The Rapport Sunday newspaper of June 20 published an article on the latest High Court anti-dumping court case relating to pneumatic tyres, classifiable under tariff subheadings 4011.10.00, 4011.20, 4011.20.15, and 4011.20.25, imported from or originating in the People’s Republic of China (China). The article reads “Four multi-national manufacturers of pneumatic tyres on Friday obtained a court order against the alleged dumping of cheap tyres imported from the People’s Republic of China (China). In the High Court of Pretoria, Judge Willie Hartzenberg set aside the International Trade Administration Commission of South Africa (Itac’s) recommendation for the said anti-dumping investigation. The Itac recommendation was first announced in the Government Gazette of 2007. Hartzenberg also ordered that the Minister of Trade and Industry’s decision to accept Itac’s recommendation be set aside. He further ordered that Itac complete the antidumping investigation within four months. The companies, Bridgestone South Africa, Continental Tyre South Africa, Dunlop Tyres International and Goodyear Tyre and Rubber Holdings, together with the South African Tyre Manufacturers Conference (SATMC), the representative organisation for South African tyre manufacturers, lodged the court application. The application was submitted by 19 respondents, amongst others seven China companies that manufacture tyres and export to South Africa and nine South African companies that import tyres from China. Hartzenberg said when a country’s economy is so influenced by the state that it is not a free market economy, goods can likely be exported at lower prices than the normal prices in the importing country with a free-market economy. This can harm the economy of the import country. This can have all sorts of consequences, such as the stagnation of its economy and a loss of jobs. Accordingly, there is an international agreement that gives member states of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) the power to protect their economies against the dumping of products. Hartzenberg said that South Africa was a member country bound by the anti-dumping agreement. The applicants claimed Chinese tyres were dumped in South Africa at prices with which local producers could not compete. In July 2005 the applicants submitted an anti-dumping application to Itac, and in May 2006 they made submissions to Itac. Part of their argument was that the sale of imported Chinese tyres increased rapidly and that the Southern African Customs Union (Sacu) had declined. In its final report Itac said that six of the respondents did not dump their products in South Africa, but that tyres were dumped by other exporters in the Sacu. Itac found that other factors, and not dumping, resulted in the Sacu manufacturers suffering. The investigation was terminated on 5 April 2007. Hartzenberg said Itac did not properly pay attention to the investigation. He further said Itac “must surely” be able to conclude the study within four months. Sunset Review – Last Chance On 28 June 2010 comment is due in respect of the sunset review of the anti-dumping duties on acetaminophenol originating in or imported from China and the United States of America. Anti-Dumping Duties – Last Chance On 30 June 2010 comment is due by Sacu manufacturers in respect of the imminent lapse of anti-dumping duties for: (i) chicken meat portions originating in or imported from the USA; (ii) carbon black originating in or imported from Thailand; (iii) paperboard originating in or imported from South Korea; and (iv) drawn glass and float glass originating in or imported from Indonesia.
