China: Final determination of antidumping duty on chloroprene rubber from the US, EU and Japan
On May 9, 2010, the Ministry of Commerce of the People’s Republic of China (“MOFCOM”) published Notice No. 25  to initiate an anti-dumping sunset review investigation on imports of Chloroprene Rubber originating in Japan, the EU and the US as of May 10, 2010.
After one year’s investigation, in accordance with Article 48 of Chinese Regulations on Antidumping, the MOFCOM released this Notice NO.21(2011) and held that termination of the antidumping duty on the said product from the US, EU and Japan, would be likely to lead to recurrence of injury to Chinese domestic Chloroprene Rubber industry. In accordance with this Notice NO.21(2011), import of Chloroprene Rubber originating from the US, EU and Japan shall be levied with antidumping duty rate in accordance with Notice NO.23 (2005) and the Notice NO.49 (2010) , the antidumping duty shall come into effect since May 10 , 2011. The antidumping duty period shall be effective for 5 years.
On 9 May 2011, the Chinese Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) released the Notice NO.21 (2011) announcing the final review determination to levy antidumping duty on chloroprene rubber (listed under 40024910, 40024990 in the import tariffs of the Chinese Customs) originating from the US, EU and Japan.
Any Evidence-Based Deliberation:
|Is there anything in the public record to suggest that evidence of the effectiveness of the proposed measure was considered during official deliberations?||No|
|Is there any evidence that alternatives to the proposed measure were considered?||No|
|Is there anything in the public record that suggests that empirical evidence informed the comparison across the alternatives available to government?||No|
|Was such evidence identified?||No|
|Is such evidence publicly available?||No|
|Did the official decision-maker in question provide an explanation as to why a chosen measure was favoured over alternatives?||No|
|Is there any evidence to suggest that potentially affected trading partners were consulted before the measures were taken?||No|
|Is there any evidence that safeguards have been put in place to ensure that implementation of the initiative is transparent and non-discriminatory?||No|
|Did the government state its intention to review the measure within one year of implementation?||No|
Date Discovered: 21/05/2010
Date of inception: 10 May 2011
Duration: 60 months
GTA Evaluation: Red
Bureau of Fair Trade for Imports and Exports, Chinese Ministry of Commerce:
Final Determination (Chinese version):