See Full Document Text
Official Journal EN
of the European Union L series
2025/1456 18.7.2025
COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION(EU) 2025/1456
of 17 July 2025
imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of fused alumina originating in the People’s
Republic of China
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on protection
against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Union(1)(‘the basic Regulation’), and in particular
Article 7 thereof,
After consulting the Member States,
Whereas:
1. PROCEDURE
1.1. Initiation
(1) On 21 November 2024, the European Commission (‘the Commission’) initiated an anti-dumping investigation with
regard to imports of fused alumina originating in the People’s Republic of China (‘the country concerned’ or ‘PRC’)
on the basis of Article 5 of the basic Regulation. It published a Notice of Initiation in the Official Journal of the
European Union(2)(‘the Notice of Initiation’).
(2) The Commission initiated the investigation following a complaint lodged on 9 October 2024 by Imerys S.A. (‘the
complainant’). The complaint was made on behalf of the Union industry of fused alumina in the sense of Article 5(4)
of the basic Regulation. The complaint contained evidence of dumping and of resulting material injury that was
sufficient to justify the initiation of the investigation.
1.2. Registration
(3) The Commission made imports of the product concerned subject to registration by Commission Implementing
Regulation (EU) 2025/260(3)(‘the registration Regulation’).
1.3. Interested parties
(4) In the Notice of Initiation, the Commission invited interested parties to contact it in order to participate in the
investigation. In addition, the Commission specifically informed the complainant, the known exporting producers,
the authorities of the PRC, known importers, suppliers and users, traders, as well as associations known to be
concerned about the initiation of the investigation and invited them to participate.
(5) Interested parties had an opportunity to comment on the initiation of the investigation and to request a hearing with
the Commission and/or the Hearing Officer in trade proceedings.
1.4. Comments on initiation
(6) A related importer, Reckel GmbH (‘Reckel’), contested the appropriateness of Mexico, which was used in the
complaint as a representative country, asserting that it lacks sufficient competitive production of the investigated
products and appropriate production conditions similar to those in China. They suggest Brazil as a more suitable
alternative, given its more comparable raw material conditions to China’s.
(1) OJ L 176, 30.6.2016, p. 21, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/1036/oj.
(2) OJ C, C/2024/7049, 21.11.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/7049/oj.
(3) Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/260 of 10 February 2025 making imports of fused alumina originating in the
People’s Republic of China subject to registration (OJ L, 2025/260, 11.2.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/260/oj).
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/oj 1/50EN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
(7) A Union user, RHI Magnesita GmbH, commented on the initiation of the anti-dumping investigation, criticizing the
selection of Mexico as the benchmark country for determining the normal value of fused alumina. They argued that
Mexico lacks sufficient competitive production with only two producers indicating a non-competitive market.
Additionally, they pointed out that Mexico does not share similar raw material conditions with China, which has
significant mineral reserves, suggesting that Brazil would be a more suitable alternative due to its comparable
production conditions.
(8) The Union users association, Verband Deutscher Schleifmittelwerke e.V. (‘VDS’), commented on the initiation of the
anti-dumping investigation, objecting to the selection of Mexico as a representative third country for determining
the normal value of fused alumina. VDS argued that Mexico is inappropriate for this role because it lacks significant
production of the product under investigation, with only a small presence of producers using different grades and
more expensive raw materials. They expressed concerns that this choice would lead to distorted results and
emphasized the importance of ensuring that dumping and injury calculations are based on an objective, fair basis.
VDS suggested using India instead as the representative third country, pointing out that India has a more relevant
production landscape and more appropriate cost structures comparable to those in China, ensuring more accurate
and reliable calculations.
(9) A Union user, Wester Mineralien GmbH (‘Wester’), argued that the complaint does not convincingly demonstrate that
dumping is taking place, as the choice of Mexico as a representative country for calculating normal value is
inappropriate. Wester highlighted that the methodology used, based on the constructed normal value from Mexican
data, fails to accurately reflect the situation because Mexico lacks a substantial and competitive production base for
fused alumina. Therefore, they advocated for the termination of the anti-dumping proceedings.
(10) At the initiation stage of the investigation, Mexico was considered a potential representative country as it was deemed
to have production of the product under investigation. However, it is important to acknowledge that the initial
consideration was just the beginning of a thorough investigative process. As the investigation progressed, the
Commission's choice of a representative country was refined and evaluated against specific criteria pursuant to
Article 2(6a) of the basic Regulation. These criteria, which include the availability and quality of data and the
economic environment's comparability to that of China, were meticulously applied to ensure a fair and accurate
determination of the normal value. This process and the rationale behind the final selection are explained in depth in
Section 3.2.2, highlighting the Commission's commitment to maintaining transparency and methodological rigor
throughout the investigation.
(11) Some parties provided comments on the product control number (‘PCN’) construction regarding certain technical
issues and missing characteristics. Some users claimed that the distinction between first and second grade brown
fused alumina reflected in the PCN is unnecessary because it is connected to the contents of aluminum oxide (Al O )
2 3
and iron (III) oxide (Fe O ), which are already taken into account separately. The Commission took note of all the
2 3
technical comments submitted. The investigation established that the distinction between first and second quality
brown fused alumina in the PCN is artificial, does not reflect industry-recognised standards and is subject to
interpretation. Thus, an adjustment in the PCN was necessary regarding brown fused alumina. The Commission
considered that when comparing products, the critical elements are the contents of Al O and Fe O , which are
2 3 2 3
reflected in values A1/A2 and F1/F2 within the PCN. PCNs B2GA2F1 and B1GA2F1 were thus compared to
establish the injury margin, as detailed in Section 6.1. Regarding the additional technical characteristics proposed for
inclusion, the Commission noted that the existing PCN structure sufficiently captured all relevant characteristics for
the purposes of the investigation.
1.5. Sampling
(12) In the Notice of Initiation, the Commission stated that it might sample the interested parties in accordance with
Article 17 of the basic Regulation.
1.5.1. Sampling of Union producers
(13) In its Notice of Initiation, the Commission stated that it had provisionally selected a sample of Union producers. The
Commission selected the sample on the basis of representativity in terms of size of the production and sales quantity
of the product under investigation from 1 October 2023 to 30 September 2024 and geographic location. This
sample consisted of two Union producers located in two different Member States. The sampled Union producers,
based on the information available at that stage, accounted for almost 50 % of the estimated total production and
more than 40 % of estimated total Union sales volume of the like product in the Union. The Commission invited
interested parties to comment on the provisional sample.
2/50 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/ojEN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
(14) Due to the absence of a questionnaire reply from one of the sampled companies, MOTIM Electrocorundum Ltd.
(Hungary), the Commission proposed to replace the company by another Union producer, Alteo Fused Alumina
(France), which also expressed its interest in participating in the sample. Based on the information available at that
stage, the sample accounted for more than 44 % of the estimated total Union production and more than 38 % of
estimated total Union sales quantity of the like product, and it also ensured a good geographical spread.
(15) The sample was confirmed and is representative of the Union industry.
1.5.2. Sampling of unrelated importers
(16) To decide whether sampling was necessary and, if so, to select a sample, the Commission asked unrelated importers
to provide the information specified in the Notice of Initiation.
(17) Ten unrelated importers provided the requested information and agreed to be included in the sample. In accordance
with Article 17(1) of the basic Regulation, the Commission selected a sample of two unrelated importers on the
basis of the largest volume of imports and sales of the product concerned in the Union. In accordance with
Article 17(2) of the basic Regulation, all known importers concerned were consulted on the selection of the sample.
(18) One Union user, Tyrolit, one Union users association, VDS, and one related importer, Reckel, commented on the
sample of unrelated importers indicating that only traders of raw materials and not manufacturers who process the
raw materials have been sampled. Additionally, both parties argued that the sampled importers mainly focus on the
imports of commodities, such as brown and white fused alumina (‘BFA’ and ‘WFA’), with limited involvement in the
import of speciality grades. Therefore, they argued that the sample was not representative. The Commission noted
that several parties participating in the sampling exercise were more accurately classified as users rather than
unrelated importers. The Commission clarified that any company, regardless of whether it is purchasing directly
from the country concerned or through a supplier or trader, is considered a ‘Union user’ if it subsequently
incorporates the product under investigation into its own production process. The inclusion of direct users in the
sampling exercise of importers does not serve the purpose of investigating importers. Instead, the interests of users
are assessed separately. Concerning the claim on the speciality grades, the Commission noted that all types of fused
alumina share similar basic physical, technical and chemical characteristics. As the two sampled importers
represented more than 63 % of the volume of imports of the product under investigation from China and 71 % of
the imports of the product under investigation from all origins, based on the submissions of the parties participating
in the sampling exercise, the Commission confirmed the sample selected on 17 December 2024.
1.5.3. Sampling of exporting producers in the PRC
(19) To decide whether sampling is necessary and, if so, to select a sample, the Commission asked all exporting producers
in PRC to provide the information specified in the Notice of Initiation. In addition, the Commission asked the Mission
of the People’s Republic of China to identify and/or contact other exporting producers, if any, that could be interested
in participating in the investigation.
(20) Twenty-two exporting producers in the country concerned representing 16,7 % of the total export volume of fused
alumina from China to the Union provided the requested information and agreed to be included in the sample. In
accordance with Article 17(1) of the basic Regulation, the Commission selected a provisional sample of three
exporting producers on the basis of the largest representative volume of exports to the Union which could
reasonably be investigated within the time available. In accordance with Article 17(2) of the basic Regulation, all
known exporting producers concerned and the authorities of the country concerned were consulted on the selection
of the sample. The comments received are summarized and addressed below.
(21) Dengfeng Wudu Abrasives Co. Ltd. (‘Wudu’), a company selected in the provisional sample, resubmitted the data
pertaining to its exports of the product under investigation to the Union and reported lower export volumes. The
Commission requested additional information from Dengfeng Wudu Abrasives Co. Ltd. to be considered as a
cooperating exporting producer in this proceeding. However, Dengfeng Wudu Abrasives Co. Ltd. did not provide
the requested information within the deadline set.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/oj 3/50EN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
(22) In view of the updated lower export volume reported by Wudu and in the absence of reply to the Commission’s
request for additional information, the Commission considered that this company was no longer cooperating with
the investigation and therefore was no longer part of the sample or a cooperating exporting producer.
(23) Shanxi Lvliangshan Minerals Co. Ltd (‘Lvliangshan’) claimed that the provisional sample of three exporting producers
was not representative as it represented only 6,2 % of the total export volume of fused alumina from China to the
Union. Furthermore, it submitted that the sampled exporters must be genuine exporting producers capable of
providing reliable data on production costs and export sales. Shanxi Lvliangshan Minerals Co., Ltd proposed that the
sample selection be based on the largest production volume.
(24) Art Abrasives (Guizhou) Co., Ltd. requested to be included in the final sample as it is the sole producer in the PRC
utilising both alumina and bauxite as raw materials to manufacture semi-friable fused alumina while relying on a
comprehensive series of advanced treatments for this product type.
(25) Tyrolit claimed that additional factors such as quality levels of the product concerned and the treatment specifications
should also be considered to select the sample. Tyrolit and VDS also requested the inclusion of at least one additional
exporting producer to increase the representativeness of the sample. Alternatively, Tyrolit considered that the
investigation should be limited to commodities (in particular brown and white fused alumina), which allegedly
account for 75-80 % of the total volume of fused alumina.
(26) With regard to the representativity of the sample and request for addition of exporting producer(s), the Commission
considered that the overall low level of cooperation by Chinese exporting producers, the fragmentation of the
Chinese domestic industry and the relative size of the companies that came forward did not warrant the inclusion of
an additional exporting producer to the sample and that the selected sample was sufficiently representative as it
accounted for 6,1 % of total imports. When it comes to the claims relating to quality aspects and the use of different
production processes or raw materials, the Commission recalled that these are not legal criteria in the sample
selection under Article 17 of the basic Regulation. The Commission also considered that a sample based on the
export volume to the EU was more representative than when based on the production volume given that the
investigation is focussed on the exporting practices of the Chinese operators. Furthermore, Lvliangshan did not
provide evidence that the provisionally sampled companies were not genuine exporting producers. In parallel, the
Commission also considered that the current investigation was initiated following a complaint which scope is not
limited to fused alumina commodities. On this basis, the claims related to these issues were rejected.
(27) Furthermore, it appeared that the use of alumina and bauxite by Art Abrasives (Guizhou) Co. related to one product
type only (semi-friable alumina) whereas it manufactures a much wider range of product types falling within the
scope of this investigation. In addition, such claim was not confirmed by the ‘Information on inputs’ submitted by
this party, which contained contradictory information. Furthermore, adding a company that has ‘unique’
manufacturing techniques would not make the sample more representative of the Chinese operators as a whole, to
the contrary. On this basis, the above claims were rejected.
(28) Based on the above, following the comments received on the selection of the sample, and due to the non-cooperation
by Wudu as explained in recital 21, the Commission decided to limit the definitive sample to two exporting
producers. On this new basis, the definitive sample accounts for 4,5 % of total imports of the product concerned
and 26,6 % of the imports of the product concerned in the Union as reported by the cooperating exporting
producers.
1.6. Questionnaire replies and verification visits
(29) The Commission sent a questionnaire concerning the existence of significant distortions in the PRC within the
meaning of Article 2(6a)(b) of the basic Regulation to the Government of the People’s Republic of China (‘GOC’).
(30) Furthermore, the complaint contained sufficient prima facie evidence of raw material distortions in the PRC
regarding the product concerned. Therefore, as announced in the Notice of Initiation, the investigation covered those
raw material distortions to determine whether to apply the provisions of Article 7(2) and 7(2a) of the basic
Regulation with regard to the PRC. For this reason, the Commission sent additional questionnaires in this regard to
the Government of the PRC.
4/50 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/ojEN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
(31) The Commission published online(4)the questionnaires for the exporting producers, users, unrelated importers and
the Union producers.
(32) The Commission sought and verified all the information deemed necessary for a provisional determination of
dumping, resulting injury and Union interest. Verification visits or remote cross-checking pursuant to Article 16 of
the basic Regulation were carried out on the following companies:
Union producers:
— Imerys Villach GmbH, Villach, Austria;
— Alteo Fused Alumina (‘Alteo’), La Bâthie, France;
Unrelated importers:
— TRAXYS Europe SA (‘TRAXYS’), Luxembourg, Luxembourg;
— lmexco Minerals GmbH (‘lmexco), Offenbach an der Queich, Germany;
Users:
— Calderys, Paris, France;
— Tyrolit – Schleifmittelwerke Swarovski AG & Co. KG, Schwaz, Austria;
Exporting producers in the PRC:
— Chongqing Saite Corundum (‘Saite’), Chongqing, PRC;
— Luoyang Runbao Abrasives (‘Runbao’), Luoyang, PRC;
Related importer in the Union:
— Bosai Europe GmbH.
1.7. Investigation period and period considered
(33) The investigation of dumping and injury covered the period from 1 October 2023 to 30 September 2024 (‘the
investigation period’). The examination of trends relevant for the assessment of injury covered the period from
1 January 2021 to the end of the investigation period (‘the period considered’).
2. PRODUCT UNDER INVESTIGATION, PRODUCT CONCERNED AND LIKE PRODUCT
2.1. Product under investigation
(34) The product under investigation is artificial corundum, whether or not chemically defined, also known as fused
alumina (‘the product under investigation’).
(35) The types of artificial corundum are also known as white fused alumina (‘WFA’), pink fused alumina, ruby fused
alumina, brown fused alumina (‘BFA’), sol-gel, etc. They are all included, regardless of their commercial naming,
provided they meet the properties or specifications set out in the relevant TARIC codes descriptions.
(36) Fused alumina is produced by melting bauxite or aluminium oxide at very high temperatures (around 2 000 °C) in an
electric arc furnace, and then cooling and crushing the resulting material.
(37) Due to its hardness and thermal resistance, fused alumina is primarily used in two industrial sectors, abrasives and
refractories. In the abrasives industry, it is used in a wide range of applications, including grinding, polishing, cutting
and blasting. In the refractories industry, it functions as a refractory material in high-temperature settings, such as
furnace linings, crucibles, and refractory bricks. Beyond these principal uses, fused alumina is also used in the
manufacture of technical ceramics and as a wear-resistant additive in surface coatings within the laminated products
industry.
(4) https://tron.trade.ec.europa.eu/investigations/case-view?caseId=2757.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/oj 5/50EN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
2.2. Product concerned
(38) The product concerned is the product under investigation originating in the PRC, currently falling under CN code
2818 10 11, 2818 10 19, ex 2818 10 91, and 2818 10 99 (TARIC codes 2818 10 91 20, 2818 10 91 90) (‘the
product concerned’).
(39) However, artificial corundum currently classified under TARIC code 2818 10 91 30 (i.e., sintered corundum with a
micro crystalline structure consisting of aluminium oxide (CAS RN 1344-28-1) and magnesium aluminate (CAS RN
12068-51-8) with a content by weight (calculated as oxides) of 92 % or more, but not more than 94 % of aluminium
oxide, and 7 % (± 1 %) of magnesium oxide) is not part of the product under investigation. Mechanical mixtures of
artificial corundum and other substances, currently classified under heading 3824, are also not part of the product
under investigation
2.3. Like product
(40) The investigation showed that the following products have the same basic physical, chemical and technical
characteristics as well as the same basic uses:
— the product concerned when exported to the Union;
— the product under investigation produced and sold on the domestic market of the PRC; and
— the product under investigation produced and sold in the Union by the Union industry.
(41) The Commission decided at this stage that those products are therefore like products within the meaning of
Article 1(4) of the basic Regulation.
2.4. Claims regarding product scope
(42) Several parties, particularly Union users from the refractory industry, claimed that there was lack of substitution
between abrasive-grade and refractory-grade fused alumina, based on their different physical characteristics,
properties, applications and consumer perception. Many users pointed to the difference of the particle size
distribution between abrasive-grade and refractory-grade fused alumina, claiming that abrasive-grade fused alumina
must adhere to certain standards issued by the Federation Européenne des Fabricants de Produits Abrasifs (‘FEPA’)
which are based on the grit size. To the contrary, refractory-grade alumina employs broader particle size ranges and
less stringent requirements for particle size uniformity. Additionally, several users claimed that both grades are not
interchangeable from a cost and end-use perspective, as the use of abrasive-grade fused alumina in the refractories
industry would be too costly, while refractory-grade fused alumina is technically unsuitable for use in abrasive
products.
(43) Users from the refractory industry also claimed that the Union industry was mainly focused on the production of
abrasive-grade fused alumina, with only 20 to 30 % of the Union’s production being dedicated to refractory-grade
fused alumina. Therefore, they argued that there was insufficient capacity in the Union to meet the demand of the
refractory-grade fused alumina. Additionally, they argued that since refractory-grade fused alumina was such a small
part of the production of the Union industry, excluding this grade from the product scope would not compromise
the effects of the duties contemplated.
(44) The Commission noted that abrasive and refractory grades of fused alumina share the same basic physical, chemical
and technical characteristics. Both grades consist of 90-99 % aluminium oxide, possess high hardness, high density
and a high melting point, are characterised by a low level of impurities, strong thermal shock resistance and
substantial wear resistance. Concerning particle size distribution, the Commission observed that the variation in
particle size results from post-fusion classification processes, such as sieving, and does not reflect any inherent
distinction in the nature of the product. Furthermore, the Commission noted that there is a significant overlap in
particle sizes which would allow both grades to be used interchangeably for certain applications. The investigation
established that, users from the refractory industry, while predominantly purchasing broader particle size ranges,
also purchased narrower grit ranges that sufficiently overlap with the particle size distribution typically associated
with abrasive-grade fused alumina. Also, users in the abrasive industry could, from a technical perspective, and as
confirmed by the German Abrasives Association, VDS, utilise grain sizes that are generally employed in the
6/50 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/ojEN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
refractory industry, even where such use does not conform to FEPA standards, particularly in the context of less
demanding abrasive applications. The investigation established that compliance with FEPA standards is not a legal
obligation and is not always applied across all uses. Regarding the difference in cost, the Commission noted that
pricing differences are not considered a sufficient basis for product exclusion absent clear evidence of material
differences in physical, chemical or technical characteristics. The Commission considered that the absence of full
interchangeability across all grades of fused alumina, which is often attributable to cost considerations on the part of
refractory users or to quality requirements in certain high-end applications on the part of abrasive users, does not
negate the conclusion that the different grades of fused alumina fall within the scope of the same product. The claim
was therefore rejected.
(45) The Commission addresses the arguments concerning the Union’s production of refractory-grade fused alumina in
Section 7 below.
(46) Some parties claimed that sol-gel corundum and fused alumina have very limited substitutability and that, while
fused alumina is produced from bauxite and alumina, sol-gel corundum is produced from high-purity boehmite.
Tyrolit noted that sol-gel corundum is not produced by a fusion process like fused alumina but instead follows a
different production process, which includes the formation of a sol-gel by dispersing boehmite and additives in
acidified water. Additionally, in view of the high price of its raw material, boehmite, Tyrolit claimed that sol-gel
corundum was approximately ten times more expensive than fused alumina, and that, its substitution in a
formulation with another type of fused alumina, while in theory possible, would have significant impact in the
quality of the resulting bonded or coated abrasives. Therefore, some parties requested that sol-gel corundum be
excluded from the scope of the investigation.
(47) The Commission noted that sol-gel corundum shares similar basic physical, technical and chemical characteristics as
other types of fused alumina. Both sol-gel and other product types of fused alumina, including white fused alumina
and brown fused alumina, consist primarily of aluminum oxide (Al O ) and demonstrate comparable levels of
2 3
hardness, thermal resistance, and chemical stability, which render them suitable for similar industrial applications.
Although sol-gel alumina is manufactured through a distinct chemical synthesis process rather than conventional
fusion, and originates from a different raw material, the differences in production process and input are not per se
relevant in determining whether a product type is a distinct product when this divergence in production
methodology does not materially affect the functional properties of the end product. By the same token, differences
in costs and prices do not, in themselves, justify the conclusion that sol-gel should be considered as a different
product. The fact that Tyrolit acknowledges that white fused alumina could theoretically replace sol-gel, albeit with
reduced performance in more demanding applications, demonstrates that the various types of fused alumina share
core functional characteristics to a sufficient degree. The Commission considered that for the majority of abrasive
applications, there exists a meaningful level of interchangeability between sol-gel alumina and other types of fused
alumina.
(48) Accordingly, the Commission concluded that the comments regarding the product scope did not provide sufficient
justification for the product exclusions. Consequently, these claims were rejected.
3. DUMPING
3.1. Procedure for the determination of the normal value under Article 2(6a) of the basic Regulation
(49) In view of the sufficient evidence available at the initiation of the investigation pointing to the existence of significant
distortions within the meaning of point (b) of Article 2(6a) of the basic Regulation with regard to the PRC, the
Commission considered it appropriate to initiate the investigation with regard to the exporting producers from this
country having regard to Article 2(6a) of the basic Regulation.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/oj 7/50EN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
(50) Consequently, in order to collect the necessary data for the eventual application of Article 2(6a) of the basic
Regulation, in the Notice of Initiation the Commission invited all exporting producers in the PRC to provide
information regarding the inputs used for producing fused alumina. 10 exporting producers submitted the relevant
information.
(51) In order to obtain information, it deemed necessary for its investigation with regard to the alleged significant
distortions, the Commission sent a questionnaire to the GOC. In addition, in point 5.3.2 of the Notice of Initiation,
the Commission invited all interested parties to make their views known, submit information and provide
supporting evidence regarding the application of Article 2(6a) of the basic Regulation within 37 days of the date of
publication of the Notice of Initiation in the Official Journal of the European Union. No questionnaire reply was
received from the GOC and no submission on the application of Article 2(6a) of the basic Regulation was received
within the deadline. Subsequently, the Commission informed the GOC that it would use facts available within the
meaning of Article 18 of the basic Regulation for the determination of the existence of the significant distortions in
the PRC. The Commission invited the GOC to submit its comment on the application of Article 18. No comments
were received.
(52) In the Notice of Initiation, the Commission also specified that, in view of the evidence available, it may need to select
an appropriate representative country pursuant to Article 2(6a)(a) of the basic Regulation for the purpose of
determining the normal value based on undistorted prices or benchmarks.
(53) On 21 January 2025, the Commission informed by a note (‘the First Note’) interested parties on the relevant sources it
intended to use for the determination of the normal value. In that note, the Commission provided a list of all factors
of production such as raw materials, labour and energy used in the production of the product under investigation in
the PRC. In addition, based on the criteria guiding the choice of undistorted prices or benchmarks, the Commission
identified possible representative countries, namely Mexico and Brazil as an appropriate representative country. All
comments were addressed below in section 3.2.2.1.
(54) On 5 March 2025, the Commission informed by a second note (‘the Second Note’) interested parties on the relevant
sources it intended to use for the determination of the normal value, with Mexico as the representative country. It
also informed interested parties that it would establish selling, general and administrative costs (‘SG & A’) and profits
based on ELMET, S.A. DE C.V.
(55) Comments on the two notes were summarized and addressed in Section 3.2.2.
3.2. Normal value
(56) According to Article 2(1) of the basic Regulation, ‘the normal value shall normally be based on the prices paid or
payable, in the ordinary course of trade, by independent customers in the exporting country’.
(57) However, according to Article 2(6a)(a) of the basic Regulation, ‘in case it is determined […] that it is not appropriate
to use domestic prices and costs in the exporting country due to the existence in that country of significant
distortions within the meaning of point (b), the normal value shall be constructed exclusively on the basis of costs of
production and sale reflecting undistorted prices or benchmarks’, and ‘shall include an undistorted and reasonable
amount of administrative, selling and general costs and for profits’ (‘administrative, selling and general costs’ is
refereed hereinafter as ‘SG & A’).
(58) As further explained below, the Commission concluded in the present investigation that, based on the evidence
available, and in view of the lack of cooperation of the GOC, the application of Article 2(6a) of the basic Regulation
was appropriate.
8/50 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/ojEN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
3.2.1. Existence of significant distortions
(59) In recent investigations concerning the metallurgical and chemicals sector, in the People’s Republic of China
(‘PRC’)(5), the Commission found that significant distortions in the sense of Article 2(6a)(b) of the basic Regulation
were present.
(60) In those investigations, the Commission found that there is substantial government intervention in the PRC resulting
in a distortion of the effective allocation of resources in line with market principles(6). In particular, the Commission
concluded that in the metallurgical and chemical sectors, not only does a substantial degree of ownership by the
Government of China (‘GOC’) persist in the sense of Article 2(6a)(b), first indent of the basic Regulation(7), but the
GOC is also in a position to interfere with prices and costs through State presence in firms in the sense of
Article 2(6a)(b), second indent of the basic Regulation(8). The Commission further found that the State’s presence
and intervention in the financial markets, as well as in the provision of raw materials and inputs have an additional
distorting effect on the market. Indeed, overall, the system of planning in the PRC results in resources being
concentrated in sectors designated as strategic or otherwise politically important by the GOC, rather than being
allocated in line with market forces(9). Moreover, the Commission concluded that the Chinese bankruptcy and
property laws do not work properly in the sense of Article 2(6a)(b), fourth indent of the basic Regulation, thus
generating distortions in particular when maintaining insolvent firms afloat and when allocating land use rights in
the PRC(10). In the same vein, the Commission found distortions of wage costs in the metallurgical and chemical
sectors in the sense of Article 2(6a)(b), fifth indent of the basic Regulation(11), as well as distortions in the financial
markets in the sense of Article 2(6a)(b), sixth indent of the basic Regulation, in particular concerning access to
capital for corporate actors in the PRC(12).
(5) See Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/1923 of 10 July 2024 imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of
titanium dioxide originating in the People’s Republic of China (OJ L, 2024/1923, 11.7.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/
2024/1923/oj); Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2120 of 12 October 2023 imposing a provisional anti-dumping
duty on imports of electrolytic manganese dioxides originating in the People’s Republic of China (OJ L, 2023/2120, 13.10.2023, ELI:
http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2023/2120/oj); Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1394 of 11 August 2022
imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of silicon originating in the People’s Republic of China, as extended to imports of
silicon consigned from the Republic of Korea and from Taiwan, whether declared as originating in the Republic of Korea or Taiwan or
not, following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and the Council
(OJ L 211, 12.8.2022, p. 86, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2022/1394/oj).
(6) See Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/1923, recital 199; Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2120, recital 121; Implementing
Regulation (EU) 2022/1394, recital 125.
(7) See Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/1923, recitals 131-142; Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2120, recital 75; Implementing
Regulation (EU) 2022/1394, recital 83.
(8) See Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/1923, recitals 143-152; Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2120, recitals 83-85;
Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1394, recital 96. While the right to appoint and to remove key management personnel in SOEs
by the relevant State authorities, as provided for in the Chinese legislation, can be considered to reflect the corresponding ownership
rights, CCP cells in enterprises, state owned and private alike, represent another important channel through which the State can
interfere with business decisions. According to the PRC’s company law, a CCP organisation is to be established in every company (with
at least three CCP members as specified in the CCP Constitution) and the company shall provide the necessary conditions for the
activities of the party organisation. In the past, this requirement appears not to have always been followed or strictly enforced.
However, since at least 2016 the CCP has reinforced its claims to control business decisions in SOEs as a matter of political principle.
The CCP is also reported to exercise pressure on private companies to put ‘patriotism’ first and to follow party discipline. In 2017, it
was reported that party cells existed in 70 % of some 1,86 million privately owned companies, with growing pressure for the CCP
organisations to have a final say over the business decisions within their respective companies. These rules are of general application
throughout the Chinese economy, across all sectors, including the producers in the metallurgical and chemical sectors.
(9) See Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/1923, recital 154; Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2120, recital 86; Implementing
Regulation (EU) 2022/1394, recital 85.
(10) See Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/1923, recital 175; Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2120, recital 86; Implementing
Regulation (EU) 2022/1394, recital 86.
(11) See Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/1923, recitals 178-181; Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2120, recital 106;
Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1394, recital 87.
(12) See Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/1923, recital 182; Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2120, recital 106; Commission
Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/844 of 13 March 2024 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and definitively collecting the
provisional duty imposed on imports of electrolytic manganese dioxides originating in the People’s Republic of China (OJ L,
2024/844, 14.3.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2024/844/oj), recital 43; Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1394,
recital 87.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/oj 9/50EN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
(61) Like in previous investigations concerning the metallurgical and chemical sectors in the PRC, the Commission
examined in the present investigation whether it was appropriate or not to use domestic prices and costs in the PRC,
due to the existence of significant distortions within the meaning of point (b) of Article 2(6a) of the basic Regulation.
The Commission did so on the basis of the evidence available on the file, including the evidence contained in the
complaint, and in the Commission Staff Working Document on Significant Distortions in the Economy of the
People’s Republic of China for the Purposes of Trade Defence Investigations(13) (‘Report’), which relies on publicly
available sources. That analysis covered the examination of the substantial government interventions in the PRC’s
economy in general, but also the specific market situation in the relevant sector including the product under
investigation. The Commission further supplemented these evidentiary elements with its own research on the
various criteria relevant to confirm the existence of significant distortions in the PRC as also found by its previous
investigations in this respect.
(62) The complaint alleged that due to the existence of significant distortions in China, domestic prices and costs of the
Chinese metallurgical and chemical industry cannot be used in the present case. To support its position, the
complainant referred to the Report, especially the sections concerning the chemical sector(14), to previous
Commission investigations of chemical and downstream metallurgical products(15), as well as to Chinese legislation.
(63) More specifically, the complaint pointed out that the Chinese economic system is based on the concept of a ‘socialist
market economy’, with the state-owned economy being the ‘leading force of the national economy’(16). The Chinese
Constitution and property law reinforce the unquestioned and ever-growing control of the Chinese Communist Part
(‘CCP’) over the economic system of the PRC, which goes well beyond the situation customary in other countries
where the governments exercise general macroeconomic control. The Chinese state engages in an interventionist
economic policy using various tools as industrial planning, financial systems, and regulatory environment to control
the economy(17). Crucially, the relevant Chinese authorities at all levels of government adhere to the system of plans
and they use their vested powers, accordingly, thereby inducing the economic operators to comply with the priorities
set out therein(18).
(64) The chemical market, and specifically the alumina sector is subject to significant interference by the GOC, as
extensively described in the Report. State control is further exercised through various planning and regulatory
documents, along with ad hod policy interventions, targeting the chemical sector and allowing the State to pursue its
vision and make necessary adjustments(19). Regarding alumina, a raw material for fused alumina production, it is
identified in plans such as the Chongqing municipality 14th FYP on the High-Quality Development of
Manufacturing Industry (‘Chongqing Plan’), which aims to enhance alumina projects and build a local supply
system(20).
(65) Referring again to the Report, the complaint pointed out that the market in question is being served to a significant
extent by enterprises which operate under the ownership, control or policy supervision, or guidance of the
authorities of the exporting country. The State party not only actively formulates and oversees the implementation
of general economic policies by individual SOEs, but it also claims its rights to participate in operational decision-
making in SOEs. This is typically done through the rotation of cadres between government authorities and SOEs,
through presence of party members in SOEs executive bodies and of party cells in companies, as well as by shaping
the corporate structure of the SOE sector. In exchange, SOEs enjoy a number of economic benefits, in particular the
shielding from competition and the preferential access to relevant inputs, including financing. With the high level of
government intervention in the chemical industry and a high share of SOEs in the sector relative to overall
production, even privately owned producers of the product under investigation are prevented from operating under
market conditions. Rather, both public and privately owned enterprises in the chemicals sector are likely subject to
policy supervision and guidance by the GOC.
(13) Commission Staff Working Document on Significant Distortions in the Economy of the People’s Republic of China for the purposes of
Trade Defence Investigations, 10 April 2024 (SWD(2024) 91 final), available at: https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/documents-register/
detail?ref=SWD(2024)91&lang=en.
(14) Report, Chapter 15.
(15) Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/1923, recital 199; Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2120, recital 121; Implementing
Regulation (EU) 2022/1394, recital 125.
(16) Report, p. 6-7.
(17) Ibid., p. 152-171 and p. 207-208, 242-243.
(18) Ibid., p. 40-84.
(19) Ibid., p. 495-496.
(20) See the 14th Five-Year Plan (2021-2025), Chongqing Municipal People’s Government, Issuing high-quality development of
manufacturing industry in Chongqing, available at: https://www.cq.gov.cn/zwgk/zfxxgkml/szfwj/qtgw/202108/
t20210803_9538603.html, accessed on 15 April 2025.
10/50 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/ojEN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
(66) The presence of the State in firms allows it to interfere with respect to prices or costs. In this respect, the complaint
referred to the Report, highlighting that while the right to appoint and to remove key management individuals in
SOEs by the relevant State authorities (as provided for in Chinese legislation) can be considered to reflect the
corresponding ownership rights, the CCP cells in enterprises, state-owned and private alike, represent another
channel through which the State can interfere with business decisions. Since at least 2016, the CCP has reinforced its
claim to control business decisions in SOEs for the purpose of pursuing governmental objectives. The CCP is also
reported to exercise pressure on private companies to put ‘patriotism’ first and to follow Party discipline.
Furthermore, the State’s presence and intervention in financial markets as well as in the provision of raw materials
and inputs have a further distorting effect on the market.
(67) Moreover, public policies or measures in China discriminate in favour of domestic suppliers or otherwise influencing
free market forces. Relevant plans exist at all levels of government and cover virtually all economic sectors, and
specifically those considered as ‘strategic’. The authorities at each administrative level monitor the implementation of
such plans. The economic planning system in China results therefore in resources being directed to sectors designated
as strategic or politically important by the government, including the chemical one, affecting the downstream
industries, among which the production of fused alumina.
(68) There is a lack of discriminatory application or inadequate enforcement of bankruptcy, corporate or property laws.
While the Chinese bankruptcy law formally rests on similar principles as corresponding laws in other countries, the
Chinese system is characterised by systematic under-enforcement. The State plays a strong and active role in the
insolvency proceedings, often having direct influence on their outcome(21). In addition, in China, all land is owned
by Chinese State and its allocation is solely dependent on the State. Therefore, the Chinese bankruptcy and property
laws result in distortions by maintaining insolvent firms and not providing land at market conditions.
(69) Wage costs in China are also distorted since China has not ratified several fundamental conventions of the
International Labour Organisation, in particular those on the freedom of association and on collective bargaining.
Moreover, the mobility of the Chinese workforce is restricted by the household registration system, which limits
access to the full range of social security and other benefits to residents of a given administrative area.
(70) Access to finance is granted by institutions which implement public policy objectives and act dependently on the
State. The Chinese financial system is characterized by the strong position of State-owned banks, which remain
connected to the State, not only through ownership but also via personal relations and just like non-financial SOEs,
the banks regularly implement public policies designated by the government. Moreover, borrowing costs have been
kept artificially low to stimulate investment growth. Even though nominal interest rate liberalization was achieved in
October 2015, price signals are still not the result of free market forces but are influenced by Government induced
distortions. In essence, despite the steps that have been taken to liberalize the market, the corporate credit system in
China is affected by significant systemic issues and distortions resulting from the continuing pervasive role of the
state in the capital markets.
(71) In addition, the distortions of the Chinese market have a systematic nature. Regarding the production of fused
alumina, Government involvement in the energy sector is particularly relevant. Due to high temperature levels that
are required for the production of fused alumina (more than 2 000 °C) production is highly energy intensive. In
addition to this, the electricity market in China is characterized by strong involvement of SOEs in various stages of
the supply chain. There is also strong involvement of the GOC in the setting of energy prices in particular, including
the granting of preferential electricity prices for certain industries at the provincial level.
(72) In conclusion, the complaint took the position that prices or costs are not the result of free market forces because
they are affected by substantial government intervention within the meaning of Article 2(6a)(b) of the basic
Regulation. On that basis, according to the complaint, it is not appropriate to use domestic prices and costs to
establish normal value in this case.
(21) Ibid., Chapter 6, p. 171-179.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/oj 11/50EN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
(73) The GOC did not comment or provide evidence supporting or rebutting the existing evidence on the case file,
including the Report and the additional evidence provided by the complainant, on the existence of significant
distortions and/or appropriateness of the application of Article 2(6a) of the basic Regulation in the case at hand.
(74) Consequently, when examining in the present investigation whether it was appropriate or not to use domestic prices
and costs in the PRC, due to the existence of significant distortions within the meaning of point (b) of Article 2(6a) of
the basic Regulation, the Commission did so on the basis of the evidence available on the file, including the evidence
contained in the complaint, as well as in the Report. The Commission further supplemented these evidentiary
elements with its own research on the various criteria relevant to confirm the existence of significant distortions in
the PRC, as also found by its previous investigations in this respect.
(75) In the sector of the product under investigation, a substantial degree of ownership, control, policy supervision or
guidance by the GOC persists in the sense of Article 2(6a)(b), first indent of the basic Regulation. In China,
enterprises operating under the ownership, control and/or policy supervision or guidance by the state represent an
essential part of the economy. The GOC and the CCP maintain structures that ensure their continued influence over
enterprises, and in particular SOEs(22). However, CCP interventions into operational decision making have become
the norm not only in SOEs, but also in private companies(23), with CCP claiming leadership over virtually every
aspect of the country’s economy.
(76) The investigation established that the sector of the product under investigation is served both by SOEs and private
companies(24). For instance, Chinalco, an SOE under SASAC(25), and China Henan International Cooperation
Group Co. Ltd.(26), an SOE owned by the Henan government, are among the largest bauxite suppliers(27), bauxite
being an essential input to produce fused alumina. Moreover, while several producers are private, such as
Zhengzhou Yufa Abrasives Co. Ltd., (a subsidiary of the Zhengzhou Yufa Group)(28), and Saite.(29), a subsidiary of
the Bosai Group, they too operate under the supervision and guidance of the Chinese authorities (see recitals 85
and 86).
(77) Not only, the GOC exerts guidance on enterprises also by setting specific objectives and policies for the metallurgical
and chemical sectors, which all industry participants, regardless of their private or public nature, are obliged to
comply with.
(78) To give an example, the Standard Conditions Applicable to the Aluminium Industry(30) (‘Standard Conditions’),
issued by the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (‘MIIT’) in 2020, set the overall framework for the
operation of the aluminium industry at the central level. Nominally, the Standard Conditions pursue the objective to:
‘[p]romote the supply-side structural reform of the aluminium industry, promote the technological development of
the industry, and promote the high-quality development of the industry’ and provide that: ‘[b]auxite mining,
alumina, electrolytic aluminium and secondary aluminium production must comply with national and local
industrial policies, mineral resource plans, environmental protection and energy conservation laws, regulations and
policies, mining laws, regulations and policies, safety production laws, regulations and policies, industry
development plans and other requirements’(31).
(22) Report, p. 120-131.
(23) Article 33 of the CCP Constitution, Article 19 of the Chinese Company Law. See also the Report, p. 47-50.
(24) See also the Report, p. 422 and p. 441.
(25) See at: http://wap.sasac.gov.cn/n2588045/n27271785/n27271792/c14159097/content.html(accessed on 8 April 2025).
(26) See at: http://www.c-chico.com/#/index(accessed on 8 April 2025).
(27) See at: https://finance.eastmoney.com/a/202503243354581456.html(accessed on 8 April 2025).
(28) See at: https://www.yfml.com/about-03(accessed on 8 April 2025).
(29) See at: https://www.cqbosai.com/index.php/company/show/111 and also at https://www.cq.gov.cn/ywdt/jrcq/202411/
t20241126_13831013.html(accessed on 8 April 2025).
(30) See at: http://www.lyghz.gov.cn/hzqzxqyj/gfxwj/content/437ba875-02fc-4082-b62f-febf935ced75.html(accessed on 8 April 2025).
(31) Ibidem, Point 1.1.
12/50 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/ojEN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
(79) Furthermore, alumina is included in the 2025 Catalogue of Encouraged Industries in the Western Regions(32).
(80) More recently, the GOC released the Implementation Plan for the High Quality Development of the Aluminium
Industry(33) (‘Aluminium Plan’) stating that: ‘To promote the high-quality development of the aluminium industry,
better support key manufacturing industry chains, […] we have formulated this Plan for the period from 2025 to
2027 […]. Guided by Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era, we must fully
implement the guiding principles of the 20th National Congress of the [CCP], and the Second and Third Plenary
Sessions of the 20th CPC Central Committee, and act in accordance with the decisions of the national meeting on
promoting new industrialization. […] We will strive to significantly enhance the resilience and security level of the
industrial and supply chains by 2027, with the overall situation of the industry chain leading the world. Aluminium
resource security capacity will be substantially improved, striving for a 3 %–5 % increase in domestic bauxite
resources, and an annual recycled aluminium output of over 15 million tons. The industrial structure will be
optimized, with aluminium processing industry clusters improved.’
(81) The Shandong Province 14th FYP on Aluminium Industry Development(34) (‘Shandong Plan’) lists the following
targets: ‘[b]y 2025, the production capacity of electrolytic aluminum and alumina will be controlled […]. The
province will evolve into a major aluminium industrial cluster with significant domestic and overseas influence’(35).
(82) In September 2022, the Standing Committee of the People’s Congress of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region
issued the Decision on Promoting the High-quality Development of the Aluminium Industry(36)(‘Guangxi Decision’)
and specified the goals regarding cultivating leading enterprises and steering the development path of SOEs in the
province: ‘Cultivate and introduce a group of leading enterprises with core competitiveness. Establish an ‘industrial
chain leader’ system in the aluminium industry, for enterprises leading the alumina and electrolytic aluminium
industrial chains, to implement a comprehensive energy efficiency evaluation and incentive mechanism covering the
whole industry […]. Improve the development quality and efficiency of aluminium-related state-owned enterprises,
support Guangxi Investment Group and other state-owned enterprises to optimize and integrate their internal
aluminium business; take and use capital to deploy the aluminium industry chain across provinces and countries via
mergers and acquisitions, participating or controlling equity interest or other methods, so as to implement
coordinated development of the whole industrial chain and build up leading enterprises in the aluminium industry
with national influence and international competitiveness’(37).
(83) Government control and policy supervision can be also observed at the level of the relevant industry associations.
Indeed, Chinese industry associations are to guarantee that industry implements the policies of the GOC. This
responsibility is confirmed by the fact that in their activity, they liaise closely with State authorities, which is
reflected in their statutes.
(84) For instance, China Non-Ferrous Metals Fabrication Industry Association(38)(‘CNFA’) notably states in Article 3 of its
Articles of Association that the organisation ‘[a]dheres to the overall leadership of the [CCP], establishes an
organization of the [CCP], carries out Party activities, and provides the necessary conditions for the activities of the
Party organization’ and ‘accepts the professional guidance, supervision and management by the entities in charge of
registration and management, by entities in charge of Party building, as well as by the relevant administrative
departments in charge of industry management’(39). According to Article 6 of its Articles of Association, the scope
of the Association’s business is, inter alia, the following: ‘[i]n accordance with the general policy and general task of
(32) See at: https://www.gov.cn/zhengce/zhengceku/202411/content_6990315.htm(accessed on 14 April 2025).
(33) See at https://www.gov.cn/zhengce/zhengceku/202503/content_7016126.htm(accessed on 8 April 2025).
(34) See at: http://gxt.shandong.gov.cn/module/download/downfile.jsp?classid=0&filename=f85aaf1621f249c39003ec11de94edac.pdf
(accessed on 8 April 2025).
(35) Ibid., Section II.3.
(36) See at: http://gxt.gxzf.gov.cn/wzsy/zwdt/mtgz/t13115758.shtml(accessed on 15 April 2025).
(37) Ibid., Point 15.
(38) See at: https://www.cnfa.net.cn/index.aspx(accessed on 8 April 2025).
(39) See at: https://www.cnfa.net.cn/about/1546.aspx(accessed on 8 April 2025).
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/oj 13/50EN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
establishing a socialist market economic system put forward by the Party and the state, and in view of the actual
situation of the industry, actively put forward suggestions and opinions on industry development, industry policies,
laws and regulation’(40). Moreover, the conditions to be eligible as a representative of the Association include the
adhesion to the leadership of the Communist Party of China, supporting socialism with Chinese characteristics,
resolutely implementing the Party’s line, principles and policies, and possessing good political qualities(41).
(85) Some bauxite suppliers, for instance Chinalco, are members of CNFA.
(86) Similarly, the Association of China Refractory Industry(42)(‘ACRI’) states in Article 3 of its Articles of Association that
the organisation [a]dheres to the overall leadership of the [CCP], establishes an organization of the [CCP], carries out
Party activities, and provides the necessary conditions for the activities of the Party organization’ and ‘accepts the
professional guidance, supervision and management by the Ministry of Civil Affairs.’ Additionally, the Association’s
Party work ‘accepts the unified guidance of the Society work department of the CCP Central Committee(43).’
(87) The Bosai Group as well as the Zhengzhou Yufa Group are members of ACRI(44).
(88) Also, the Articles of Association of the downstream China Machine Tool Industry Association(45)(‘CMTBA’), which
has nevertheless a branch concerned specifically with abrasives, contain the identical Article 3(46), declaring the
Association’s compliance with the CCP’s leadership and its acceptance of the supervision and management by the
Ministry of Civil Affairs and by the Party Committee of the State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration
Commission of the State Council as concerns CMTBA’s Party building activities(47).
(89) As to the GOC being in a position to interfere with prices and costs through State presence in firms in the sense of
Article 2(6a)(b), second indent of the basic Regulation, CCP cells in enterprises, state-owned and private alike,
represent an important channel through which the state can interfere with business decisions. During the
investigation, the Commission established the existence of personal connections between producers of the product
under investigation and the CCP, such as CCP members among the senior management or members of the board of
directors in a number of companies manufacturing the product under investigation.
(90) For instance, Chinalco’s chairman and Chinalco’s director and general manager, are respectively the party secretary
and the party deputy-secretary of Chinalco’s party organization. Not only, in 2024, all units of Chinalco Group
launched the Party Discipline Study and Education: ‘[t]he deployment meeting of the Party Discipline Study and
Education of Chinalco Group emphasized that party organizations at all levels should strengthen the combination of
learning and application, combine the Party Discipline Study and Education with the implementation of the annual
implementation system of the strategic planning of Chinalco Group’s “4 + 4 + N + annual key projects”, and strive to
achieve annual goals and tasks, and effectively transform the learning results into an inexhaustible driving force for
accelerating the construction of a world-class excellent aluminium company with strong comprehensive competitive
advantages, and provide strong political guarantees for striving to write a new chapter of Chinalco’s
modernization’(48).
(40) Ibidem.
(41) Ibid., Article 21.
(42) See at: https://www.acri.org.cn/(accessed on 10 April 2025).
(43) See at: https://www.acri.org.cn/aboutAssociation/constitution?id=2(accessed on 10 April 2025).
(44) See at: https://www.acri.org.cn/associationMember/director?id=3(accessed on 10 April 2025).
(45) See at: https://www.cmtba.org.cn/(accessed on 10 April 2025).
(46) See at: https://www.cmtba.org.cn/web/197001/3043.html(accessed on 10 April 2025).
(47) See at: https://www.cmtba.org.cn/web/3/list.html(accessed on 10 April 2025).
(48) See at: https://www.chinalco.com.cn/dqjs/dqjs_djdt/202404/t20240422_126423.html(accessed on 10 April 2025).
14/50 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/ojEN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
(91) Also privately owned enterprises in the alumina industry are subject to Party interference. For example, the Chairman
of the Bosai Group also serves as ‘the Chairman of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference of Nachuan
District, Chongqing’ and has won the honorary title of ‘China’s outstanding characteristic socialist builder’(49).
Furthermore, the Deputy General Manager of the Group also serves as the Secretary of the Group’s Party Committee
and participated in a meeting with the Chongqing ‘Municipal Party Committee Propaganda Group to study and
implement the spirit of the Third Plenary Session of the 20th Central Committee of the CCP’(50).
(92) Further, policies discriminating in favour of domestic producers or otherwise influencing the market in the sense of
Article 2(6a)(b), third indent of the basic Regulation are in place in the sector of the product under investigation.
(93) The metallurgical industry keeps being regarded as a key industry by the GOC(51). This is confirmed in the numerous
plans, directives and other documents covering alumina, issued at national, provincial, and municipal level, which
have been documented in detail by the Commission’s previous investigations of the sector(52), as well as by the
Report(53).
(94) At national level, for instance, the 14th FYP on Developing the Raw Materials Industry(54) (‘Raw Materials Plan’)
includes provisions ‘encouraging coastal areas to orderly arrange alumina and other projects using overseas
resources’. The plan further calls for capacity control in the aluminium sector in general, including in the alumina
sector: ‘Strictly control newly increased production capacity. […] Prevent the disorderly development of […] and
alumina’.
(95) Additionally, the Aluminium Plan states that the GOC ‘will strive to significantly enhance the resilience and security
level of the industrial and supply chain by 2027, and make sure the industry chain development reaches a world-
leading level. Aluminum resource security capacity will be substantially improved, striving for a 3 %–5 % increase in
domestic bauxite resources’. Beyond this focus on bauxite inputs, the GOC also intends to ‘build alumina projects in a
steady and prudent fashion. We will strengthen the scientific planning of alumina […] projects with bauxite as raw
material […] New projects will be advanced prudently. Newly modified or expanded alumina projects must strictly
comply with relevant policies on industry […]’(55).
(96) As can be seen from the above documents, the alumina sector is closely monitored and steered by the central
government and the sector, including the whole fused alumina industry chain, is to a large extent shaped by
governmental intervention rather than by free market forces.
(97) At local level, the extent of China’s interference into the alumina industry is more evident. One such example is the
Shandong Plan, that, alongside the goals described in recital 81, sets out support measures for the local aluminium
enterprises: ‘Increase policy and regulatory support. Actively implement various national and provincial-level
support policies, provide support to eligible industrial clusters, key products and key technologies. Support
enterprises undertaking major national and provincial projects’(56).
(49) See at: https://www.cqbosai.com/index.php/about/team(accessed on 10 April 2025).
(50) See at : https://www.cqbosai.com/index.php/news/m_show/493#:~:text=%E5%85%9A%E5%A7%94%E4%B9%A6%E8%AE%B0%E5%
88%98%E5%89%91%E8%A6%81%E6%B1%82,%E5%A4%9A%E6%9B%B4%E5%A4%A7%E7%9A%84%E8%B4%A1%E7%8C%AE%
E3%80%82(accessed on 10 April 2025).
(51) Report, p. 427.
(52) See Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/1923, recitals 153-167; Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2120, recitals 86-100;
Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1394, recitals 81-127.
(53) Report, p. 427.
(54) See at: https://www.miit.gov.cn/zwgk/zcwj/wjfb/tz/art/2021/art_2960538d19e34c66a5eb8d01b74cbb20.html(accessed on 10 April
2025).
(55) See Section I of the Aluminium Plan.
(56) See Section VIII.2 of the Shandong Plan.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/oj 15/50EN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
(98) In Yunnan, the Yunnan Province Action Plan on Reshaping the Whole Chain of Nonferrous Metals and New Material
Industries with New Advantages 2021-2023(57) (‘Yunnan Plan’) seeks to ‘[d]evelop intelligent manufacturing: […]
promote the transformation of production methods to intelligent, flexible, and refined, and carry out pilot
demonstrations of intelligent manufacturing in the non-ferrous metal industry. In the mining fields of […] bauxite,
[…] we will promote a complete set of intelligent collaborative mining technology systems […] and build digital
mines based on leading backbone enterprises in the industry and carry out industry demonstrations. […] promote
enterprises to improve their intelligence level in process optimization […] and safe production and improve their
ability to meet user needs quickly and at low cost’(58).
(99) The Yunnan Plan also contains measures to lower the operating costs of the alumina industry by the means of
preferential tax policies: ‘Implement preferential tax policies for the development of the western region, and duly
conduct investigation and registration of relevant enterprises for the […] green aluminium industry and non-ferrous
metal deep processing industry listed in the catalogue of encouraged industries in the western regions; provide
unsolicited advice and services to help enterprises reduce their tax burden’(59).
(100)The Guangxi Decision, as already pointed out in recital 82, sets out several objectives for the aluminium industry
development in the province. Furthermore, it mandates that: ‘[T]he competent departments of the Autonomous
Region such as Development and Reform, Industry and Information Technology, and Ecology and Environment
shall guide and support alumina and electrolytic aluminum enterprises to use new processes, new technologies, and
green and low-carbon technologies to carry out energy-saving transformation […]’(60).
(101)In Henan, the Bauxite International Trade Business Cooperation Agreement was signed between China Henan
International Cooperation Group Co., Ltd. and the Sanmenxia Municipality State-owned Assets Operation and
Management Co., Ltd. According to the agreement, ‘[i]n the future, the Sanmenxia Municipal Party Committee and
the Municipal Government will include aluminum-based new materials in one of the 12 key industrial chains that
the city will focus on cultivating. As an important platform enterprise for the province’s opening up and
cooperation, China Henan International Cooperation Group Co., Ltd. serves and guarantees the province's key
strategies […]. As a municipal state-owned enterprise, Sanmenxia State-owned Assets Operation and Management
Co., Ltd. […] strives to cultivate new quality productivity, has been deeply cultivated in the field of aluminum
industry for many years, strives to achieve new breakthroughs in the expansion of aluminum-based industrial chain,
and actively explores new paths for innovation and development. The cooperation between the two parties to carry
out bauxite international trade business is not only an important measure to implement the national strategy,
expand the field of foreign economic cooperation, and promote the high-quality development of the local economy,
but also a vivid practice of deepening the reform and innovative development of the city's state-owned enterprises,
which is of great significance and far-reaching impact on solving the problem of tight local bauxite supply faced by
the city and the development of the aluminum industry in the current and future periods’(61).
(102)At local level, in 2021, the Fuling High Tech Zone (the Fuling district is located in the Chongqing Municipality area)
declared to have ‘spent RMB 185 million on scientific and technological innovation, which was 10,9 percentage
points higher than the growth rate of the general public budget expenditure of the whole region’ and added that
‘through platform construction and policy support, the zone has effectively promoted the agglomeration of
innovative elements to the new material industry chain, and many innovative achievements have filled the domestic
gap. For example, […] Fuling [Chongqing] Saite’s annual output of brown fused alumina exceeded 200 000 tons,
becoming the world’s largest brown fused alumina monomer manufacturing enterprise. By the end of 2021, the
Fuling District cultivated 98 private high-tech enterprises’(62).
(57) Available at: http://www.yn.gov.cn/ztgg/lqhm/lqzc/djzc/202202/t20220223_236886.html(accessed on 14 April 2025).
(58) See Section III.10 of the Yunnan Plan.
(59) See Section IV.3(3) of the Yunnan Plan.
(60) See Point XI of the Guangxi Decision.
(61) See at: https://www.smx.gov.cn/4036/616899168/1838419.html(accessed on 11 April 2025).
(62) See at: https://www.cq.gov.cn/zt/fjxzcjgxsd/zjqxkfz/202210/t20221014_11190923.html(accessed on 11 April 2025).
16/50 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/ojEN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
(103)Additionally, state-owned banks also support some fused alumina producers, like for instance Chongqing Branch of
the Export and Import Bank of China which ‘introduced a number of measures to help Chongqing do everything
possible to stabilize the basic market of foreign trade and foreign investment, and promote the new development of
Chongqing’s open economy […] and strengthened trade financial support, […] provided settlement services […]
letter of credit and trade financing for many production-oriented and trade-oriented enterprises such as [Chongqing]
Saite Corundum and Chongqing International Trade’(63). In sum, the GOC has measures in place to induce operators
to comply with the public policy objectives of supporting encouraged industries, including the production of the
main inputs used in the manufacturing of the product under investigation. Such measures impede market forces
from operating freely.
(104)The present investigation has not revealed any evidence that the discriminatory application or inadequate
enforcement of bankruptcy and property laws according to Article 2(6a)(b), fourth indent of the basic Regulation in
the alumina sector would not affect the manufacturers of the product under investigation.
(105)The product under investigation is also affected by the distortions of wage costs in the sense of Article 2(6a)(b), fifth
indent of the basic Regulation, as also referred to above in recital 60. Those distortions affect the sector both directly
(when producing the product under investigation or the main inputs), as well as indirectly (when having access to
inputs from companies subject to the same labour system in the PRC).
(106)Moreover, no evidence was submitted in the present investigation demonstrating that the sector of the product under
investigation is not affected by the government intervention in the financial system in the sense of Article 2(6a)(b),
sixth indent of the basic Regulation, as also referred above in recital 60. Even at policy level, the government deeply
regulates financial measures. For instance, Raw Materials Plan mandates that ‘[t]he existing funding channels will be
made full use of to support major projects involved in the Plan. [The GOC] will deepen industry-finance cooperation
and leverage the role of the national industry-finance cooperation platforms to provide strong support for projects in
line with the Plan by means of financial services and equity investment’(64).
(107)Therefore, the substantial government intervention in the financial system leads to the market conditions being
severely affected at all levels.
(108)Finally, the Commission recalls that to produce the product under investigation, a number of inputs is needed. When
the producers of the product under investigation purchase/contract these inputs, the prices they pay (and which are
recorded as their costs) are clearly exposed to the same systemic distortions mentioned before. For instance,
suppliers of inputs employ labour that is subject to the distortions. They may borrow money that is subject to the
distortions on the financial sector/capital allocation. In addition, they are subject to the planning system that applies
across all levels of government and sectors.
(109)As a consequence, not only the domestic sales prices of the product under investigation are not appropriate for use
within the meaning of Article 2(6a)(a) of the basic Regulation, but all the input costs (including raw materials,
energy, land, financing, labour, etc.) are also affected because their price formation is affected by substantial
government intervention, as described in Parts I and II of the Report. Indeed, the government interventions
described in relation to the allocation of capital, land, labour, energy and raw materials are present throughout the
PRC. This means, for instance, that an input that in itself was produced in the PRC by combining a range of factors of
production is exposed to significant distortions. The same applies for the input to the input and so forth.
(110)In sum, the evidence available showed that prices or costs of the product under investigation, including the costs of
raw materials, energy and labour, are not the result of free market forces because they are affected by substantial
government intervention within the meaning of Article 2(6a)(b) of the basic Regulation, as shown by the actual or
potential impact of one or more of the relevant elements listed therein. On that basis, and in the absence of any
cooperation from the GOC, the Commission concluded that it is not appropriate to use domestic prices and costs to
(63) See at: http://www.eximbank.gov.cn/info/ztzl/zszhwwmwwzgz/202008/t20200806_20935.html(accessed on 11 April 2025).
(64) See Section VIII.2 of the Raw Materials Plan.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/oj 17/50EN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
establish normal value in this case. Consequently, the Commission proceeded to construct the normal value
exclusively on the basis of costs of production and sale reflecting undistorted prices or benchmarks, that is, in this
case, on the basis of corresponding costs of production and sale in an appropriate representative country, in
accordance with Article 2(6a)(a) of the basic Regulation, as described in the following section.
3.2.1.1. Arguments of the interested parties
(111)On 31 January 2025, Runbao and Saite, submitted a set of comments in reply to the First Note, including with
respect to application of Article 2(6a) of the basic Regulation.
(112)First, Runbao and Saite took the position that Article 2(6a) of the basic Regulation is not applicable as Chinese fused
alumina industry operates under market-oriented conditions. Runbao and Saite also argued in this connection that
the Commission should accept the domestic prices and costs reported by both companies since they are privately-
owned.
(113)This argument could not be accepted. As described in detail in recitals 74 to 110 above, the sector of the product
under investigation is subject to numerous significant distortion within the meaning of Article 2(6a)(b) of the basic
Regulation. While such distortions take various forms and presence of SOEs in the sector is indicative of the
existence of significant distortions, the government intervention affecting the market forces is not limited to
economic operators owned by the state but extends also to private companies (see in particular recital 91 above).
(114)Second, Runbao and Saite submitted that even if the Commission were to find that significant distortions exist, the
relevant assessment must be done individually for Runbao and Saite as stipulated in the third paragraph of
Article 2(6a) of the basic Regulation.
(115)The Commission noted that the existence of significant distortions giving rise to the application of Article 2(6a) of
the basic Regulation is established on a country-wide level. If the existence of significant distortions in a definitive
sector is established, then the provisions of Article 2(6a) of the Regulation apply a priori to all exporting producers
of the sector in question in the PRC and concern all costs relating to their factors of production. While the same
provision of the basic Regulation provides for the use of domestic costs which are positively established not to be
affected by significant distortions, no domestic costs have been established to be undistorted based on accurate and
appropriate evidence. In particular, the exporting producers did not submit accurate and appropriate evidence on
undistorted prices and costs, they limited themselves to the above-mentioned general claim that the fused alumina
industry operates under market-oriented conditions.
3.2.2. Representative country
3.2.2.1. General remarks
(116)The choice of the representative country was based on the following criteria pursuant to Article 2(6a) of the basic
Regulation:
— A level of economic development similar to the PRC. For this purpose, the Commission used countries with a
gross national income per capita similar to the PRC on the basis of the database of the World Bank(65);
— Production of the product under investigation in that country;
— Existence of relevant readily available data in the representative country.
— Where there is more than one possible representative country, preference was given, where appropriate, to the
country with an adequate level of social and environmental protection.
(65) World Bank Open Data – Upper Middle Income, https://data.worldbank.org/income-level/upper-middle-income.
18/50 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/ojEN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
(117)As explained in recitals 53 and 54, the Commission issued two notes for the file on the sources for the determination
of the normal value: the first note on production factors of 21 January 2025 (hereinafter the ‘First Note’) and the
second note on the production factors of 5 March 2025 (hereinafter the ‘Second Note’). These notes described the
facts and evidence underlying the relevant criteria, and also addressed the comments received by the parties on these
elements and on the relevant sources. In the second note on production factors, the Commission informed interested
parties of its intention to consider Mexico as an appropriate representative country in the present case if the existence
of significant distortions pursuant to Article 2(6a) of the basic Regulation would be confirmed. Following comments
and supporting evidence received from interested parties regarding the absence of genuine production of the product
under investigation in Mexico, the Commission considered that Brazil was the most appropriate representative
country in the present case if the existence of significant distortions pursuant to Article 2(6a) of the basic Regulation
would be confirmed.
3.2.3. A level of economic development similar to the PRC
(118)In the First Note on production factors, the Commission identified Mexico and Brazil as countries with a similar level
of economic development as the PRC according to the World Bank, i.e. they are all classified by the World Bank as
‘upper-middle income’ countries on a gross national income basis where production of the product under
investigation was known to take place.
(119)In its comments, Tyrolit proposed three potential countries – Brazil, Kazakhstan and India – as suitable representative
countries for this investigation. VDS argued that India would be the most appropriate choice, citing the presence of
numerous producers of the product under investigation. Additionally, VDS submitted that India offers a realistic
reflection of raw material prices and that its energy prices are more comparable to those in China.
(120)The Commission noted that, contrary to the country concerned, Kazakhstan and India do not fall under the category
of ‘upper middle income’ countries according to the classification of World Bank and do therefore not qualify as
possible representative countries in view of their level of economic development, as provided for in Article2(6a)(a)
of the basic Regulation. Consequently, Kazakhstan and India cannot be used as representative countries. Hence these
claims were rejected.
3.2.4. Availability of relevant readily available data in the representative country
(121)In the First note the Commission indicated that for the countries identified as countries where product under
investigation is being produced, i.e. Brazil and Mexico, the availability of data needed is to be further verified in
particular with regard to the readily available financial data from producers of the product under investigation.
(122)With regard to Brazil, the Commission could not find, at this stage, readily available financial statements (whether
consolidated or not) for Elfusa Geral de Eletro Fusão, the only known company producing the product under
investigation in Brazil. The Commission therefore concluded that it could not use the data of this company in the
proceeding. As a result, the Commission concluded that Brazil could not be considered as an appropriate
representative country for this investigation.
(123)With regard to Mexico, the Commission identified readily available financial statements for Elmet which show a
reasonable level of profitability in the year 2022 but not covering the investigation period.
(124)The Commission analysed the imports of the main factors of production into Mexico and Brazil. The complainant
provided prima facie evidence of the existence of significant distortions concerning fused alumina in China.
Therefore, should the existence of such distortions be confirmed, imports from China would be excluded from the
calculation of benchmark prices for the raw materials in the representative countries. The Commission also
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/oj 19/50EN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
examined imports from non-WTO countries listed in Annex I to Regulation (EU) 2015/755 of the European
Parliament and the Council(66). In all cases, these imports were either non-existent or minimal (below 1 %) during
the investigation period. Accordingly, both Mexico and Brazil could be considered appropriate representative
countries(67).
(125)Tyrolit and VDS asserted that there are strong indications suggesting that Elmet, an identified producer in Mexico,
primarily operates as an importer and distributor of raw materials for the refractory and metallurgical industries
rather than producing any type of fused alumina. They further stated that Brazil has domestic production of the
product under investigation, with Elfusa Geral de Eletro Fusão (‘Elfusa’) being a well-known producer among VDS
members.
(126)The Commission noted that Tyrolit and VDS did not provide evidence that Elmet does not produce the product under
investigation. On the contrary, Elmet’s website explicitly states that the company produces BFA and operates its own
furnace. Such element was also not contradicted by other interested parties that reckon the existence of such
producer in Mexico. Additionally, Elmet’s financial statements are readily accessible through Orbis, whereas the
financial statements of the Brazilian producer, Elfusa, are not readily available and were not submitted by Tyrolit
and/or VDS. Consequently, these claims were rejected.
(127)Union users, Vesuvius Poland Sp. z o.o. (‘Vesuvius’) and Calderys and Union users association European Refractories
Producers’ Association (‘PRE’) came forward in support for the choice of Mexico as the representative country at this
stage. According to Vesuvius, Brazil is an inappropriate representative country as there is insufficient and “unsuitable”
data for key factors of production, as imports of these materials into Brazil are limited, particularly when excluding
those of Chinese origin. Furthermore, based on Vesuvius' knowledge, the imported materials do not correspond to
those typically used in fused alumina production. Instead, these imports primarily consist of specialized grades of
bauxite intended for specific applications, which are unlikely to be used for producing fused alumina. Additionally,
no financial data is available for fused alumina producers in Brazil. Vesuvius therefore recommended that if the
Commission were to select Brazil as the representative country, it should rely on export data rather than import
data, as done in previous investigations, to ensure a fair and accurate determination of the normal value. Calderys
supported the selection of Mexico as the representative country due to the availability of financial data for an
identified fused alumina producer in Mexico. Additionally, Mexico's import patterns indicate lower exposure to
potentially distorted imported inputs and adherence to stronger social and environmental standards. PRE noted that
Brazil is one of the world’s largest producers of bauxite and, as a result, is a net exporter. Consequently, PRE argued
that the unit import price of bauxite in Brazil may not accurately reflect the domestic market, either due to the low
volume of imports or because imported products are specialized, focusing on higher-value specialty grades.
Additionally, like the Commission, PRE was unable to find available financial statements for Elfusa.
(128)Tyrolit and Reckel commented that the factors of production for manufacturing alumina-based fused alumina and
sol-gel corundum were not listed in the First Note. Meanwhile, Reckel argued that the production factors identified
by the Commission should be reconsidered, as they do not accurately reflect the primary raw materials used for
producing sol-gel corundum. Both companies urged the Commission either to adjust the identified production
factors or to exclude sol-gel corundum from the scope of the investigation.
(129)In response to the comments from Tyrolit and Reckel, one additional input used in the manufacturing of sol-gel – a
product type included in the product under investigation –was also considered, as it was reported by one of the
sampled exporting producers. The Commission calculated dumping margins based on the data gathered and verified
during the investigation, ensuring that all necessary inputs for the production of the various types of fused alumina
by the two sampled producers are considered.
(66) Regulation (EU) 2015/755 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2015 on common rules for imports from
certain third countries (OJ L 123, 19.5.2015, p. 33, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2015/755/oj).
(67) Idem.
20/50 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/ojEN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
(130)Saite and Runbao argued that GTA import statistics are not a suitable basis for determining the raw material costs of
the normal value unless adjustments required under Article 2(10) of the basic Regulation are made to ensure that
benchmark prices are comparable to the actual prices paid by Chinese exporting producers. They noted that Chinese
companies source a significant portion of their raw materials and other inputs on the domestic market, meaning that
the factor of production (FOP) prices in question do not include costs such as ocean freight, insurance, and import
duties. Therefore, they claimed that when using GTA import data, the Commission should adjust the benchmark
prices to reflect the actual procurement conditions of the Chinese producers, including the mode of transportation,
transport distance, and the applicability of costs such as insurance, import duties, and VAT.
(131)The Commission noted that Article 2(6a)(a) of the basic Regulation prescribes the use of corresponding data in an
appropriate representative country ‘provided that the relevant data are readily available’. In this case, import prices in
the potential representative countries are readily available, and the Commission uses GTA data as the source for those
prices. If evidence confirms the basis to apply the methodology in Article 2(6a)(a) of the basic Regulation, the
Commission further adjusts these import prices (e.g. by adding the relevant customs duties) to arrive at a reasonable
proxy representing an undistorted domestic price in these countries. Moreover, the Commission excluded data on
imports into the representative country from China to determine the relevant benchmarks. As long as the import
quantities of the factors of production are deemed by the Commission sufficiently representative at undistorted
prices and there are no other specific circumstances rendering them unsuitable, there is no objective reason to
exclude them. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Commission rejected this claim.
(132)In light of the above considerations, the Commission informed the interested parties with the second note that it
intended to use Mexico as an appropriate representative country, in accordance with Article 2(6a)(a), first ident of
the basic Regulation in order to source undistorted prices or benchmarks for the calculation of normal value. When
establishing reasonable values for SG & A costs and for profit, the Commission initially proposed to use financial
data of Elmet, which were available in the ORBIS database for a period preceding the IP.
(133)Interested parties were invited to comment on the appropriateness of Mexico as a representative country and of Elmet
as producers in the representative country.
(134)Saite and Runbao emphasized the importance of adjusting GTA import data to exclude costs like ocean freight,
insurance, and import duties, as these are not incurred when they source raw materials domestically in China. They
argued that including such costs would distort the comparison between export prices and normal value as they
urged the Commission to ensure that the normal value sources reflect actual procurement conditions of Chinese
producers to ensure fair comparison. In addition, Runbao objected to using Brazil's GTA import statistics for silicon
carbide as suggested in the Second Note, recommending Turkey instead due to higher import volumes and more
reliable data reflecting a comparable economic development level.
(135)As mentioned in recital 110, in view of the existence of significant distortions on the Chinese domestic market, the
Commission is entitled to construct the normal value exclusively on the basis of corresponding costs of production
and sale in an appropriate representative country, in accordance with Article 2(6a)(a) of the basic Regulation. In this
regard, the Commission could not identify prevailing domestic prices on the domestic market and had to resort to
import statistics including transport cost and import duties, where applicable, to reflect the domestic prices in the
representative country that would be payable by a local producer. Hence this claim is rejected. The specific claim
relating to silicon carbide was considered and addressed in recital 154.
(136)Wester argued that Elmet is too small, with fluctuating financial data, to be representative of Mexico’s industry for
this purpose. Additionally, there is no confirmation that Elmet manufactures BFA in Mexico, as the company’s
website does not support the Commission’s claim. Even if Elmet produces BFA, Wester pointed out that it is a minor
part of Elmet's product range, and the financial data from Elmet primarily reflects their other trades, rendering it
unsuitable for determining the normal value of BFA. Wester urged the Commission to reconsider using Elmet’s
financial data and, if no other appropriate data is available, to reconsider the use of a representative country
altogether.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/oj 21/50EN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
(137)Traxys challenged the selection of Elmet in Mexico as a representative producer, providing evidence that Elmet does
not manufacture BFA for the refractory industry but rather operates as an importer-trader sourcing from the PRC.
They contended that using Elmet's data would distort normal value calculations since it does not properly reflect
production processes, cost structure or pricing strategies relevant to the product under investigation. Traxys also
pointed out that ocean freight significantly impacts costs, making Mexican sales prices unsuitable for proper
comparison with the EU market. They suggested that Elfusa in Brazil could be a more representative producer due to
its local production of BFA and similarity in freight costs compared to PRC. Traxys emphasized that the current
selection lacks sufficient evidence and may lead to inaccurate normal value determination, affecting procedural
fairness and European interests.
(138)The Verband Deutscher Schleifmittelwerke e.V. (VDS) questioned the choice of Mexico as a representative country,
arguing that Elmet does not produce the product under investigation. They claimed that Elmet imports the BFA from
PRC, potentially leading to distorted calculations if used as a benchmark. VDS claimed that the Commission had not
sufficiently scrutinized assumptions brought forward by complainants and neglected important arguments from
interested parties.
(139)Further to the above claims and evidence put forward, the Commission further investigated whether Elmet was a
genuine producer of the product under investigation in Mexico whose financial statements could be used for the
determination of reasonable amounts for SG & A and for profit in the representative country. Following its research,
the Commission confirmed that Elmet was not a genuine producer. Furthermore, the Commission has obtained a
letter from Elmet clarifying that the company does not produce the product under investigation. In the absence of
genuine production of the product under investigation, the Commission had to reconsider its selection of an
appropriate representative country.
(140)Imerys and VDS also made certain claims regarding the price of electricity in Mexico, GTA import statistics for
alumina and bauxite in Mexico. VDS repeated that India should be used as a representative country. Considering the
absence of genuine production in Mexico, these claims were considered moot. Furthermore, as already explained in
recital 120, India does not belong to the same income group as the PRC and cannot be considered for the selection
of an appropriate representative country.
(141)When re-considering the selection of an appropriate representative country, the Commission relied on the
information contained in the first and second notes to the file and on the comments received in this regard. In the
first and second notes, the Commission had identified Mexico and Brazil as potential representative countries. While
there were no decisive factors favouring the choice of Brazil or Mexico as far as production of the product under
investigation, import statistics, labour or energy are concerned, the Commission selected Mexico based on the
availability of financial statements. Considering the comments received pointing to the absence of genuine
production in Mexico -contrary to Brazil- and the absence of financial statements for producers of the product under
investigation in Brazil, the Commission examined the availability of financial statements for companies active in the
same NACE sector as fused alumina in Brazil. In this context, the Commission identified 3 companies operating in
the NACE sector C 23.9 – Manufacture of abrasive products and non-metallic mineral products in Brazil with
available financial statements for the years 2023 and 2024 i.e. covering partially the investigation period. This sector
was considered representative as it includes companies whose industrial processes are close to those of producers of
the product under investigation as production steps such as high temperature processing, mechanical grinding and
classification systems, are fundamentally aligned across these companies and fused alumina manufacturing. On this
basis, the Commission considered that Brazil was appropriate representative country for the purpose of this
investigation.
3.2.5. Level of social and environmental protection
(142)Having established that Brazil was appropriate representative country, based on all of the above elements, there was
no need to carry out an assessment of the level of social and environmental protection in accordance with the last
sentence of Article 2(6a)(a) first indent of the basic Regulation.
22/50 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/ojEN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
3.2.5.1. Conclusion
(143)In view of the above analysis, Brazil met the criteria laid down in Article 2(6a)(a), first indent of the basic Regulation
in order to be considered as an appropriate representative country.
3.2.6. Sources used to establish undistorted costs
(144)In the First Note, the Commission listed the factors of production such as materials, energy and labour used in the
production of the product under investigation by the cooperating exporting producers and invited the interested
parties to comment and propose readily available information on undistorted values for each of the factors of
production mentioned in that note.
(145)In the same note, the Commission stated that, in order to construct the normal value in accordance with
Article 2(6a)(a) of the basic Regulation, it would use GTA to establish the undistorted cost of most of the factors of
production, notably the raw materials. In the second note, the Commission listed certain sources for labour cost and
energy. Given the intended change in the appropriate representative country, these sources for labour and energy will
no longer be used should Brazil be used as an appropriate representative country. Rather the Commission will use
Brazilian sources for establishing undistorted costs of labour(68)and energy(69).
(146)In the Second Note, the Commission also informed the interested parties that due to the large number of factors of
production of the sampled exporting producers that provided complete information and the negligible weight of
some of the raw materials in the total cost of production, these negligible items were grouped under ‘consumables’.
Further, the Commission informed that it would calculate the percentage of the consumables on the total cost of raw
materials and apply this percentage to the recalculated cost of raw materials when using the established undistorted
benchmarks in the appropriate representative country.
3.2.6.1. Factors of production
(147)Considering all the information submitted by the interested parties and collected during the verification visits, the
following factors of production and their sources have been identified in order to determine the normal value in
accordance with Article 2(6a)(a) of the basic Regulation:
Table 1
Factors of production of fused alumina
Commodity Unit of Undistorted value
Factor of Production Source
Code measurement (CNY)
Raw materials
Calcined Bauxite 2606 00 12 Global Trade Atlas(1) kg 4,03
2606 00 90 (‘GTA’)
Artificial Corundum 2818 10 GTA kg 7,45
Silicon Carbide 2849 20 GTA kg 22,81
Aluminium Oxide 2818 20 10 GTA kg 13,60
2818 20 90
Anthracite Coal 2701 11 GTA kg 1,24
(68) https://www.ibge.gov.br/estatisticas/economicas/industria/9042-pesquisa-industrial-anual.html?=&t=downloads.
(69) https://www.gov.br/mme/pt-br/assuntos/secretarias/sntep/publicacoes/boletins-mensais-de-energia/boletins/2023-1/ingles/brazilian-
monthly-energy-bulletin-january-2023.pdf/view.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/oj 23/50EN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
Commodity Unit of Undistorted value
Factor of Production Source
Code measurement (CNY)
Aluminium Hydroxide 2818 30 GTA kg 10,29
Iron Filings 7204 41 GTA kg 1,92
Non-calcined Petroleum Coke 2713 11 GTA kg 0,81
Consumables
By-products
Slag, ash and residues 2620 99 90 GTA kg [3,50-7,50]
Labour
Labour N/A Instituto Brasileiro de Hour 58,36
Geografia e Estatística
(IBGE)
Energy
Electricity N/A Ministry of Mines and kWh 0,98
Energy of Brazil
Gas N/A Ministry of Mines and m3 4,32
Energy of Brazil
(1) http://www.gtis.com/gta/secure/default.cfm.
(148)The Commission included a value for manufacturing overhead costs in order to cover costs not included in the
factors of production referred to above. To establish this amount, the Commission expressed the manufacturing
overhead cost incurred by the cooperating exporting producers for the production of the product under
investigation as a percentage of the actual cost of the used raw materials and then applied the same percentage to the
undistorted cost of the same raw materials in order to obtain the undistorted manufacturing overhead costs. The
Commission considered that, in the context of this investigation, the ratio between the exporting producer’s raw
material and the reported overhead costs could be reasonably used as an indication to estimate the undistorted
manufacturing overhead costs when delivered to the company’s factory.
3.2.6.2. Raw materials
(149)In order to establish the undistorted price of raw materials as delivered at the gate of a representative country
producer, the Commission used as a basis the weighted average import price to the representative country as
reported in the GTA to which import duties and transport costs were added. An import price in the representative
country was determined as a weighted average of unit prices of imports from all third countries excluding the PRC
and countries which are not members of the WTO, listed in Annex I to Regulation (EU) 2015/755. The Commission
decided to exclude imports from the PRC into the representative country as it concluded in recitals 110 and 115 that
it is not appropriate to use domestic prices and costs in the PRC due to the existence of significant distortions in
accordance with Article 2(6a)(b) of the basic Regulation. Given that there is no evidence showing that the same
distortions do not equally affect products intended for export, the Commission considered that the same distortions
affected export prices.
(150)Imerys and Tyrolit commented that the HS code for calcined bauxite appears to be incorrect, as it should fall under
the same CN code as bauxite – specifically, all aluminium ores and concentrates are classified under HS code 2606.
Additionally, Tyrolit noted that calcined bauxite is not a homogeneous commodity, with unit prices varying
significantly. Therefore, Tyrolit recommended using pricing data from reputable sources such as CM Group or Fast
Markets, adding transport costs where appropriate, or conducting cross-checks by comparing import prices in GTA
24/50 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/ojEN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
with readily available market prices to avoid significant deviations from expected prices. Lastly, Tyrolit asserted that
aluminium oxide powder, commonly referred to as alumina, is the primary raw material for producing various types
of fused alumina and should not be regarded as a waste by-product of the fusion process involving calcined bauxite.
(151)With regard to the claim concerning the classification of calcined bauxite and the Commission confirmed that, in
accordance with the Combined Nomenclature (CN) and the Harmonised System (HS), all aluminium ores and
concentrates, including calcined bauxite, fall under CN code 2606. No evidence was provided to demonstrate that
this classification was incorrect or that its use led to unreliable data. With regard to the suggestion to use pricing
data from sources such as CM Group or Fastmarkets, the interested parties did not submit any concrete data from
these sources, nor did they substantiate why such data would be more reliable than GTA import statistics. While the
Commission has access to Fastmarkets, the information contained therein was not considered an appropriate basis to
determine the benchmark for this factor of production as it did either not correspond to that factor of production at
stake or related to a Chinese port price quotation. Therefore, the Commission rejected this claim.
(152)With regard to aluminium oxide powder, considering the absolute and relative negligible value of this factor of
production in the total cost of manufacturing, it was moved under consumables for the purpose of constructing
normal value. This claim therefore became irrelevant.
(153)As explained in recital 127, several interested parties claimed that, should Brazil be selected as an appropriate
representative country, the undistorted price for bauxite and calcined bauxite should be based on export statistics
rather than import statistics as they would correspond to specialised forms of bauxite intended for specific
applications. The Commission noted that, the benchmark was actually in the range of the price paid by Union
producers for the same factor of production. On this basis, this claim was rejected.
(154)Runbao objected to the use of Brazil’s GTA import statistics for silicon carbide to determine the value of this factor of
production, arguing that Brazil’s import volumes during the investigation period were too low to be considered
representative and that there is significant price dispersion among Brazil’s import sources. As an alternative, Runbao
proposed using Turkey as the source for the benchmark price, citing Turkey’s significantly higher import volume of
silicon carbide, lower number of minor suppliers and classification as an upper-middle-income country comparable
to China. Runbao further argued that Turkey’s import data is publicly available and more reliable and submitted data
from Trade Map in support of its claim.
(155)After reviewing Brazilian import statistics, the Commission observed that a marginal share in quantity of imports
from countries showed abnormally high import unit prices, several hundred times higher than the weighted average
price established. Considering that these volumes must have corresponded to a different product than the relevant
FOP included under the same HS code, the Commission decided to exclude the quantities in question. As a result,
the benchmark price was based on over 91% of the import volume into Brazil during the investigation period. As
for the proposal to use Turkey as an alternative source, the Commission noted that Turkey was not retained as an
appropriate representative country in this investigation due to the absence of production of the product under
investigation. Therefore, Turkey’s import data could not be used for the purpose of determining benchmark prices,
and the claim was rejected.
(156)In the absence of available import statistics in Brazil for ‘Slag, ash and residues’ that reflected the specific by-product
generated in the production process of the product under investigation by one cooperating exporting producer, the
Commission had to rely on an alternative method to establish the undistorted price for ‘Slag, ash and residues’. In
this regard, the Commission calculated a ratio between the domestic sales price in the PRC of this by-product and
the total material cost. This ratio was then applied to the undistorted total material cost calculated and the resultant
amount was then divided by the actual quantity sold to arrive at the undistorted unit price. For reasons of
confidentiality, the calculated benchmark is reported in ranges in Table 1. However, it was disclosed to the exporting
producer concerned in its specific disclosure.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/oj 25/50EN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
(157)In order to establish the undistorted price of raw materials, as provided by Article 2(6a)(a), first indent of the basic
Regulation, the Commission added the relevant import duties to the CIF value recorded in the import statistics of the
representative country, as available in GTA.
(158)The Commission expressed the transport cost incurred by the cooperating exporting producers for the supply of raw
materials as a percentage of the actual cost of such raw materials and then applied the same percentage to the
undistorted cost of the same raw materials in order to obtain the undistorted transport cost. The Commission
considered that, in the context of this investigation, the ratio between the exporting producer’s raw material and the
reported transport costs could be reasonably used as an indication to estimate the undistorted transport costs of raw
materials when delivered to the company’s factory.
3.2.6.3. Labour
(159)Insitituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (IBGE) publishes detailed information on wages in different economic
sectors in Brazil. The Commission used the latest available statistics covering 2022 for average labour cost in
relation to the economic activity 23.91 ‘Fabricação de produtos cerâmicos refratários’ according to the Brazilian
classification CNAE 2.0. The IBGE statistics provide information on the total annual wages and related charges and
on the number of employees per sector of economic activity for the year 2022. Only information related to staff
linked to production was considered. Values were indexed to the investigation period using the national consumer
price index(70).
3.2.6.4. Electricity and gas
(160)The price of electricity and gas for companies (industrial users) in Brazil is published by the Ministry of Mines and
Energy of Brazil(71)for the investigation period. The rates published in the monthly bulletin included the ‘Imposto
sobre Circulação de Mercadorias e Serviços’ (‘ICMS’), a tax levied by the Brazilian states on the circulation of goods
and the provision of interstate and inter municipal transportation and communications services. This tax could be
claimed back by the industrial users and was deducted from the established benchmark. As ICMS was collected by
Brazilian states at the rate ranging from 17 % to 18 % depending on the state, during the investigation period, the
Commission recalculated the electricity and gas benchmarks, deducting an average of 17,5 % ICMS. The recalculated
electricity benchmark is an average industrial tariff for the IP and is 0,98 CNY/kWh while gas benchmark is 4,32
CNY/m3.
3.2.6.5. Manufacturing overhead costs, SG & A costs and profits
(161)According to Article 2(6a)(a) of the basic Regulation, ‘the constructed normal value shall include an undistorted and
reasonable amount for administrative, selling and general costs and for profits’. In addition, a value for
manufacturing overhead costs needs to be established to cover costs not included in the factors of production
referred to above.
(162)The manufacturing overheads incurred by the cooperating exporting producers were expressed as a share of the costs
of manufacturing actually incurred by the exporting producers. This percentage was applied to the undistorted costs
of manufacturing.
(163)For establishing an undistorted and reasonable amount for SG & A costs and profit, the Commission relied on the
financial data for years 2023 or 2024, depending on the availability of companies’ data, for three Brazilian
companies operating under NACE Code 23.9. These companies are Bozel Brasil S.A., Trevo Industrial de
Acartonados S/A and Technosulfur Sistema de tratamento de metais liquidos Ltda as extracted from Orbis. Greca
Distribuidora de Asflatos Ltda, also identified in NACE Code 23.9, was disregarded since the latest identified readily
available financial statements were from 2022, that is outside the investigation period.
(70) https://www.ibge.gov.br/en/statistics/economic/prices-and-costs/17136-national-consumer-pricce-index.html?edicao=36055&t=downloads.
(71) https://www.gov.br/mme/pt-br/assuntos/secretarias/sntep/publicacoes/boletins-mensais-de-energia/boletins/2023-1/ingles/brazilian-
monthly-energy-bulletin-january-2023.pdf/view.
26/50 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/ojEN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
3.2.6.6. Calculation
(164)On the basis of the above, the Commission constructed the normal value per product type on an ex-works basis in
accordance with Article 2(6a)(a) of the basic Regulation.
(165)First, the Commission established the undistorted manufacturing costs. The Commission applied the undistorted unit
costs to the actual consumption of the individual factors of production of the cooperating exporting producers.
These consumption rates provided by the cooperating exporting producers were verified during the verification. The
Commission multiplied the usage factors by the undistorted costs per unit observed in the representative country, as
described in recitals 144 to 146.
(166)Once the undistorted manufacturing cost established, the Commission added the manufacturing overheads as
explained in recital 162.
(167)The SG & A costs and profit determined on the basis of the financial statements of 3 companies as explained in recital
163 were applied to the sum of undistorted manufacturing cost and manufacturing overheads; i.e. the costs of
production.
(168)SG & A costs expressed as a percentage of the Costs of Goods Sold (‘COGS’) and applied to the undistorted costs of
production, amounted to 13,25 %. The profit expressed as a percentage of the COGS and applied to the undistorted
costs of production, amounted to 19,68 %.
(169)On that basis, the Commission constructed the normal value per product type on an ex-works basis in accordance
with Article 2(6a)(a) of the basic Regulation.
3.3. Export price
(170)The sampled exporting producers exported to the Union either directly to independent customers or through a
related company acting as an importer.
(171)For the exporting producer that exported the product concerned directly to independent customers in the Union, the
export price was the price actually paid or payable for the product concerned when sold for export to the Union, in
accordance with Article 2(8) of the basic Regulation.
(172)For the exporting producer that exported the product concerned to the Union through a related company acting as
an importer based in the Union, the export price was established on the basis of the price at which the imported
product was first resold to independent customers in the Union, in accordance with Article 2(9) of the basic
Regulation. In this case, adjustments to the price were made for all costs incurred between importation and resale,
including SG & A expenses actually incurred by the related importer, and a profit (of [4-6] %(72)) which was
obtained from the two sampled unrelated importers in the Union.
3.4. Comparison
(173)Article 2(10) of the basic Regulation requires the Commission to make a fair comparison between the normal value
and the export price at the same level of trade and to make allowances for differences in factors which affect prices
and price comparability. In the case at hand the Commission chose to compare the normal value and the export
price of the sampled exporting producers at the ex-works level of trade. As further explained below, where
appropriate, the normal value and the export price were adjusted in order to: (i) net them back to the ex-workslevel;
and (ii) make allowances for differences in factors which were claimed, and demonstrated, to affect prices and price
comparability.
3.4.1. Adjustments made to the normal value
(174)As explained in recital 169, the normal value was established at the ex-works level of trade by using costs of
production together with amounts for SG & A and for profit, which were considered to be reasonable for that level
of trade. Therefore, no adjustments were necessary to net the normal value back to the ex-works level.
(72) Considering that the data used related to a limited number of parties, information on profit had to be ranged.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/oj 27/50EN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
(175)Regarding allowances, the Commission found that the HS code under which the product under investigation is
classified for exports in the PRC is subject to a non-refundable VAT of 13 %, whereas the normal value had been
constructed net of VAT. Therefore, in order to ensure a fair comparison, an upward adjustment of the normal value
has been made in accordance with Article 2(10)(k) of the basic Regulation for the exporting producers subject to
this VAT. The Commission found no reasons for making any other allowances to the normal value, nor were such
allowances claimed by any of the sampled exporting producers.
3.4.2. Adjustments made to the export price
(176)In order to net the export price back to the ex-works level of trade, adjustments were made on the account of:
customs duty, other import charges, freight, insurance, handling loading and ancillary expenses.
(177)Allowances were made for the following factors affecting prices and price comparability: transport, insurance,
handling and loading, packing expenses, credits costs and bank charges. An adjustment was also made for
commissions under Article 2(10)(i) of the basic Regulation for the related trader of Runbao by deducting a
constructed commission (based on the SG & A costs of the related trader and a notional profit of [4-6 %] used by
analogy to one applied to related importers, as explained in recital 172 above.
3.5. Dumping margins
(178)For the sampled cooperating exporting producers, the Commission compared the weighted average normal value of
each type of the like product with the weighted average export price of the corresponding type of the product
concerned, in accordance with Article 2(11) and (12) of the basic Regulation.
(179)On this basis, the provisional weighted average dumping margins expressed as a percentage of the CIF Union frontier
price, duty unpaid, are as follows:
Company Provisional dumping margin (%)
Chongqing Saite Corundum Co., Ltd. 125,23
Luoyang Runbao Abrasives Co., Ltd. 111,95
(180)For the cooperating exporting producers outside the sample, the Commission calculated the weighted average
dumping margin, in accordance with Article 9(6) of the basic Regulation. Therefore, that margin was established on
the basis of the margins of the sampled exporting producers, on a weighted average basis.
(181)On this basis, the provisional dumping margin of the cooperating exporting producers outside the sample is
118,88 %.
(182)For all other exporting producers in the PRC, the Commission established the dumping margin on the basis of the
facts available, in accordance with Article 18 of the basic Regulation. To this end, the Commission determined the
level of cooperation of the exporting producers. The level of cooperation is the volume of exports of the
cooperating exporting producers to the Union expressed as proportion of the total imports from the country
concerned to the Union in the IP, that were established on the basis of Eurostat. As mentioned in recital 20, the level
of cooperation in this case is very low because the exports of the cooperating exporting producers constituted less
than 20 % of the total imports into the Union during the IP.
(183)The Commission recalled that section 10 of the Notice of Initiation(73)had informed interested parties that failure to
cooperate, or only partial cooperation, could lead to findings based on facts available under Article 18 of the basic
Regulation, potentially resulting in less favourable outcomes for those parties. Given that the interested parties were
clearly warned of the consequences of non-cooperation, and that the level of cooperation in this case was
particularly low, the Commission deemed it appropriate to determine the residual dumping duty based on the
(73) See recital 1 above.
28/50 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/ojEN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
dumping bahaviour observed in relation to a subset of sales by Saite – the sampled exporting producer with the
highest dumping margin rep–resenting 7 % of the total export volume of all sampled companies to the Union
during the investigation period. These sales were considered a reasonable and representative proxy for the dumping
behaviour of the non-cooperating exporters.
(184)The residual dumping margin was therefore set at 136,36 %.
(185)The provisional dumping margins, expressed as a percentage of the CIF Union frontier price, duty unpaid, are as
follows:
Company Provisional dumping margin (%)
Chongqing Saite Corundum Co., Ltd. 125,23
Luoyang Runbao Abrasives Co., Ltd. 111,95
Other cooperating companies 118,88
All other imports originating in the PRC 136,36
4. INJURY
4.1. Definition of the Union industry and Union production
(186)The like product was manufactured by nine producers in the Union during the investigation period. They constitute
the ‘Union industry’ within the meaning of Article 4(1) of the basic Regulation.
(187)The total Union production during the investigation period was established at around 131 810 tonnes on the basis of
all the available information concerning the Union industry, such as data contained in the questionnaire reply of the
complainant relating to all Union producers and the questionnaire replies received from the sampled Union
producers. As indicated in recital 14, the sampled Union producers represented more than 44 % of the total Union
production of the like product.
4.2. Union consumption
(188)The Commission established the Union consumption on the basis of (a) data submitted by the complainant
concerning the Union industry’s sales of the like product to unrelated customers in the Union, as cross-checked with
the sales volumes reported by the sampled Union producers; (b) imports of the product under investigation from all
third countries as reported in Eurostat.
(189)Union consumption developed as follows:
Table 2
Union consumption (tonnes)
2021 2022 2023 Investigation period
Total Union 379 436 367 672 294 891 305 360
consumption
Index 100 97 78 80
Source: Complainant, sampled Union producers and Eurostat.
(190)Consumption in the Union decreased by 20 % during the period considered. Union consumption declined by 3 %
from 2021 to 2022, followed by a significant drop of 19 percentage points in 2023. From 2023 to the investigation
period, consumption increased by 2 percentage points but remained 20 % below the beginning of the period
considered.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/oj 29/50EN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
4.3. Imports from the country concerned
4.3.1. Volume and market share of the imports from the country concerned
(191)The Commission established the volume of imports on the basis of Eurostat data. The market share of the imports
was established by comparing the volume of imports with the Union consumption.
(192)Imports into the Union from the country concerned developed as follows:
Table 3
Import volume and market share
2021 2022 2023 Investigation period
Volume of imports 140 372 175 343 151 650 160 549
from the country
concerned (tonnes)
Index 100 125 108 114
Market share (%) 37 48 51 53
Index 100 129 139 142
Source: Eurostat.
(193)Imports from the country concerned increased from 140 372 tonnes to 160 549 tonnes over the period considered,
an increase of 14 %. After a significant rise of 25 % in 2022, where imports peaked at 175 343 tonnes, volumes
declined in 2023 to 151 650 tonnes before partially recovering during the investigation period. The overall increase
during the investigation period was 14 %.
(194)The market share of those imports increased from 37 % to 53 % over the period considered, an increase of 42 % in a
period of constant declining of Union consumption.
4.3.2. Prices of the imports from the country concerned and price undercutting
(195)The Commission established the prices of imports on the basis of data provided by the cooperating exporting
producers that represented 4 % of Chinese imports to the Union in the IP.
(196)The average price of imports into the Union from the country concerned developed as follows:
Table 4
Import prices (EUR/ tonne)
2021 2022 2023 Investigation period
China 809 1 169 865 878
Index 100 144 107 108
Source: Eurostat.
(197)The average import price from China increased by 8 % over the period considered. Prices first increased by around
44 % to reach 1 169 EUR/ tonne in 2022. This was followed by a drop of 37 percentage points in 2023, with prices
falling to 865 EUR/ tonne, before rising slightly to 878 EUR/tonne during the investigation period. The price
fluctuation was mainly influenced by fluctuations in the cost of raw materials.
30/50 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/ojEN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
(198)The Commission determined the price undercutting during the investigation period by comparing the weighted
average sales prices per product type of the sampled Union producers charged to unrelated customers on the Union
market, adjusted to an ex-works level, and the corresponding weighted average prices per product type of the
imports from the sampled Chinese producers to the first independent customer on the Union market, established on
a Cost, insurance, freight (CIF) basis, with appropriate adjustments for customs duties and post-importation costs.
(199)The price comparison was made on a type-by-type basis for transactions at the same level of trade, duly adjusted
where necessary, and after deduction of rebates and discounts. An adjustment in the PCN was necessary given an
identified inconsistency in the PCN description concerning brown fused alumina, as detailed in recital 11. The result
of the comparison was expressed as a percentage of the sampled Union producers’ theoretical turnover during the
investigation period. It showed a weighted average undercutting margin of between 42,94 % and 61,37 % by the
imports from the country concerned on the Union market. Around 99,9 % of the import volumes from sampled
exporting producers were found to be undercutting the Union industry’s prices.
(200)In addition to price undercutting, there was also significant price suppression within the meaning of Article 3(3) of
the basic Regulation. Due to the significant price pressure caused by the low-priced dumped imports from Chinese
exporting producers, the Union industry was unable to raise the prices throughout the IP in line with the
development of costs of production and in order to achieve a reasonable level of profit, as set out in Table 8 below.
The significant price suppression is confirmed by the data in Tables 4 and 8 as well as the price underselling found
on the basis of the data provided by the sampled exporting producers.
4.4. Economic situation of the Union industry
4.4.1. General remarks
(201)In accordance with Article 3(5) of the basic Regulation, the examination of the impact of the dumped imports on the
Union industry included an evaluation of all economic indicators having a bearing on the state of the Union industry
during the period considered.
(202)As mentioned in section 1.5, sampling was used for the determination of possible injury suffered by the Union
industry.
(203)For the injury determination, the Commission distinguished between macroeconomic and microeconomic injury
indicators. The Commission evaluated the macroeconomic indicators on the basis of data contained in questionnaire
reply of the complainant relating to all Union producers, cross-checked where necessary with the questionnaire
replies of the sampled Union producers. The Commission evaluated the microeconomic indicators on the basis of
data contained in the questionnaire replies from the sampled Union producers. Both sets of data were found to be
representative of the economic situation of the Union industry.
(204)The macroeconomic indicators are: production, production capacity, capacity utilisation, sales volume, market share,
growth, employment, productivity, magnitude of the dumping margin, and recovery from past dumping.
(205)The microeconomic indicators are: average unit prices, unit cost, labour costs, inventories, profitability, cash flow,
investments, return on investments, and ability to raise capital.
4.4.2. Macroeconomic indicators
4.4.2.1. Production, production capacity and capacity utilisation
(206)The total Union production, production capacity and capacity utilisation developed over the period considered as
follows:
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/oj 31/50EN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
Table 5
Production, production capacity and capacity utilisation
2021 2022 2023 Investigation period
Production volume 210 321 187 988 139 354 131 810
(tonnes)
Index 100 89 66 63
Production capacity 305 500 305 500 305 500 305 500
(tonnes)
Index 100 100 100 100
Capacity utilisation (%) 69 62 46 43
Index 100 89 66 63
Source: Complainant and sampled Union producers.
(207)During the period considered, the Union industry’s production volume experienced a consistent and significant
decrease of 37 %. From 2021 to 2022, production decreased by 11 %. This downward trend accelerated in 2023,
with production falling by 34 % compared to 2021. The decline continued during the investigation period, reaching
a low of 131 810 tonnes, a 37 % decrease from the initial volume.
(208)During the period considered, the Union industry’s production capacity remained stable at a level of 305 500 tonnes.
Given the decrease in the production volume in the period considered, the capacity utilisation sharply decreased from
69 % in 2021 to 43 % in the IP.
4.4.2.2. Sales volume and market share
(209)The Union industry’s sales volume and market share developed over the period considered as follows:
Table 6
Sales volume and market share
2021 2022 2023 Investigation period
Total Sales volume on 155 270 138 751 103 994 98 005
the Union market
(tonnes)
Index 100 89 67 63
Market share (%) 41 38 35 32
Index 100 92 86 78
Source: Complainant, sampled Union producers and Eurostat.
(210)Over the period considered the Union industry’s sales volume decreased significantly by 37 % and its market shared
reduced by 22 %, reducing its market share from 41 % in 2021 to 32 % in the IP.
32/50 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/ojEN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
4.4.2.3. Growth
(211)In the context of declining Union consumption, the Union industry suffered significant decreases in production, sales
volume, and market share that outpaced the overall Union market contraction. The Union industry's performance
deteriorated more sharply than the market, highlighting the industry's particularly vulnerable position during the
period considered and negative growth.
4.4.2.4. Employment and productivity
(212)Employment and productivity developed over the period considered as follows:
Table 7
Employment and productivity
2021 2022 2023 Investigation period
Number of employees 1 145 1 085 1 049 962
Index 100 95 92 84
Productivity (tonnes/ 184 173 133 137
employee)
Index 100 94 72 75
Source: Complainant and sampled Union producers.
(213)The Union industry experienced a decline in employment of 16 % over the period considered, with the total number
of employees falling from 1 145 in 2021 to 962 during the investigation period.
(214)In view of the decrease in production and employment the productivity of the Union industry’s workforce, measured
as tonnes per employee produced per year, decreased by 25 % over the period considered. Productivity increased
from 2023 to the investigation period by 3 %, this marginal improvement was not due to a recovery in output but
rather to a further reduction in the workforce.
4.4.2.5. Magnitude of the dumping margin and recovery from past dumping
(215)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 volume and prices of imports from the
country concerned.
(216)This is the first anti-dumping investigation regarding the product concerned. Therefore, no data were available to
assess the effects of possible past dumping.
4.4.3. Microeconomic indicators
4.4.3.1. Prices and factors affecting prices
(217)The weighted average unit sales prices of the sampled Union producers to unrelated customers in the Union
developed over the period considered as follows:
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/oj 33/50EN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
Table 8
Sales prices in the Union
2021 2022 2023 Investigation period
Average unit sales [1 310-1 536] [1 780-2 093] [1 630-1 914] [1 446-1 692]
price in the Union on
the total market
(EUR/ tonne)
Index 100 139 126 109
Unit cost of [1 321-1 548] [1 931-2 271] [2 010-2 360] [1 716-2 009]
production (EUR/
tonne)
Index 100 149 154 129
Source: Sampled Union producers.
(218)Sales prices on the Union market to unrelated parties increased 9 % over the period considered. In 2022, the price
increased by 39 % reflecting rising input costs. However, this was not sustained. In 2023, the average price declined
and continued to fall during the investigation period, reaching EUR [1 446-1 692] per tonne.
(219)Over the same period, the unit cost of production of sampled union producers increased by 29 %. From 2021 to
2022, there was a significant increase of 49 %. This trend continued in 2023 with a further increase of 5 percentage
points, before decreasing in the investigation period. The overall rise in Union prices was primarily driven by the
development of raw material prices and the companies’ inability to take full advantage of economies of scale due to a
reduction in sales and production.
4.4.3.2. Labour costs
(220)The average labour costs of the sampled Union producers developed over the period considered as follows:
Table 9
Average labour costs per employee
2021 2022 2023 Investigation period
Average labour costs [73 334-85 951] [77 354-90 954] [75 976-89 190] [85 504-100 058]
per employee (EUR)
Index 100 108 105 115
Source: Sampled Union producers.
(221)The average labour costs per employee increased by 15 % over the period considered.
4.4.3.3. Inventories
(222)Stock levels of the sampled Union producers developed over the period considered as follows:
34/50 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/ojEN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
Table 10
Inventories
2021 2022 2023 Investigation period
Closing stocks [14 355-16 824] [14 828-17 435] [12 148-14 260] [12 999-15 212]
(tonnes)
Index 100 106 86 90
Closing stocks as a [16-19] [20-24] [22-26] [18-21]
percentage of
production
Index 100 125 138 112
Source: Sampled Union producers.
(223)In absolute terms, the stocks of the sampled Union producers declined by 10 % over the period considered. This
overall reduction, however, contains significant fluctuations within the period. Specifically, stock levels increased by
6 % between 2021 and 2022, followed by a pronounced decrease of 20 percentage points in 2023. Subsequently,
from 2023 to the investigation period, stocks increased again by 4 percentage points.
(224)When production levels are taken into consideration, the percentage of closing stocks as a percentage of production
increased by 12 % over the period considered. Notably, this ratio increased by 38 % between 2021 and 2023,
indicating a substantial discrepancy between production and stock clearance. Although the Union industry managed
to partially realign stock levels with production from 2023 to the IP, the closing stock ratio remained 12 % higher
than in 2021.
(225)This trend indicates that despite efforts to align production, the accumulation of unsold stock, particularly during
periods of declining production, reflects difficulties in accessing the Union market.
4.4.3.4. Profitability, cash flow, investments, return on investments and ability to raise capital
(226)Profitability, cash flow, investments and return on investments of the sampled Union producers developed over the
period considered as follows:
Table 11
Profitability, cash flow, investments and return on investments
2021 2022 2023 Investigation period
Profitability of sales [2-6] [3-7] [(– 17)-(– 13)] [(– 14)-(– 10)]
in the Union to
unrelated customers
(% of sales turnover)
Index 100 146 – 399 – 317
Cash flow (EUR) [(– 1 566 629)- [(– 7 115 748)- [(– 12 241 286)- [(– 8 766 054)-
(– 1 336 665] (– 6 051 711)] (– 10 427 762)] (– 7 490 992)]
Index – 100 – 463 – 789 – 554
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/oj 35/50EN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
2021 2022 2023 Investigation period
Investments (EUR) [2 289 616- [6 081 027- [3 560 302- [2 999 817-
2 683 529] 7 150 218] 4 179 484] 3 510 425]
Index 100 271 157 130
Return on [(– 10)-(– 8)] [(– 11)-(– 9)] [(– 75)-(– 63)] [(– 41)-(– 35)]
investments
Index – 100 – 106 – 731 – 387
Source: Sampled Union producers.
(227)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. The
profitability of the sampled producers declined significantly over the period considered, falling from nearly [2-6] %
in 2021 to approximately [(– 14)-(– 10)] % during the investigation period. Profitability temporary increased
in 2022 to [3-7] %, followed by a sharp downturn to a loss of [(– 17)-(– 13)] % in 2023. Despite a partial recovery
that followed, profitability remained negative during the investigation period.
(228)The net cash flow is the ability of the Union producers to self-finance their activities. The cash flow was negative
throughout the period considered, deteriorating further due to investment expenditures and increase of operational
losses. This persistent negative cash flow was sustained by financial support from the ultimate shareholders of the
Union producers, who continued to back the companies’ investment programmes despite the challenging financial
environment.
(229)The level of yearly investments increased over the period considered by 30 %, it notably increased between 2021
and 2022 by 171 %, to later decrease in the following period until the IP. The increase in investments was primarily
aimed at maintaining existing capacities and replacing essential production assets. The investment continued despite
severe competition, loss of market share and a financially difficult situation.
(230)The return on investments is the profit in percentage of the net book value of investments. It fell over the period
considered by 287 %, starting from [(– 10)-(– 8)] % in 2021 to [(– 41)-(– 35)] % in the investigation period. The
negative development showed that, although investments have continued in order to maintain competitiveness, the
returns on those investments decreased substantially over the period considered
(231)The sampled Union producers’ ability to raise capital, as explained in recital 227, was based on the financial support
from the ultimate shareholders of the Union producers, who continued to back the companies’ investments.
4.5. Conclusion on injury
(232)In a context of a substantial decrease of the Union consumption (– 20 %), imports from China increased noticeably
during the period considered (+ 14 %), at prices which significantly undercut those of the Union industry. This
allowed Chinese exporting producers to reach a market share of 53 % in the IP (up from 37 % in 2021)
(233)In these circumstances, the Union industry’s economic situation worsened as shown by all major macro-indicators
presenting a negative trend: production (– 37 %), Union sales (– 37 %) and a significant reduction of its market share
(from 41 % to 32 %) in the period considered
(234)In reaction to the pressure of low Chinese import prices, the Union industry tried to reduce costs and adjustments in
employment (– 16 %) were undertaken. Investments continued over the period considered in attempt to stay
competitive. However, as a result of the pressure exerted by dumped Chinese imports in terms of increased volumes
and low prices, Union sales, productivity and return on investments dropped rapidly in the period considered.
36/50 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/ojEN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
(235)The cost of production of the Union industry went up significantly during the period considered (+ 29 %), mainly
because of a strong increase in the raw material prices.
(236)The Union industry’s cost increased more than sales prices. Consequently, profitability collapsed in the period
considered, from a moderate situation (+ [2-6] %) in 2021 to an unsustainable loss-making scenario
([(– 14)-(– 10)] %) in the IP.
(237)On the basis of the above, the Commission concluded at this stage that the Union industry suffered material injury
within the meaning of Article 3(5) of the basic Regulation.
5. CAUSATION
(238)In accordance with Article 3(6) of the basic Regulation, the Commission examined whether the dumped imports
from the country 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 country concerned was not attributed to the dumped imports. These factors are: imports from
third countries, export performance of the Union industry, contraction in EU consumption, increase of energy prices
in the Union, competitive disadvantage in the use of the main raw material, lack of adequate level of investment, self-
imports of Chinese fused alumina.
5.1. Effects of the dumped imports
(239)The deterioration of the economic situation of the Union industry coincided with significant and increasing market
penetration of dumped imports from China, which consistently undercut the Union industry’s prices and led to
price suppression. In this respect, the evolution of Chinese import volumes and prices, as reflected in tables 3 and 4,
suppressed price levels of the Union industry, establishing a causal nexus between the two.
(240)Imports from China increased by 14 % during the period considered, from ca. 140 372 tonnes in 2021, representing
a market share of 37 %, to 160 549 tonnes in the IP, representing a market share of 53 %. These increasing low-priced
imports prevented the Union industry to increase its prices in line with the increase in the cost of production.
Similarly, the decline in market share and sales volume, which in turn resulted in a decrease in production output,
had a detrimental effect on the industry's unit production costs due to reduced economies of scale.
(241)This had a strong negative impact on the Union industry. In a situation of increasing costs and price pressure exerted
by the Chinese dumped imports, the Union industry was precluded from setting prices and production volumes at
sustainable levels, which resulted in a very strong drop in profitability from 4 % to losses (– 13 %), and the
consequent deterioration of its financial indicators.
(242)It was, therefore, provisionally concluded that dumped imports from China caused material injury to the Union
industry in terms of price and volume.
5.2. Effects of other factors
5.2.1. Imports from third countries
(243)The volume of imports from other third countries developed over the period considered as follows:
Table 12
Imports from third countries
Country 2021 2022 2023 Investigation period
Ukraine Volume (tonnes) 21 662 14 275 11 958 16 705
Index 100 66 55 77
Market share (%) 6 4 4 5
Average price (EUR/ 598 1 007 856 775
tonne)
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/oj 37/50EN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
Country 2021 2022 2023 Investigation period
Index 100 168 143 130
United States Volume (tonnes) 6 012 3 066 2 757 6 236
Index 100 49 46 104
Market share (%) 2 1 1 2
Average price 4 500 9 226 8 763 4 339
(EUR/tonne)
Index 100 205 195 96
Brazil Volume (tonnes) 7 587 10 641 5 729 6 473
Index 100 140 76 85
Market share (%) 2 3 2 2
Average price 988 1 213 1 261 1 158
(EUR/tonne)
Index 100 123 128 117
Bahrain Volume (tonnes) 3 995 5 951 8 234 5 059
Index 100 149 206 127
Market share (%) 1 2 3 2
Average price 1 064 1 116 896 840
(EUR/tonne)
Index 100 105 84 79
Total of all third Volume (tonnes) 83 793 53 577 39 244 46 804
countries except the
country concerned
Index 100 64 47 56
Market share (%) 22 15 13 15
Average price 943 1 255 999 979
(EUR/tonne)
Index 100 133 106 104
Source: Eurostat.
(244)Compared to China the other third countries had a limited presence in the Union market in the period considered. In
the period considered the market shares of the biggest other third countries, Ukraine, United States, Brazil and
Bahrain, remained stable, with minimal or no variations, at a level in the IP of 5 %, 2 %, 2 % and 2 % respectively.
The combined market share of imports from all third countries except China decreased from 22 % in 2021 to 15 %
in the IP.
(245)During the period considered, Ukraine sold at lower prices than China. Bahrain sold at prices slightly below China
only during 2022 and the investigation period, while all other countries maintained higher price levels throughout
the period considered. Despite their lower pricing, Ukraine accounted for just 5 % of the market, significantly less
than China’s dominant 53 % in the IP. Bahrain’s market share was even smaller, at only 2 %. This limited market
presence of other third countries indicates that, although Ukraine and Bahrain offered lower prices at some point,
their overall impact was insufficient to weaken the causal link between the dumped Chinese imports and the
material injury suffered by Union producers.
38/50 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/ojEN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
(246)On that basis, the Commission provisionally concluded that the impact of imports from other countries does not
attenuate the causal link between dumped Chinese imports and the material injury suffered by Union producers.
5.2.2. Export performance of the Union industry
(247)The volume of exports of the sampled Union producers developed over the period considered as follows:
Table 13
Export performance of the sampled Union producers
2021 2022 2023 Investigation period
Export volume (tonne) 26 049 20 031 13 849 15 649
Index 100 77 53 60
Average price (EUR/ 1 526 2 128 2 071 1 864
tonne)
Index 100 139 136 122
Source: Sampled Union producers.
(248)Export volumes from sampled Union producers declined by 40 % during the period considered, falling from 26 049
tonnes in 2021 to 15 649 tonnes during the investigation period. Average prices of exports increased by 22 % during
the period considered.
(249)As explained by the Union industry, the decline in the export performance of the Union producers is explained by the
pressure exerted by Chinese producers on other third-country markets, which in turn has caused a decrease in
exports by Union producers. The loss of export sales volume in absolute terms is significantly lower than the loss of
sales in the Union. Moreover, the average export price for sales to third countries was significantly higher by 21 %
than for Union sales throughout the period considered.
(250)On that basis, the Commission provisionally concluded that the impact of export performance does not attenuate the
causal link between dumped Chinese imports and the material injury suffered by Union producers.
5.2.3. Significant contraction in Union Consumption
(251)Some parties claimed that the reduction of the Union consumption was a source of the injury.
(252)While Union consumption decreased over the period considered, this only intensified the impact of Chinese dumped
imports. Union producer’s sales decreased steeper than Union consumption. Consumption decreased by 20 %, while
Union producers’ sales decreased by 37 % over the period considered. Similarly, imports from all other third
countries also declined significantly. In contrast, during the same period, Chinese market share increased from 37 %
to 53 % as a result of its low-priced imports.
(253)On that basis, the Commission provisionally concluded that the impact of the contraction in the Union consumption
does not attenuate the causal link between dumped Chinese imports and the material injury suffered by Union
producers.
5.2.4. Increase of energy prices in the Union
(254)Some parties claimed that the increase of energy prices in the Union was the source of the injury.
(255)Energy is one of the main cost components in the production of fused alumina. However, the investigation revealed
that in 2022, when energy prices were significantly higher than in the rest of the period considered, Union
producers were still able to generate profits and even improved their profitability compared to the previous year.
This was possible because part of the increased energy costs could be passed on to the users.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/oj 39/50EN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
(256)Notably, in 2023 and in the investigation period, when energy prices had dropped to significantly lower levels
compared to 2022, the Union industry was no longer able to adjust its prices accordingly, and profitability
collapsed. This indicates that while energy prices do influence production costs the key issue arose when Union
producers were prevented from aligning their prices with cost developments due to unfair competition from
dumped imports originating in China.
(257)On this basis, the Commission provisionally concluded that the impact of energy prices in the Union does not
attenuate the causal link between the dumped imports from China and the material injury suffered by Union
producers.
5.2.5. Competitive disadvantage in the use of the main raw material
(258)Some parties claimed that the source of the injury was the result of differences in the origin and cost of the raw
materials used by European and Chinese producers, distinguishing specifically between bauxite and alumina.
(259)Concerning the alleged disadvantage related to raw materials, the investigation has determined that there are no
significant differences in the production processes and the raw materials employed by Chinese and Union producers.
With respect to raw material costs, as detailed in Section 3.2.1 above, the Chinese raw material market was found to
be distorted.
5.2.6. Lack of adequate level of investment
(260)Some parties claimed that the Union industry suffered from a lack of investment and outdated production facilities,
and that this was a source of the injury.
(261)However, the investigation revealed that Union producers had invested in brand new facilities in recent years.
Furthermore, as shown in table 11, annual investment levels increased by 30 % over the considered period,
indicating that investment activity continued despite the challenging financial environment.
(262)On this basis, the Commission provisionally concluded that the alleged lack of investment does not correspond the
reality and does not attenuate the causal link between the dumped imports from China and the material injury
suffered by Union producers
5.2.7. Imports of Chinese fused alumina by the Union industry
(263)Some parties claimed that the Union industry imported themselves Chinese fused alumina, and that this was a source
of the injury.
(264)The investigation concluded that the Union industry imported some quantities of the product in question from
China. However, these imports were limited in volume, namely [2 800-3 800] tonnes, representing approximately
1 % of the Union consumption during the IP. The investigation also concluded that the Union industry did not just
resell the imported products, but rather processed them before reselling them. This provided added value. The sales
of these imports did not undercut the Union producer's own production, and they were insignificant in volume.
(265)Moreover, the fact that Chinese imports increased regardless of the evolution of the Union producer’s self-imports
shows that the Chinese imports would have risen and taken the EU’s market share even in the absence of the Union
producer's self-imports from China.
(266)On that basis, the Commission provisionally concluded that the impact of Union producers’ self-imports from China
does not attenuate the causal link between dumped Chinese imports and the material injury suffered by Union
producers.
5.3. Conclusion on causation
(267)In light of the above considerations, the Commission provisionally established a causal link between the injury
suffered by the Union industry and the dumped imports from China that suppressed the Union market price. As a
result of the significant increase of dumped imports from China the Union industry was precluded from setting
prices and production volumes at sustainable levels, which resulted in strong deterioration of its economic situation.
40/50 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/ojEN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
(268)The economic decline of the Union industry coincided with a sharp rise in low-priced dumped imports from China.
These imports consistently undercut Union prices, exerting strong downward pressure on market prices which led
to price suppression. As a result, the Union industry was unable to raise prices in line with rising production costs.
This led to falling sales, reduced output, and a significant drop in profitability. The timing and scale of these
developments establish a clear causal link between dumped imports and the material injury.
(269)The Commission examined alternative factors that could have contributed to the injury suffered by the Union
industry. These included imports from other third countries, the export performance of the Union industry, a
contraction in Union consumption, rising energy costs, the sourcing and cost of raw materials, an alleged lack of
investment and the self-import of Chinese fused alumina. However, none of these were found to attenuate the causal
link between dumped Chinese imports and the material injury suffered by the Union industry.
(270)On the basis of the above, the Commission concluded at this stage that the dumped imports from the country
concerned caused material injury to the Union industry and that the other factors, considered individually or
collectively, did not attenuate the causal link between the dumped imports and the material injury.
6. LEVEL OF MEASURES
(271)In the present case, the complainants claimed the existence of raw material distortions for bauxite and alumina within
the meaning of Article 7(2a) of the basic Regulation. Thus, in order to conduct the assessment on the appropriate
level of measures, the Commission first established the amount of duty necessary to eliminate the injury suffered by
the Union industry in the absence of distortions under Article 7(2a) of the basic Regulation. Then it examined
whether the dumping margin of the sampled exporting producers would be higher than their injury margin, see
recitals 280 to 282.
6.1. Injury margin
(272)The injury would be removed if the Union Industry were able to obtain a target profit by selling at a target price in the
sense of Articles 7(2c) and 7(2d) of the basic Regulation.
(273)In accordance with Article 7(2c) of the basic Regulation, for establishing the target profit, the Commission took into
account the following factors: the level of profitability before the increase of imports from the country under
investigation, the level of profitability needed to cover full costs and investments, research and development
(R & D) and innovation, and the level of profitability to be expected under normal conditions of competition. Such
profit margin should not be lower than 6 %.
(274)As a first step, the Commission established a basic profit covering full costs under normal conditions of competition.
The basic profit was established based on the historical profitability of the sampled Union industry from 2014 to
2020, prior to the disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Such profit margin was established at 7 %.
(275)One of the two sampled Union producers provided evidence that its level of investments, research and development
(R & D) and innovation during the period considered would have been higher under normal conditions of
competition. The Commission verified the company’s internal records related to investment plans, management
decisions and financial statements and found the claims warranted. To reflect this in the target profit, the
Commission calculated the difference between investments, R&D and innovation ('IRI') expenses in the IP and the
level it could have reached under normal conditions of competition as provided by the Union Industry and verified
by the Commission with actual IRI expenses over the period considered. Such difference, expressed as a percentage
of turnover, was between 1 % and 3,06 % for each of the sampled companies.
(276)Such percentage was added to the basic profit of 7% mentioned in the recital 273, leading to a target profit of 7 %
and 10,06 % depending on the situation of the sampled Union producers.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/oj 41/50EN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
(277)In accordance with Article 7(2d) of the basic Regulation, as a final step, the Commission assessed the future costs
resulting from Multilateral Environmental Agreements, and protocols thereunder, to which the Union is a party, and
of ILO Conventions listed in Annex Ia of the basic Regulation that the Union industry will incur during the period of
the application of the measure pursuant to Article 11(2). Based on the evidence available, the Commission established
an additional cost of EUR 89,34 per tonne, from which it deducted the actual cost of compliance with such
conventions during the IP, namely EUR 72,26 per tonne, leading to a result of EUR 17,08 per tonne. This difference
was added to the non-injurious price.
(278)On this basis, the Commission calculated an average non-injurious price of EUR 1 880 per tonne for the like
products of the Union industry by applying the above-mentioned target profit margin (see recital 275) to the cost of
production of the sampled Union producers during the investigation period and then adding the adjustments under
Article 7(2d) on a type-by-type basis.
(279)The Commission then determined the injury margin level on the basis of a comparison of the weighted average
import price of the sampled cooperating exporting producers in the country concerned, as established for the price
undercutting calculations, with the weighted average non-injurious price of the like product sold by the sampled
Union producers on the Union market during the investigation period. Any difference resulting from this
comparison was expressed as a percentage of the weighted average import CIF value.
(280)The injury elimination level for ‘other cooperating companies’ and for ‘all other imports originating in the country
concerned’ is defined in the same manner as the dumping margin for these companies.
Company Dumping margin (%) Injury margin (%)
Chongqing Saite Corundum Co., Ltd. 125,23 233,91
Luoyang Runbao Abrasives Co., Ltd. 111,95 116,90
Other cooperating companies 118,88 178,48
All other imports originating in the PRC 136,36 259
6.2. Examination of the margin adequate to remove the injury to the Union industry
(281)As explained in the Notice of Initiation, the complainant provided the Commission sufficient evidence that there are
raw material distortions in the country concerned regarding the product under investigation. Therefore, in
accordance with Article 7(2a) of the basic Regulation, this investigation examined the alleged distortions to assess
whether, if relevant, a duty lower than the margin of dumping would be sufficient to remove injury.
(282)However, as the margins adequate to remove injury were higher than the dumping margins, the Commission
considered that, at this stage, it was not necessary to address this aspect. Following the above assessment the
Commission concluded that it is appropriate to determine the amount of provisional duties in accordance with
Article 7(2) of the basic Regulation.
6.3. Conclusion on the level of measures
(283)Following the above assessment, provisional anti-dumping duties should be set as below in accordance with
Article 7(2) of the basic Regulation:
Company Provisional anti-dumping duty (%)
Chongqing Saite Corundum Co., Ltd. 125,2
Luoyang Runbao Abrasives Co., Ltd. 111,9
Other cooperating companies 118,8
All other imports originating in the PRC 136,3
42/50 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/ojEN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
7. UNION INTEREST
(284)Having decided to apply Article 7(2) of the basic Regulation, the Commission examined whether it could clearly
conclude that it was not in the Union interest to adopt measures in this case, despite the determination of injurious
dumping, in accordance with Article 21 of the basic Regulation. 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.
7.1. Interest of the Union industry
(285)The Union industry comprises nine companies, geographically distributed across Europe, employing approximately
962 workers directly. A majority of these Union producers expressed support for the complaint, and none opposed
the initiation of the investigation
(286)Current levels of profitability are unsustainable. The imposition of measures is expected to allow the Union industry
to recover parts of the lost market share, and to set prices at levels that at least cover the cost.
(287)The absence of measures is likely to have a significant negative effect on the Union industry in terms of further price
suppression and a further reduction of sales, thus translating into more losses and likely closure of production
facilities, dismissals and ultimately, the shutdown of entire businesses. Such developments could result in the
interruption of the European production with long-term implications for the Union’s industrial resilience and
autonomy particularly given that fused alumina, essential for producing steel, other metals, glass, and related
materials, has historically been regarded as a sensitive product.
(288)The Commission therefore concluded that the imposition of provisional measures is in the interest of the Union
industry.
7.2. Interest of unrelated importers and traders
(289)Twelve unrelated importers made themselves known, out of which two replies were submitted outside the deadline. A
number of submissions and comments were also received. As mentioned in section 1.5, the Commission selected a
sample of two importers, which submitted questionnaires replies.
(290)Several importers argued that the imposition of anti-dumping duties would increase material costs for them and for
their customers. These additional costs would be difficult to cover and therefore threaten their profitability and
competitiveness. Further claims were made concerning the lack of capacity of the Union industry to meet demand in
the Union, hence alleging that measures would create a shortage in the market. In addition, claims were raised
concerning the lack of interest of Union producers in supplying certain materials.
(291)The Commission noted that the imposition of duties should not result in the elimination of all imports from the PRC.
The imposition of measures is meant to level the playing field after which Chinese exporting producers can continue
exporting to the Union at fair prices. Secondly, although the imposition of measures may have a negative effect on the
importers importing only from the PRC, in view of the likely increase of imports from other third countries, as
referred in section 7.4 below, the importers should be in the position to shift their sources of supply.
(292)Regarding the alleged lack of interest of Union producers in supplying certain materials, the Commission noted that
the Union industry produced a broad range of fused alumina products. During the investigation period, as well as in
previous years, the Union industry consistently supplied fused alumina in a wide variety of grades and qualities,
tailored to satisfy the specific requirements of different user industries.
(293)Concerning the lack of capacity of the Union industry, the Commission address this claim in section 7.4 below.
(294)On the basis of the above, the Commission provisionally established that any negative impact of the measures on
unrelated importers as a whole is expected to be limited and will not outweigh the positive effect of measures on
Union producers.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/oj 43/50EN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
7.3. Interest of users, consumers or suppliers
(295)Around 50 users and user associations made themselves known. 18 users submitted questionnaire replies and several
more submitted comments.
(296)Claims were raised arguing that the imposition of anti-dumping duties would increase costs for users that would be
difficult to pass on to customers and, therefore, threaten their profitability and competitiveness. Some users claimed
that the cost increase linked to the imposition of duties could jeopardize their operational sustainability. Some users
argued that as a result, the continued viability of certain production activities within the Union could be at risk,
potentially leading to downsizing, relocation outside the Union and/or business closures.
(297)The Commission noted that users are mainly active in the production of abrasive and refractory materials, for which
fused alumina is a key input material. According to the information provided by the associations, in terms of
consumption, the refractory industry purchases approximately 80 000 tonnes annually. The consumption of the
abrasives industry is estimated to be between 200 000 and 250 000 tonnes per year. This sector accounts for around
60 % to 70 % of the Union’s total fused alumina demand. In terms of employment, the refractory industry employs
approximately 20 000 people in Europe, while the abrasives industry accounts for around 8 400 jobs in Germany
and Italy alone. With regard to turnover, the refractory industry generates an estimated EUR 4 billion in annual
revenue in Europe. The abrasives industry generates approximately EUR 2,3 billion in annual revenue in Germany
and Italy alone.
(298)Based on the information provided in the user’s questionnaires, it was established that, during the IP, the activity
related to the product under investigation varied in proportion to their total activity and ranged from 5 % to 30 % of
the total turnover for the refractories industry and from 25 % to 85 % of the total turnover for the abrasives industry.
On average, in the IP, the activity related to the product concerned represented around 15 % of the total activity of
cooperating users within the refractories industries and around 53 % of cooperating users within the abrasives
industry.
(299)Users who responded to the questionnaire accounted for approximately 20 % of total Union consumption of fused
alumina and around 25 % of the Union’s imports from China. Among these responses, approximately 50 % of the
fused alumina used in the abrasives industry originated from China, while the share of Chinese origin was around
65 %-69 % in the refractories industry
(300)The Commission estimated that, if duties are imposed at the proposed level and all other factors remain constant, the
cost of production for users could increase by between 10 % and 30 %, depending on the specific company. More
specifically, for the refractory industry, the estimated increase in production costs would range from 10 % to 30 %,
while for the abrasive industry, the increase is expected to range from 10 % to 23 %. However, it is important to note
that these estimates are based on the assumption that all of the fused alumina is of Chinese origin. In reality, the
supply to downstream industries is more diverse. For those who responded to the questionnaire, around 50 % of
fused alumina used in the abrasives industry and approximately 65 % in the refractories industry originated from
China. This suggests that a significant proportion of the supply originates from sources other than China, which
would mitigate the overall cost impact of the duties. Furthermore, the actual effect on production costs will vary
depending on each company’s specific supply source mix. Those with lower dependency on Chinese sources are
likely to experience a more limited cost increase, while those with higher dependency may be more affected.
Therefore, the impact of the proposed duties should be assessed in light of these diverse sourcing strategies.
(301)Regarding the potential effect of the measures on profitability, the situation is complex due to the diversity of
companies involved. Profitability among users varied across both sectors and individual companies, with some
reporting positive margins, while others operated at a loss.
(302)The Commission considered that the impact on the profitability of users would largely depend on two key factors: the
ability of users to pass on cost increases to their customers, and the capacity to substitute inputs currently sourced
from China with alternative suppliers, provided that the prices of these supplies, after the duties on Chinese imports
are imposed, could potentially mitigate the price impact.
44/50 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/ojEN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
(303)With regard to the ability to pass on cost increases, further assessment is required. However, the Commission
acknowledges that companies operating in higher margin segments and producing more specialised products are
more likely to be able to transfer additional costs to their customers. In contrast, companies manufacturing less
specialised products and subject to broader competition, are expected to face greater difficulties in doing so. This is
particularly relevant for firms already operating at a loss, which suggests that they have already been unable to raise
prices even prior to any imposition of measures.
(304)Concerning the availability of other sources of supply, the investigation, as further explained in section 7.4,
established that the Union industry remained a reliable source of supply for fused alumina with sufficient capacity to
meet Union users’ demand. It also established that users in the Union are not solely dependent on imports from
China. Other third countries, like Bahrain, Brazil, the United States, and Ukraine, as noted in section 5.2.1, are
already present in the Union market and are likely to increase their exports to the Union, further reducing reliance
on Chinese imports.
(305)Furthermore, as established in recital 244, imports from Bahrain and Ukraine were, in the IP, at lower price than
Chinese imports, offering competitive alternatives for Union users. The availability of lower-priced imports from
these countries increases supply diversity and also contributes to mitigating the potential impact of measures on
Chinese imports, ensuring that Union users continue to have access to economically viable sources of fused alumina.
(306)These findings suggest that the imposition of measures would not result in supply shortages, and that the availability
of supply from third countries and the Union, at fair prices, would, to some extent, mitigate potential negative impact
on users. However, the economic consequences for user industries may vary significantly, depending on their specific
market positioning, cost structures, and their capacity to absorb or pass on cost increases. This impact will be further
investigated by the Commission.
7.4. Other factors: Availability of supply and market concentration
(307)Some parties claimed that the Union industry is not capable of supplying the Union market in the quantities required
and thus if anti-dumping duties are imposed there is a serious risk of shortage in the Union, including for particular
types of the product concerned.
(308)The investigation found this argument to be unjustified. The Union industry has been underutilising its production
capacity throughout the period considered. In the IP, the utilisation rate of the Union production capacity was 43 %
with additional spare capacity of about 180 000 tonnes. The investigation established that the majority of the spare
capacity is either available immediately or can become operational within a very short period of time with minimal
investment. The investigation also established that the Union industry’s spare capacity allows to produce all main
types of the product concerned. The Union industry’s production capacity broadly corresponds to the Union
consumption of 305 360 tonnes during the IP.
(309)Additionally, the investigation revealed that, while the production of fused alumina is concentrated in a few key
regions in the world, the existing capacity of the non-Chinese production outside the Union can complement the
already substantial production capacity within the Union. As detailed in table 12, imports from third countries are
already present on the Union market. The Commission considered that these imports are likely to increase, should
the dumped imports from China decrease. It is therefore concluded that the total spare capacity of the Union and
third-country producers outside the Union is sufficient to meet Union consumption.
(310)Some parties also argued that the imposition of anti-dumping duties on the product concerned will create a market
concentration risk, which may lead to a further increase of prices of the product concerned.
(311)The Commission noted that while it is true that the Union competition rules impose more stringent standards of
behaviour on a company that has a significant market share, it is ultimately up to the competition authorities to
determine whether there is a dominant position and whether it is abused. In anti-dumping proceedings the
Commission examines competition concerns to establish whether, on balance, it would be clearly against the Union
interest to impose anti-dumping measures. Such an analysis cannot encompass a competition assessment in the
strict legal sense, which can only be carried out by a competent competition authority. In any case, no robust
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/oj 45/50EN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
evidence was provided that would suggest that the complainant would engage in anti-competitive behaviour should
anti-dumping measures be imposed, aside from its already strong position on the market and its engagement in
commercial practices generally regarded as standard, such as differentiated pricing linked to purchase volumes and
the nature of existing business relationships. It is recalled that the purpose of imposing anti-dumping measures is to
restore a level playing field that has been distorted by the unfair trade practises of Chinese exporting producers. The
aim of anti-dumping measures is not to force Chinese exporting producers out of the Union market but rather to
create conditions where Union producers and third country producers compete under fair conditions.
(312)Some parties claimed that the certification process for the materials used in their production, both internally and by
their clients, is lengthy and complex. It involves rigorous testing and approval procedures to ensure compliance with
customer requirements. If measures are imposed, this could imply the need to switch suppliers or materials, which
could require a re-certification process and delay in production, potentially affecting contractual obligations.
(313)The Commission noted several mitigating factors that significantly reduce this risk. Both the Union industry and
several suppliers from third countries are well-established producers of fused alumina. These suppliers have many
years of experience in the market, supplying materials that meet industry standards. Similarly, the Union industry is
recognised as a quality producer with the capacity to meet strict certification requirements. Its products are often the
first to be certified in the Union, after which alternative sources are considered. Furthermore, the investigation was
initiated several months ago, providing users with time to prepare for potential changes, assess alternative suppliers,
and initiate certification processes where necessary.
7.5. Conclusion on Union interest
(314)The Commission recognises the legitimate concerns raised by user industries, particularly with regard to their ability
to absorb or pass on the cost increases and maintain profitability. Therefore, the Commission considers it appropriate
to examine these issues in greater depth. To this end, during the definitive stage of the investigation, the Commission
will further assess the extent and impact of these concerns ensuring that any definitive measures adopted are based
on a comprehensive understanding of the broader economic implications.
(315)On the basis of the above, the Commission provisionally concluded, despite the legitimate concerns of user
industries, that there were no compelling reasons that it was not in the Union interest to impose measures on
imports of fused alumina originating in the People’s Republic of China at this stage of the investigation. The
measures are considered legally justified and proportionate, as they are necessary to prevent further injury to the
Union industry, preserve viability of Union production, and ensure fair competition in the Union. The Commission
therefore found it appropriate to impose provisional measures at this stage of the investigation, while committing to
further assess the impact on user industries.
8. PROVISIONAL ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES
(316)On the basis of the conclusions reached by the Commission on dumping, injury, causation, level of measures and
Union interest, provisional measures should be imposed to prevent further injury being caused to the Union
industry by the dumped imports.
(317)Provisional anti-dumping measures should be imposed on imports of product originating in country concerned, in
accordance Article 7(2) of the basic Regulation. The Commission concluded recitals 280 and 281 that the
appropriate level to remove injury should be the dumping margin.
(318)On the basis of the above, the provisional anti-dumping duty rates, expressed on the CIF Union border price, customs
duty unpaid, should be as follows:
46/50 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/ojEN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
Provisional anti-dumping
Company
duty (%)
Chongqing Saite Corundum Co., Ltd. 125,2
Luoyang Runbao Abrasives Co., Ltd. 111,9
Other cooperating companies 118,8
All other imports originating in the PRC 136,3
(319)The individual company anti-dumping duty rates specified in this Regulation were established on the basis of the
findings of this investigation. Therefore, they reflect the situation found during this investigation with respect to
these companies. These duty rates are exclusively applicable to imports of the product concerned originating in the
country concerned and produced by the named legal entities. Imports of the product concerned 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 imports originating in the PRC’. They
should not be subject to any of the individual anti-dumping duty rates.
(320)To minimise 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 application of individual anti-dumping duties is only
applicable upon presentation of 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. Until such invoice is presented,
imports should be subject to the anti-dumping duty applicable to ‘all other imports originating in in the PRC’.
(321)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.
(322)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.
9. REGISTRATION
(323)As mentioned in recital 3, the Commission made imports of the product concerned subject to registration.
Registration took place with a view to possibly collecting duties retroactively under Article 10(4) of the basic
Regulation.
(324)In view of the findings at provisional stage, the registration of imports should cease/be discontinued.
(325)No decision on a possible retroactive application of anti-dumping measures has been taken/can be taken at this stage
of the proceeding.
10. INFORMATION AT PROVISIONAL STAGE
(326)In accordance with Article 19a of the basic Regulation, the Commission informed interested parties about the
planned imposition of provisional duties. This information was also made available to the general public via DG
TRADE's website. Interested parties were given three working days to provide comments on the accuracy of the
calculations specifically disclosed to them.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/oj 47/50EN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
(327)No comments on the accuracy of the calculations were received.
11. FINAL PROVISIONS
(328)In the interests of sound administration, the Commission will invite the interested parties to submit written
comments and/or to request a hearing with the Commission and/or the Hearing Officer in trade proceedings within
a fixed deadline.
(329)The findings concerning the imposition of provisional duties are provisional and may be amended at the definitive
stage of the investigation,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
1. A provisional anti-dumping duty is imposed on imports of fused alumina, currently falling under CN codes
2818 10 11, 2818 10 19, ex 2818 10 91, and 2818 10 99 (TARIC codes 2818 10 91 20, 2818 10 91 90) and originating
in the PRC.
2. The rates of the provisional anti-dumping duty applicable to the net, free-at-Union-frontier price, before duty, of the
product described in paragraph 1 and produced by the companies listed below shall be as follows:
Country of origin Company Provisional anti-dumping duty (%) TARIC additional code
PRC Chongqing Saite Corundum Co., Ltd. 125,2 89RI
PRC Luoyang Runbao Abrasives Co., Ltd. 111,9 89RJ
PRC Other cooperating companies listed 118,8 See Annex
in Annex I
PRC All other imports originating in the 136,3 8999
PRC
3. The application of the individual duty rates specified for the companies mentioned in paragraph 2 shall be
conditional upon presentation to the Member States’ customs authorities of a valid commercial invoice, on which shall
appear a declaration dated and signed by an official of the entity issuing such invoice, identified by his/her name and
function, drafted as follows: ‘I, the undersigned, certify that the (volume in unit we are using) of (product concerned) sold for export to
the European Union covered by this invoice was manufactured by (company name and address) (TARIC additional code) in [country
concerned]. I declare that the information provided in this invoice is complete and correct.’Until such invoice is presented, the duty
applicable to all other imports originating in the PRC shall apply.
4. The release for free circulation in the Union of the product referred to in paragraph 1 shall be subject to the provision
of a security deposit equivalent to the amount of the provisional duty.
5. Unless otherwise specified, the provisions in force concerning customs duties shall apply.
Article 2
1. Interested parties shall submit their written comments on this regulation to the Commission within 15 calendar days
of the date of entry into force of this Regulation.
2. Interested parties wishing to request a hearing with the Commission shall do so within 5 calendar days of the date of
entry into force of this Regulation.
48/50 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/ojEN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
3. Interested parties wishing to request a hearing with the Hearing Officer in trade proceedings are invited to do so
within 5 calendar days of the date of entry into force of this Regulation. The Hearing Officer may examine requests
submitted outside this time limit and may decide whether to accept to such requests if appropriate.
Article 3
1. Customs authorities are hereby directed to discontinue the registration of imports established in accordance with
Article 1 of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/260.
2. Data collected regarding products which entered the EU for consumption not more than 90 days prior to the date of
the entry into force of this regulation shall be kept until the entry into force of possible definitive measures, or the
termination of this proceeding.
Article 4
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, 17 July 2025.
For the Commission
The President
Ursula VON DER LEYEN
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/oj 49/50EN
OJ L, 18.7.2025
ANNEX
PRC cooperating exporting producers not sampled
Country Name TARIC additional code
PRC Art Abrasives (Guizhou) Co., Ltd. 89RK
PRC Bedrock Corundum Co., Ltd. 89RL
PRC Binzhou Qinai New Material Co., Ltd. 89RM
PRC Guizhou Guxin New Materials Co., Ltd. 89RN
PRC Guizhou Kaicheng Fused Minerals Co., Ltd. 89RO
PRC Henan Ant Advanced Materials Co., Ltd. 89RP
PRC Henan Haochen Advanced Materials Co., Ltd. 89RQ
PRC Henan Hengxin Industrial & Mineral Products Co., 89SI
Ltd
PRC Henan Jinfeng New Material Technology Co., Ltd. 89RR
PRC Imerys Fused Minerals (Guizhou) Co., Ltd. 89RS
PRC Qinai (Shandong) New Material Co., Ltd. 89RT
PRC Qingdao Reckel Advanced Materials Co., Ltd. 89RU
PRC Qingdao Sisa Abrasives Co., Ltd. 89RV
PRC Saint-Gobain Ceramic Materials (Zhengzhou) Co 89RW
Ltd
PRC Shandong Imerys Mount Tai Co., Ltd. 89RX
PRC Shanxi Lvliangshan Mineral Co., Ltd. 89RY
PRC Yichuan Kingsino Refractories Co., Ltd 89RZ
PRC Zhengzhou Sinabuddy Mineral Co., Ltd. 89SA
PRC Zhengzhou Yufa High-Tech Material Co., Ltd. 89SB
PRC Zibo Jin Chun Tai Abrasives Co., Ltd. 89SD
PRC Zibo Jinjiyuan Abrasives Co., Ltd. 89SC
50/50 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1456/oj