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

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

The Commission imposed individual anti-dumping duty rates ranging from 13,1 % to 23,4 % on imports of the product concerned for the sampled exporting producers. For the cooperating exporting producers that were not included in the sample, a duty rate of 17,9 % was imposed. The cooperating exporting producers not included in the sample are listed in Annex I to Regulation (EU) 2019/2131. Furthermore, a country-wide duty rate of 36,1 %. was imposed on the product concerned from companies in the PRC which either did not make themselves known or did not cooperate with the investigation.

1. (a)

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

2. (b)

   it is not related to any of the exporters or producers in the PRC which are subject to the anti-dumping measures imposed by the original Regulation; and

3. (c)

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

The company Hunan Huazhi Ceramic Co., Ltd. (‘Huazhi’ or the ‘applicant’) submitted a request to the Commission to be granted new exporting producer treatment (‘NEPT’) and hence be subject to the duty rate applicable to the cooperating companies in the PRC not included in the sample, which is 17,9 %. The applicant claimed that it met all three conditions set out in Article 2 of the original Regulation.

In order to determine whether the applicant fulfilled the conditions for being granted NEPT, as set out in Article 2 of the original Regulation (‘the NEPT conditions’), the Commission first sent a questionnaire to the applicant requesting evidence showing that it met the NEPT conditions.

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

With regard to the condition set out in Article 2(a) of the original Regulation that the applicant did not export the product concerned to the Union during the period of investigation on which the measures are based, that is from 1 January 2011 to 31 December 2011 (‘the original investigation period’), the Commission established that the applicant did not exist as a company at the time. The Articles of Association of Huazhi date from October 2013 and its business license from November 2013. Therefore, the applicant could not have exported the product concerned to the Union during the period of investigation and thus fulfils this condition.

With regard to the condition set out in Article 2(c) of the original Regulation, that the applicant has actually exported the product concerned to the Union after the original investigation period or has entered into an irrevocable contractual obligation to export a significant quantity to the Union, the Commission established that the applicant had exported to the Union in 2019, therefore after the original investigation period. The applicant submitted invoices, a packing list, a bill of lading and a receipt of payment for an order placed in 2019 by a company in France. Therefore, the applicant fulfils this condition.

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

The applicant and the Union industry were informed of the essential facts and considerations based on which it was considered appropriate to grant the anti-dumping duty rate applicable to the cooperating companies not included in the sample of the original investigation to Hunan Huazhi Ceramic Co., Ltd. (‘Huazhi’).

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

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