Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1171 of 30 June 2017 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of melamine 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

(94) CCPIT claimed that the Union industry is uncompetitive and struggles to compete with third countries exports. The party argued that to the extent the Union industry might be suffering injury this injury is caused by the exports from third countries other than the PRC.

(95) The findings and conclusions on injury contradict this claim as it is described in detail in Section 5 below. The measures created fair market conditions under which the Union industry competed with other countries imports including those of the PRC (together representing over 25 % of the Union consumption in the RIP) and at the same time managed to recover from the past injury suffered. This demonstrates that the Union industry is able to withstand competition when the latter is at fair terms.

1. Economic situation of the Union industry

4.1.

General remarks

(96) In accordance with Article 3(5) of the basic Regulation, the Commission examined all economic factors and indices having a bearing on the state of the Union industry.

(97) As mentioned in recital (14), sampling was used for the determination of possible injury suffered by the Union industry.

(98) For the injury determination the Commission distinguished between macroeconomic and microeconomic injury indicators. The Commission evaluated macroeconomic indicators relating to the whole Union industry on the basis of data provided and verified in the questionnaire replies of the sampled Union producers and information in the review request adjusted on the basis of the developments of the sampled Union producers for the RIP. The Commission evaluated microeconomic indicators relating only to the sampled companies on the basis of data contained in the questionnaire replies of the sampled Union producers. Both sets of data were found representative of the economic situation of the Union industry.

(99) The macroeconomic indicators are: production, production capacity, capacity utilisation, employment, productivity, sales volume, market share and Union consumption.

(100) The microeconomic indicators are: average sales prices, stocks, profitability, cash flow, investments, return on investments, and ability to raise capital.

4.2.

Production, production capacity and capacity utilisation

(101) Data on production relating to the Union industry for the period considered was established based on the verified questionnaire replies of the sampled Union producers and the estimated data related to the non-sampled producers as provided in the review request by the applicants as well as Eurostat.

(102) The total Union production remained relatively stable with a peak in 2014 and an overall modest increase of 3 % during the entire period considered. The Union production was estimated at 374540 tonnes in the RIP.

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

Table 5

Production, production capacity and capacity utilisation

Source: Review request, verified questionnaire replies

2012201320142015RIPProduction volume (tonnes)365245383215391761377539374540Index (2012 = 100)100105107103103Production capacity (tonnes)479120479120479120479120479120Index (2012 = 100)100100100100100Capacity utilisation rate (%)7680827978

(104) The production volume remained relatively stable during the period considered. Following the revival of consumption, production increased in 2013 and in 2014. The decrease in 2015 and the RIP (the two periods overlap by nine months) was due to a number of different factors such as production halts for compulsory multiannual maintenance, fire incidents or economic decisions.

(105) The production capacity remained constant throughout the period considered with almost 480000 tonnes. Given the constant production capacity the capacity utilisation rates followed closely the trend of production. Throughout the period considered capacity utilisation remained in the range of 76 % to 82 %.

4.3.

Sales volume and market share

(106) The sales figures in the table below refer to the sales by the Union industry on the Union market to independent customers:

Table 6

Sales volume and market share

Source: Review request, Eurostat, verified questionnaire replies

2012201320142015RIPSales volume (tonnes)269154265738270175271581275365Index (2012 = 100)10099100101102Market share (%)8178787573

(107) Sales volume increased over the period considered by 2 %. This growth rate is below the growth of the Union consumption during the same period (12 %) as shown in Table 1 above. As a consequence, the market share of the Union industry declined by 8 percentage points despite the increase in sales volume. During the RIP the Union industry held around 73 % of the Union market.

(108) The lost market share of the Union industry was shared more or less equally by the third countries suppliers with Russia, Japan and Qatar gaining, Trinidad and Tobago losing, and the United States of America keeping relatively stable sales volumes. The PRC also benefited from the increase in Union consumption albeit to a lesser extent as indicated in recital (88).

4.4.

Sales prices and factors affecting prices

(109) The average sales prices of the Union industry to unrelated customers in the Union developed over the period considered as follows:

Table 7

Average sales prices

Source: verified questionnaire replies

2012201320142015RIPAverage unit selling price in the Union (EUR/tonne)10131245113511391149Index (2012 = 100)100123112112113

(110) The Union industry's average unit sales price to unrelated customers in the Union increased by 13 % over the period considered. There was a relatively big jump in melamine prices in 2013 compared to the depressed price level in 2012 (+ 23 %) due to the increase in demand following the revival of the construction sector. The prices lowered in 2014 to a level around the MIP and remained stable since then.

(111) Sales prices are usually negotiated quarterly and depend principally on the melamine demand/supply ratio on the market (and the perception thereof). Raw material prices do not directly influence the melamine prices i.e. melamine prices are not linked/indexed to the main raw material as it is the case for some other products.

4.5.

Employment and productivity

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

Table 8

Employment and productivity

Source: verified questionnaire replies

2012201320142015RIPNumber of employees555595598611613Index (2012 = 100)100107108110110Productivity (tonne/employee)658644655618611Index (2012 = 100)10098999493

(113) Employment of the Union industry increased by 10 % during the period considered. Productivity expressed by production volume per employee decreased by 7 % during the period considered.

4.6.

Labour costs

(114) The average labour costs of the Union industry developed over the period considered as follows:

Table 9

Labour costs

Source: verified questionnaire replies

2012201320142015RIPAverage labour costs per employee (EUR)6198265247666006771568676Index (2012 = 100)100105107109111

(115) Between 2012 and the RIP, the average labour costs per employee of the sampled Union producers increased by 11 %. The main reason for this increase was annual inflation.

4.7.

Inventories

(116) Stock levels of the Union industry developed over the period considered as follows:

Table 10

Inventories

Source: verified questionnaire replies

2012201320142015RIPClosing stocks (tonnes)2319426792264701492412995Index (2012 = 100)1001161146456Closing stocks as percentage of production (%)6,98,28,04,84,2Index (2012 = 100)1001191177061

(117) Closing stocks both absolute volumes and as a percentage of production decreased sharply (– 44 % and – 39 % respectively) at the end of the RIP. The main reason is that in 2015 the Union industry experienced temporary production shortages as mentioned in recital (104) above which meant that stock levels were used in in order to fulfil all supply obligations.

4.8.

Cost of production

(118) The unit cost of production developed as follows during the period considered:

Table 11

Unit cost of production

Source: verified questionnaire replies

2012201320142015RIPCost of production (EUR/tonne)11141144105210701036Index (2012 = 100)100103949693

(119) Over the period considered the Union industry's unit cost of production of melamine decreased by 7 %.

(120) The main major raw material for melamine is urea, which is either bought or produced in-house by the Union producers from ammonia. Ammonia in turn is principally made from natural gas. On average, urea/ammonia represent around 40 % of the total cost of production for the Union industry. During the period considered ammonia and urea prices followed a downward trend in general and decreased by 23,5 % and 25,5 % respectively between 2012 and the RIP.

4.9.

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

Table 12

Profitability, cash flow, investments and return on investment

Source: verified questionnaire replies

2012201320142015RIPProfitability of sales in the Union to unrelated customers (% of sales turnover)– 13,67,26,99,315,4Year/year (%)—20,8– 0,32,46,1Cash flow (EUR)293913341847614368400854793338663738058Index (2012 = 100)1001424125316312169Investments (EUR)646371313675164115338931363859912234128Index (2012 = 100)100212178211189Return on investments– 28,116,214,920,834,1Year/year (%)—44,3– 1,35,913,3

(121) The Commission established the profitability of the sampled Union producers 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. During the period considered, the Union industry's profitability increased steadily as a combined effect of the increase in sales prices (recital (110)) and the decrease in raw material cost (recital (120)).

(122) Profit fluctuations are rather volatile in this industry as it can be seen from the figures observed during the period considered. The profits moved from unsustainably low levels to a very high peak during the four-year period under relatively stable sales and production volumes. The reason is that the sales price of melamine is strongly influenced by supply and demand balances and the market's perception thereof, while the costs are heavily dependent on the energy prices. This can lead to a situation where in a growing market the sales prices increase even when raw material prices decrease or stagnate, thereby boosting profits, while also the opposite scenario can easily occur when under depressed market conditions producers are forced to lower their prices (or keep them constant) despite increase in their production costs.

(123) The net cash flow is the Union industry's ability to self-finance their activities. The cash flow recovered markedly from 2012 to 2013 (together with many other injury indicators) and then followed the growing trend of the profits.

(124) The investments increased by 89 % over the period considered. There was a significant jump (+ 112 %) from the depressed levels of 2012 to 2013 (when most investment activities were halted due to the overall difficult financial situation) following which the amount of investment remained stable. The levels observed in the period 2013 to the RIP can be considered as standard investment rates covering the continuous maintenance and necessary replacement of machine parts, but without any major re-construction or capacity increase activity.

(125) The return on investments is the profit in percentage of the net book value of fixed assets. As the other financial indicators, the return on investments related to the production and sale of the like product also developed positively reflecting the general upward trend.

1. Conclusion on injury

(126) In a context of an increasing consumption, the Union industry was able to recover from the past dumping and showed a healthy economic situation during the RIP. The measures in force provided for a level playing field on the melamine market which contributed not only to the recovery of the Union industry but also enabled stakeholders to better plan their activities. Furthermore, the measures did not foreclose Chinese producers from the Union market, who continued to be present. Imports from a number of other third countries continued as well but without creating unreasonable price fluctuations and/or false expectations on the market of abundant quantities of low priced melamine.

(127) Consequently, in the period considered almost all injury indicators showed a positive trend. The Union industry increased both its sales and production volumes. Given that Union consumption increased with a higher rate, the market share of the Union industry declined but remained however at a sufficiently high level. The Union industry also increased its sales prices, in line with the general growth in demand rooted in the recovery of the construction sector. Given that raw material prices have declined in the same period, the Union industry's profitability recovered markedly. This also meant that all financial indicators developed favourably.

(128) On the basis of the above, the Commission concluded that the Union industry did not suffer material injury within the meaning of Article 3(5) of the basic Regulation during the review investigation period.

F.

LIKELIHOOD OF RECURRENCE OF INJURY

(129) In accordance with Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation the Commission then assessed whether there is a likelihood of recurrence of injury in case the measures in force against the PRC were allowed to lapse. The following elements were analysed: production and spare capacities in the PRC, existence of anti-dumping or countervailing measures on melamine in other third countries, attractiveness of the Union market, the export behaviour of Chinese exporting producers in other third markets and finally assessment of the likely impact of continuing Chinese dumping on the performance of the Union industry.

1. Production and spare capacity in the PRC

(130) The PRC is the biggest producer of melamine in the world and accounts for around 69 % of world's overall production capacity

HIS Chemical: Chemical Economics Handbook melamine, Annex 9 of the review request.

by the end of 2013. The analysis made in recitals (57) to (61) showed that available spare capacities in China in the review investigation period were very high in comparison to the Chinese domestic market as well as global demand. The Chinese spare capacity was estimated to be at least 500000 tonnes annually exceeding the total Union consumption in the RIP. In this respect it is important to note that the Union market is the second biggest market in the world (after the PRC) for melamine.

(131) In addition, as already mentioned in recital (74), the recent anti-dumping and countervailing duties imposed by the United States of America on melamine of Chinese origin has freed up further significant quantities (in the range of 12000 tonnes) for other destinations.

1. Attractiveness of the Union market and export behaviour of Chinese exporting producers on other third markets

(132) The size of the Union market — being the second biggest in the world — is clearly an important factor contributing to its attractiveness. Also the fact that imports from the PRC have continued despite the measures shows that Chinese exporting producers find the Union market attractive and are keen to continue selling on the Union market and keep their business relations.

(133) A further important factor demonstrating the attractiveness of the Union market is the higher price level as compared to other markets. As already mentioned in recital (72) above, the PRC export prices on most of its other destinations are significantly below the prices of the Union industry on the Union market. Based on the Chinese export database, during the review investigation period over 99 % of Chinese exports to third countries (i.e. 224000 tonnes, a volume equivalent to 57 % of the Union market) were sold on average price 922 EUR/tonne as adjusted

The Chinese export database provides prices on FOB level which were adjusted upward by the average transportation costs to the Union as well post importation costs to obtain an estimated Union landed price.

. This price is well below the Union industry's average price (1149 EUR/tonne) in the same period.

(134) The Union market hence constitutes an attractive market for Chinese exports both in terms of size and price levels.

1. Impact of Chinese dumping on the Union industry

(135) Given the high spare capacities and the attractiveness of the Union market as summarised above, it is likely that significant volumes of low-priced melamine would be available for sale/redirection to the Union already in the short term in case the measures were allowed to lapse.

(136) To assess the likely impact of such low-priced Chinese imports on the Union industry the Commission analysed the situation at other, nearby markets. In this sense, Turkey was considered as a good example as it is a big market with a strong demand

According to IHS Chemicals: Chemical Economics Handbook, Melamine: the Turkish demand has been continuously increasing since 2010 and is estimated to reach around 56000 tonnes in 2018. Turkey accounts for over 80 % of Middle Eastern consumption of melamine. Annex 9 of the review request.

and is in the vicinity of the European Union. In addition, Turkey were the biggest export destination of the PRC with almost 32000 tonnes in the review investigation period. The Chinese import prices to Turkey were reported on FOB basis in the Chinese export database. These prices were first adjusted to CIF Union border with the average transportation and insurance costs and then further increased by post-importation costs (regular duty of 6,5 % and customs clearance costs) to obtain an estimated Union landed price.

(137) As a result, the adjusted average Chinese import price to Turkey was 919 EUR/tonne in the RIP. Taking this adjusted export price to Turkey as an example, these prices undercut the Union industry prices by 20 % during the RIP.

(138) Similar result was obtained (i.e. 19,6 % undercutting) when the Chinese average price to the rest of the world was used

923 EUR/tonne estimated landed Union price from 810 EUR/tonne FOB China.

.

(139) Given that melamine is a homogenous commodity product, the price is the most important factor for customers when choosing between suppliers. For this reason (and also for supply security considerations) most customers source their melamine from at least two or three alternative suppliers and vary the exact order quantities among them according to the price offered. Under these circumstances, it is likely that the entry of low-priced Chinese imports to the Union market would immediately drive down the prices if the measures were allowed to lapse. The Union industry would need to decrease its prices to meet the Chinese competition, similar to what happened in the original investigation where prices of the Union industry were as low as 900 EUR/tonne.

(140) Based on the verified data of the Union producers for the review investigation period, a price decrease to the level of the Turkish prices would result in a drastic decrease in their profitability. In fact it would render the Union industry outright lossmaking by (– 5,5 %). Practically the same result was obtained when using the average price level of all Chinese imports to third countries, i.e. – 5 %. This analysis demonstrates that the Union industry cannot maintain sustainable profit levels should dumped Chinese melamine enter the Union at prices similar to those currently charged in other third markets.

(141) In addition to the price effect, also the likely volumes would have a negative effect on the Union industry. Assuming a rather moderate sales and production volume decrease of 30000 tonnes (around 11 % drop in the sales volume)

The estimation of 30000 tonnes corresponding to 11 % drop in Union sales and 8 % drop in production volume compared to RIP figures is a rather modest estimate given the estimated volume of spare capacities (at least 500000 tonnes) and the volumes freed up from the US market (12000 tonnes). In the original investigation the PRC imported on average 30000 tonnes annually to the Union.

as a result of an increase in Chinese imports, the unit cost of production of the Union industry would increase by 3,6 % from 1037 EUR/tonne to 1073 EUR/tonne further deteriorating its situation.

(142) Given that 25 % of the Union consumption was covered by imports from other countries than the PRC, it cannot be excluded that the dumped Chinese melamine would replace some of these import volumes. At the same time, the average sales price of third countries imports to the Union is below the average sales price of the Union industry meaning that if low priced Chinese melamine would reappear on the Union market, it would first gain market share at the expense of the Union industry, before taking over the market share of the exports from third countries producers to the Union.

(143) In any case, even if the volume effect were to be lower in reality than in the simulation described in recital (141) above, experience from the original investigation shows that also smaller quantities entering the Union at low and dumped price levels could cause injury to the Union industry

In the original investigation in the investigation period the PRC imported 17434 tonnes of melamine to the Union (only 9500 tonnes increase compared to the volumes in the current review investigation period) on average prices of 896 EUR/tonne resulting in -18 % profit margin for the Union industry at the time.

. It is the very low price levels of the Chinese imports together with the prospect of very large quantities that would distort the Union market causing the injury to the Union industry to recur should the measures be allowed to lapse.

(144) Following definitive disclosure CCPIT argued that the extension of the measures is not justified. It referred to the same claims regarding Chinese spare capacity and the attractiveness of the Union market already mentioned in recitals (63) and (76) above. Given that those claims would invalidate the findings on continuation of dumping, the conclusion on the likely recurrence of injury is not valid either. In addition, CCPIT also questioned the appropriateness of the Commission's references to Chinese export prices to Turkey and the rest of the world to assess the price impact of Chinese dumping on the Union industry given that EU regulations and institutions have no jurisdiction over practices in third countries.

(145) In response to this claim, the Commission stressed that looking at Chinese prices to Turkey and the rest of world does not violate the principle of jurisdiction. As explained in detail in recitals (136) to (138), the Commission merely analysed the available export statistics to ascertain the price level on which the Chinese exporting producers were selling melamine to Turkey and the rest of the world during the review investigation period. The prices charged by the Chinese producers to Turkey and the rest of the world are the best indication of prices that the exporting producers are likely to charge on the Union market in case measures were allowed to lapse. Therefore, this claim was rejected.

(146) The arguments regarding available Chinese spare capacity, attractiveness of the Union market and likelihood on continuation of dumping have been refuted in detail in recitals (64) to (66) and (77) above and the Commission has maintained its conclusion on all these points. Consequently, the conclusions regarding recurrence of injury remain unaltered as well.

(147) CCPIT further claimed that there is no causal link between imports of Chinese melamine and the situation of the Union industry. The interested party based its claim on the lack of strong correlation between Chinese import volumes and prices, on the one hand, and the Union industry's profitability, on the other hand. According to CCPIT, other factors such as prices of raw materials and the competitiveness of the Union industry vis-à-vis imports from third countries other than the PRC have a direct causal effect on the situation of the Union industry.

(148) It is recalled that in contrast to investigations under Article 5 of the basic Regulation, Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation does not require the performance of a causation analysis in expiry reviews. Furthermore, in this particular case, the import volumes of melamine from the PRC were negligible during the entire period considered as they were ranging between 0,4 % to 2,5 % of the Union market. Under these circumstances, and even if the fluctuations in raw material prices and third country imports may have an impact on the situation of the Union industry, the possible lack of correlation between the volumes and prices of Chinese melamine imports and the profitability of the Union industry when measures are in place cannot serve as a basis to draw conclusion concerning what is likely to happen on the Union market if measures were allowed to lapse.

(149) On the basis of the above, and in the absence of any further comments, the Commission found that the repeal of the measures would result in recurrence of injury to the Union industry.

G.

UNION INTEREST

1. Preliminary remarks

(150) In accordance with Article 21 of the basic Regulation, the Commission examined whether maintaining the existing measures against the PRC would be against the interest of the Union as a 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 and users.

1. Interest of the Union industry

(151) The Commission established that during the period considered the Union industry gradually recovered from the injury caused by the dumped imports from the PRC. Should the measures against China be repealed, it is, however, likely that the injury would quickly recur as the Union industry would be exposed to significant price pressure from the dumped imports of potentially big volumes from the PRC. As a consequence, the economic situation of the Union industry would deteriorate as described in recitals (140) and (141) above. On the other hand, maintaining the measures would allow the Union industry to maintain its positive economic trends while operating on a fair and competitive Union market.

(152) Following definitive disclosure, CCPIT contested that the measures would be in the Union industry's interest given that the Union industry has already fully recovered. Furthermore CCPIT disputed the need for the measures given that in their view neither dumping nor injury would likely recur if the measures were to lapse.

(153) These arguments regarding likelihood of continuation and/or recurrence of dumping and injury have been already addressed in detail in the chapters above. In the absence of any new arguments in this regard, the findings explained in recital (151) above were maintained.

(154) On this basis, the Commission concluded that the continuation of the anti-dumping measures in force would be in the interest of the Union industry.

1. Interest of importers

(155) Eleven known importers/distributors and four trade associations were contacted at the initiation stage. One importer in Germany replied to the sampling form and provided a questionnaire reply.

(156) This trader imported some limited quantities of melamine from the PRC during the review investigation period, mainly for re-sale outside the Union. In addition, the trader bought melamine from other external suppliers as well as from the Union industry. During the review investigation period, the melamine business constituted over half its total turnover and resulted in a profit margin between 2 to 4 %

For confidentiality reasons, the exact figure could not be disclosed.

.

(157) While it cannot be presumed to be the case for (all) other importers, this sole cooperating trader was not against the measures. This trader was of the view that the measures stabilised the market and provided for supply security and predictability, which are in the interest of all market players in the long term. The trader considered that in case measures would lapse, it could easily switch to Chinese suppliers but this would negatively impact its existing business relations both outside and within the Union and create severe disruptions and fluctuations on the melamine market.

(158) In the absence of any other information, the investigation did not reveal that the continuation of the measures would have any significant negative impact for importers in the Union.

(159) Following definitive disclosure CCPIT questioned the Commission's conclusion concerning the interest of importers arguing that it was based on the opinion of one importer, which cannot be considered representative.

(160) The Commission reiterated, as it is stated in recital (157) above, that it did not presume that the views of the cooperating importer represented the views of all importers. Nevertheless, the information provided by the sole cooperating importer was verified and as such was duly taken into account. CCPIT, on the other hand, did not provide any evidence or substantiated information indicating that the maintenance of the measures would have a significant negative impact on the importers.

(161) Therefore, based on the available information and in the absence of any information/evidence to the contrary, the Commission concluded that the maintenance of measures has no significant negative impact for the importers in the Union.

1. Interest of users

(162) Questionnaires were sent to 68 known users. Four users, representing 3 % of the Union consumption and 0,6 % of imports from the PRC, provided a complete questionnaire reply.

(163) The views of the fully cooperating users were somewhat mixed. Two users were against the continuation of measures claiming that the anti-dumping duty hinders them from buying melamine from the PRC. One user took a neutral position as melamine has a very low impact in its costs structure. The fourth user was in favour of the measures. This user feared that if measures were repealed the Chinese would again flood the Union market with cheap melamine. As a result, in the short term, its costs would be reduced, but soon after, the Union industry could be destroyed. The user would thus become dependent on Chinese supply.

(164) The investigation showed that the users were generally coping well with the market conditions prevailing under the anti-dumping measures. During the review investigation period the average profit margin of the cooperating users was 5,6 % meaning that the users were able to achieve satisfactory profit levels even with the duties in force. In addition, the Union market is an open market with numerous suppliers competing on it. Therefore, in addition to the Union producers and the PRC, the users can have a number of alternative supply sources without being threatened by potential supply shortages.

(165) Following definitive disclosure CCPIT claimed that the prolongation of the measures is unjust as it resulted in increasing melamine prices amid decreasing raw material costs and therefore sacrificed the profitability of the users and the overall competition on the Union market for the profitability of the Union industry. In its submission the interested party referred to a study by the Copenhagen Institute

National Agency for Enterprise and Construction, Economic Assessment of the Community interest in EU Anti-dumping Cases, August 2005, available at: http://www.copenhageneconomics.com/Website/Publications/Antidumping.aspx?M=News&PID=2028&NewsID=328

and various WTO cases to which the EU had been a party, e.g. the EC — Salmon case.

(166) Concerning the remark on the price increase, the Commission referred to recital (110) above. As explained, the price increase during the period considered happened from a very depressed, unsustainable price level in 2012. Following the increase in 2013 the price level in fact decreased and remained stable since 2014. In any case, CCPIT failed to provide any concrete information demonstrating that the economic situation of users of melamine has deteriorated due to the measures to such an extent that would allow the conclusion that maintaining the measures is against the interest of the Union as a whole. In this sense neither the economic study nor the WTO case mentioned by the interested party refers specifically to the melamine industry.

(167) Based on the above and in the absence of any further comment the Commission concluded that it had not been demonstrated that maintaining the measures in force would have any significant negative impact on the situation of the users that could outweigh the positive impact the measures have on the Union industry.

1. Conclusion on Union interest

(168) On the basis of the above, the Commission concluded that there were no compelling reasons of Union interest against the maintenance of the measures on imports of melamine originating in the PRC.

(169) Following definitive disclosure, although the applicants agreed with the conclusions reached by the Commission with regards to Union interest, they argued that, given the low cooperation and the support for the measures for the majority of the coopering interested parties, the Commission did not have to make a comprehensive determination of the Union interest. They also argued that the fact that during the review investigation period the average profit margin of the cooperating users was 5,6 % is irrelevant.

(170) The Commission disagreed with these claims. For the purpose of the Union interest test, the Commission is bound to carry out a comprehensive analysis of all facts and considerations at its disposal and to make an appreciation of all the various interests involved, including those of the Union industry, importers and users. The Commission also has to duly substantiate the conclusions it reached on the interest of the Union as a whole. Therefore, these claims were rejected.

H.

DISCLOSURE

(171) All parties were informed of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of which the Commission intended to maintain the existing measures against the PRC. They were also granted a period to submit comments subsequent to that disclosure. The submissions and comments were duly taken into consideration where warranted.

Definitive measures

(172) It follows from the above that, as provided for by Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation, the anti-dumping measures applicable to imports of melamine originating in the PRC, imposed by Regulation (EC) No 457/2011, should be maintained.

(173) CCPIT claimed in its post-hearing submission that extension of the anti-dumping measures in its current form would be illegal as in the original investigation two of the Chinese exporting producers did not pass individual treatment (IT) examination which is considered illegal after a ruling of the WTO Appellate Body

WT/DS397/AB/RW, Report of the Appellate Body from 18 January 2016, European Communities — Definitive Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Iron or Steel Fasteners from China — Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by China.

. According to CCPIT these two companies should thus have their individual anti-dumping margins calculated, which would affect also the level of the country-wide residual duty.

(174) In an expiry review the level of the anti-dumping measures may not be changed. Furthermore, the companies in question did not cooperate in the proceeding and did not provide any data which would allow calculation of their individual dumping margins. The Commission therefore rejected this claim. The companies in question have however the possibility to request an interim review of their dumping margin calculations on the basis of Article 11(3) of the basic Regulation.

(175) The Committee established by Article 15(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 did not deliver an opinion,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

1. A definitive anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on imports of melamine currently falling within CN code 29336100 and originating in the People's Republic of China.

1. The rate of the definitive anti-dumping duty applicable to the product described in paragraph 1 and produced by the companies below shall be as follows:

Company

Minimum import price

(EUR/tonne net product weight)

Duty

(EUR/tonne net product weight)

TARIC additional codeSichuan Golden-Elephant Sincerity Chemical Co.,1153—A986Holitech Technology Co. Ltd1153—A987Henan Junhua Development Company Ltd1153—A988All other companies—415A999

For the individually named producers, the amount of the definitive anti-dumping duty applicable to the product described in paragraph 1 shall be the difference between the minimum import price and the net, free-at-Union-frontier price, before duty, in all cases where the latter is less than the minimum import price. For these individually named producers, no duty shall be collected where the net free-at-Union-frontier price, before duty, is equal to or higher than the corresponding minimum import price.

The application of the minimum import price specified for the companies mentioned in this paragraph shall be conditional upon presentation to the customs authorities of the Member States of a valid commercial invoice, which shall conform to the requirements set out in the Annex. If no such invoice is presented, the duty applicable to all other companies shall apply.

1. For the individually named producers and in cases where goods have been damaged before entry into free circulation and, therefore, the price actually paid or payable is apportioned for the determination of the customs value pursuant to Article 131 of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/2447

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 minimum import price set out above shall be reduced by a percentage which corresponds to the apportioning of the price actually paid or payable. The duty payable will then be equal to the difference between the reduced minimum import price and the reduced net, free-at-Union-frontier price, before customs clearance.

For all other companies and in cases where goods have been damaged before entry into free circulation and, therefore, the price actually paid or payable is apportioned for the determination of the customs value pursuant to Article 131 of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/2447, the amount of the anti-dumping duty, calculated on the basis of paragraph 2 above, shall be reduced by a percentage which corresponds to the apportioning of the price actually paid or payable.

1. Unless otherwise specified, the provisions in force concerning customs duties shall apply.

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, 30 June 2017.

For the Commission

The President

Jean-Claude Juncker

Annex

ANNEX

A declaration signed by an official of the entity issuing the commercial invoice, in the following format, must appear on the valid commercial invoice referred to in Article 1(2):

1. The name and function of the official of the entity issuing the commercial invoice.

1. The following declaration:

I, the undersigned, certify that the (volume) of melamine sold for export to the European Union covered by this invoice was manufactured by (company name and registered seat) (TARIC additional code) in the People's Republic of China. I declare that the information provided in this invoice is complete and correct.

Date and signature