse. Indeed, in the absence of measures, Chinese dumped imports at injurious prices would likely exert further downward pressure on the sales prices in the Union market. The Union industry would very likely be obliged to decrease its sales prices which would lead to further loss of profitability and, in all likelihood, significant losses in the short term.

• (209) Alternatively, any attempt to increase its sales prices to profitable levels on the side of the Union industry would very likely lead to a loss of sales volumes and market share to the low-priced imports. Given the spare capacity in the PRC, Chinese exporting producers would be able to increase their exports in the short term and further gain market share at the expense of the Union industry. The Union industry would very likely lose economies of scale, which would lead to an increase of the unit production cost and consequently cause further decreases in profitability to the Union industry. As a consequence, the viability of the Union industry would be at serious risk.

• (210) In view of the above, the Commission concluded that allowing measures to lapse would in all likelihood result in a significant increase of dumped imports from the PRC at injurious price levels, and therefore further aggravating the injury suffered by the Union industry. As a consequence, the viability of the Union industry would be at serious risk.

7.2.   Likelihood of recurrence of injury from Indonesia

• (211) The Commission concluded in recital 192 that the Union industry suffered material injury during the review investigation period. The Commission also concluded in recital 196 that the injury to the Union industry observed during the review investigation period could not have been caused by imports from Indonesia due to their very limited volume present on the Union market. Therefore, the Commission assessed, in accordance with Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation, whether there would be a likelihood of recurrence of injury caused by the dumped imports from Indonesia if the measures against were allowed to lapse.

• (212) In this regard, the Commission examined the production capacity and spare capacity in Indonesia, the attractiveness of the Union market for the Indonesian exporting producers, the likely price levels of imports from Indonesia in the absence of anti-dumping measures, and their impact on the Union industry.

• (213) As explained in recitals 130 to 132, based on the substantial excess capacity of the Indonesian producers, the export prices and the attractiveness of the Union market for Indonesian exporting producers, the Commission concluded that there is a strong likelihood that the expiry of the anti-dumping measures would result in an increase of exports.

• (214) The Commission examined the likely price levels of Indonesian imports should measures be allowed to lapse based on Indonesian import price levels during the review investigation period to third countries and their effect on the situation of the Union industry. The Indonesian export price to third countries undercut the Union industry prices by more than 50 %. This shows that, should the measures be allowed to lapse, Indonesian producers would have an incentive to export to the Union and at injurious price levels, increasing the price pressure on the Union industry that would then either lose sales volume or be obliged to decrease their price levels.

• (215) In view of the above findings, namely the presence of spare capacity in Indonesia, the level of Indonesian export prices, the attractiveness of the Union market and the expected price levels of imports from Indonesia in the absence of anti-dumping measures and their impact on the Union industry, is the Commission concluded that the absence of measures would in all likelihood result in a significant increase of dumped imports from Indonesia at injurious prices and injury caused thereby would be likely to recur.

8. UNION INTEREST

• (216) In accordance with Article 21 of the basic Regulation, the Commission examined whether maintaining the existing anti-dumping measures would be against the interest of the Union as whole. The determination of the Union interest was based on an appreciation of all the various interests involved, including those of the Union industry, importers/traders and users.

• (217) All interested parties were given the opportunity to make their views known pursuant to Article 21(2) of the basic Regulation.

• (218) On this basis the Commission examined whether, despite the conclusions on the likelihood of continuation of dumping and injury for the PRC and of recurrence of dumping and injury for Indonesia, compelling reasons existed which would lead to the conclusion that it was not in the Union interest to maintain the existing measures.

8.1.   Interest of the Union industry

• (219) The investigation established that during almost the whole period considered, despite the existing measures against Indonesia and the PRC, the Union industry remained loss-making and lost production, sales volume and market share in the Union market. During the same period, imports from the PRC remained significant and undercut the Union industry’s prices. As explained above, should measures be allowed to lapse, there is a high likelihood that Chinese imports would further increase and Indonesian imports would resume at dumped prices. This would likely lead to further deterioration of the already precarious situation of the Union industry and could ultimately force it to cease the production of sodium cyclamate altogether, resulting in loss of employment and alternative sources of supply in the Union.

• (220) Should measures be maintained, it is expected that the Union industry would be able to increase its prices, production and volume and gradually return to profit.

• (221) The Commission therefore concluded that maintaining the measures in force against the PRC and Indonesia would be in the interest of the Union industry.

8.2.   Interest of unrelated importers/traders

• (222) One importer submitted a questionnaire reply. It claimed that in view of the limited size of the sodium cyclamate business in its total turnover, it did not have a firm position on the continuation of the anti-dumping measures. It was also stated that main decisive factor for its activity was to have access to a reliable source of supply which could guarantee a high product quality standard. The total activity of this importer was overall profitable.

• (223) In the previous expiry review the importers did not cooperate and it was concluded that given the non-cooperation of the importers, it was reasonable to assume that sodium cyclamate did not represent a major proportion of the importers/traders’ turnover and that there were no factors suggesting that importers/traders would be disproportionally affected if measures were to be maintained.

• (224) On these grounds, the Commission concluded that should measures be maintained, the impact on the economic situation of the importers is likely not to be significant.

8.3.   Interest of users

• (225) Two users only partially cooperated in this investigation. One of these users was buying from both the Union industry and the Chinese exporters and the other only from the Union industry. Both users were profitable and only one of them stated that it was against the continuation of measures.

• (226) In the previous investigation, it was established that in general sodium cyclamate accounted for a low proportion of the cost of production of users and for this reason, the effect of the imposition of the anti-dumping measure was not significant.

• (227) In view of the above observation that in the absence of measures, the Union industry may be forced to cease the production of sodium cyclamate and in view of the existence of only a few producers of sodium cyclamate globally, the measures are likely to benefit users in so far as they preserve the production of sodium cyclamate in the Union and the choice for users to source sodium cyclamate produced by different competing producers.

• (228) On these grounds, the Commission concluded that should the measures be maintained, the impact on the economic situation of these operators is likely not to be significant.

8.4.   Conclusion on Union interest

• (229) On the basis of the above, the Commission concluded that there were no compelling reasons of the Union interest against the maintenance of the existing measures on imports of sodium cyclamate originating in the PRC and Indonesia.

9. ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES

• (230) On the basis of the conclusions reached by the Commission on the likelihood of continuation of dumping and injury for the PRC and the likelihood of recurrence of dumping and injury for Indonesia as well as Union interest, the anti-dumping measures on sodium cyclamate from the PRC and Indonesia should be maintained.

• (231) To minimize the risks of circumvention due to the difference in duty rates, special measures are needed to ensure the application of the individual anti-dumping duties. The companies with individual anti-dumping duties must present a valid commercial invoice to the customs authorities of the Member States. The invoice must conform to the requirements set out in Article 1(3) of this regulation. Imports not accompanied by that invoice should be subject to the anti-dumping duty applicable to ‘all other companies’.

• (232) While presentation of this invoice is necessary for the customs authorities of the Member States to apply the individual rates of anti-dumping duty to imports, it is not the only element to be taken into account by the customs authorities. Indeed, even if presented with an invoice meeting all the requirements set out in Article 1(3) of this regulation, the customs authorities of Member States must carry out their usual checks and may, like in all other cases, require additional documents (shipping documents, etc.) for the purpose of verifying the accuracy of the particulars contained in the declaration and ensure that the subsequent application of the lower rate of duty is justified, in compliance with customs law.

• (233) Should the exports by one of the companies benefiting from lower individual duty rates increase significantly in volume after the imposition of the measures concerned, such an increase in volume could be considered as constituting in itself a change in the pattern of trade due to the imposition of measures within the meaning of Article 13(1) of the basic Regulation. In such circumstances and provided the conditions are met an anti-circumvention investigation may be initiated. This investigation may, inter alia, examine the need for the removal of individual duty rate(s) and the consequent imposition of a country-wide duty.

• (234) The individual company anti-dumping duty rates specified in this Regulation are exclusively applicable to imports of the product under review originating in the PRC and Indonesia and produced by the named legal entities. Imports of the product under review produced by any other company not specifically mentioned in the operative part of this Regulation, including entities related to those specifically mentioned, should be subject to the duty rate applicable to ‘all other companies’. They should not be subject to any of the individual anti-dumping duty rates.

• (235) A company may request the application of these individual anti-dumping duty rates if it changes subsequently the name of its entity. The request must be addressed to the Commission ⁵⁹. The request must contain all the relevant information enabling to demonstrate that the change does not affect the right of the company to benefit from the duty rate which applies to it. If the change of name of the company does not affect its right to benefit from the duty rate which applies to it, a regulation about the change of name will be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.

• (236) In view of Article 109 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council ⁶⁰, when an amount is to be reimbursed following a judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union, the interest to be paid should be the rate applied by the European Central Bank to its principal refinancing operations, as published in the C series of the Official Journal of the European Union on the first calendar day of each month.

• (237) All interested parties were informed of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of which it was intended to recommend that the existing measures be maintained. They were also granted a period to make representations subsequent to this disclosure. Comments were received from the GOI.

• (238) In their comments following disclosure, the GOI claimed that as the measures have been in place since 2004 it revealed that the applicant was seeking for over protection from the Commission and if the applicant was still suffering material injury it meant that the duties were ineffective and therefore irrelevant for the protection of the applicant.

• (239) In response to this claim it is noted that no time limits restrict the duration of the measures as long as the conditions for their imposition or maintenance of the measures are met. Also, in the case at hand the measures are justified as the findings confirmed likelihood of continuation of dumping and injury for the PRC and recurrence of dumping and injury for Indonesia as stated in recitals 116 to 140 and 203 to 215. Furthermore, in the current investigation carried out pursuant to Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation, the Commission cannot change the level of measures and therefore whether the measures in force are effective or ineffective is irrelevant. Therefore, the claims were rejected.

• (240) The GOI also claimed that the use of anti-dumping measures is only justified to provide remedy to the Union industry when it suffers material injury which is caused by dumped imports from the PRC which were significant and not from Indonesia which were negligible.

• (241) The Commission disagrees with this claim. Even if the imports from Indonesia were negligible and therefore could not cause material injury to the Union industry as stated in recital 196, the investigation concluded likelihood of recurrence of dumping and injury from Indonesia as stated in recitals 127 to 140 and 211 to 215. Pursuant to Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation, the measures in force can be extended when the investigation concludes likelihood of recurrence of dumping and injury as well. Therefore, the claim was rejected.

• (242) Furthermore, the GOI stated that as the imports from Indonesia were negligible, it questioned the Commission’s decision of the likelihood of recurrence of injury from Indonesia and the Commission’s decision to maintain the anti-dumping measures in force for the imports from Indonesia.

• (243) The Commission notes that the GOI did not comment on any element of the analysis of recurrence of dumping and injury presented in recitals 127 to 140 and 211 to 215. Therefore, the claim was rejected as being unsubstantiated.

• (244) The GOI also stated that the Indonesia exporting producers did not cooperate in the current investigation as they were disappointed with the Commission’s decision in the first expiry review investigation in 2010 ⁶¹ when even if the Commission found no dumping for PT Golden Sari it still concluded that dumping continued for a significant part of the Indonesian producers and the Commission still decided to apply anti-dumping measures to this company.

• (245) In an investigation carried out pursuant to Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation, the Commission can only conclude on the continuation or termination of the measures. In such investigation, the Commission cannot change the level of measures even if no dumping is found for one exporter. Therefore, the claim was rejected.

• (246) The measures provided for in this regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee established by Article 15(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Country	Company	Anti-dumping duty (EUR per kilogramme)	TARIC additional code
The People’s Republic of China	Golden Time Enterprise (Shenzhen) Co. Ltd, Shanglilang, Cha Shan Industrial Area, Buji Town, Shenzhen City, Guangdong Province, People’s Republic of China; Golden Time Chemical (Jiangsu) Co., Ltd, No 88 Panyao Road, Nanjing Chemical Industry Park, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, People’s Republic of China	0,23	A473
The People’s Republic of China	Fang Da Food Additive (Shen Zhen) Limited, Gong Le Industrial Estate, Xixian County, Bao An, Shenzhen, 518102, People’s Republic of China	1,17	A471
The People’s Republic of China	Fang Da Food Additive (Yang Quan) Limited, Da Lian Dong Lu, Economic and Technology Zone, Yangquan City, Shanxi 045000, People’s Republic of China	1,17	A472
The People’s Republic of China	All other companies	0,26	A999
Indonesia	PT. Golden Sari (Chemical Industry), Mitra Bahari Blok D1- D2, Jalan Pakin No 1, Sunda Kelapa, Jakarta 14440, Indonesia	0,24	A502
Indonesia	All other companies	0,27	A999

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, 10 October 2022.

For the Commission

The President

Ursula VON DER LEYEN

https://www.tnb.com.my/assets/files/Tariff_Rate_Final_01.Jan.2014.pdf

https://www.tnb.com.my/assets/files/Tariff_Rate_Final_01.Jan.2014.pdf