3. Dumping
104. Section 3(1) of the Act states:
"Dumping", in relation to goods, means the situation where the export price of goods imported into New Zealand or intended to be imported into New Zealand is less than the normal value of the goods as determined in accordance with the provisions of this Act, and `dumped' has a corresponding meaning:"
3.1 Export Prices
105. Export prices are generally determined in accordance with section 4 of the Act, which appears (in part) below:
- Subject to this section for the purposes of this Act, the export price of any goods imported or intended to be imported into New Zealand which have been purchased by the importer from the exporter shall be-
- Where the purchase of the goods by the importer was an [arm's] length transaction, the price paid or payable for the goods by the importer other than any part of that price that represents-
- Costs, charges, and expenses incurred in preparing the goods for shipment to New Zealand that are additional to those costs charges and expenses generally incurred on sales for home consumption; and
- Any other costs, charges, and expenses resulting from the exportation of the goods or arising after their shipment from the country of export;
In certain circumstances, export prices can be established under section 6 of the Act, which states:
- Where the [Chief Executive] is satisfied that sufficient information has not been furnished or is not available to enable the export price of the goods to be ascertained under section 4 of this Act, or the normal value of the goods to be ascertained under section 5 of this Act, the normal value or export price, as the case may be, shall be such amount as determined by the [Chief Executive] having regard to all available information.
- For the purposes of subsection (1) of this section, the [Chief Executive] may disregard any information that the [Chief Executive] considers to be unreliable.
SGI/SCT
106. Exports to New Zealand by SGI/SCT were made directly to Elephant. SGI/SCT stated that when an order is received from Elephant, SCT sends the purchase order onto SGI. SGI confirms the order and ex-works price of the goods to SCT, which is based on SCT's selling price to Elephant plus xxxx percent commission. SCT then sends an invoice to Elephant confirming the [text deleted due to confidentiality].
107. SGI/SCT stated it does [text deleted due to confidentiality] discounts or rebates on sales to New Zealand, with [text deleted due to confidentiality] invoice price equalling the net price that Elephant pays. The Investigating Team is satisfied that the sales from SGI/SCT to Elephant were arm's length transactions.
108. There were xxxx shipments of the subject goods by SGI/SCT to Elephant over the period of review, totalling xxxx square metres.
109. As stated in paragraph 98 following submissions received in response to the Interim Report Superspand has been excluded from the subject goods definition. As a result some export costs have been recalculated, as they were based on a percentage of the weight of a total shipment that initially included Superspand.
Base Prices
110. Base prices have been taken as the [text deleted due to confidentiality] invoice price to Elephant from SGI/SCT.
111. For the year ended 31 August 2005 these prices ranged from NZDxxxx to xxxx per square metre. These prices were then converted into Thai Baht using the relevant exchange rate as described in paragraph 25.
112. SGI/SCT stated that the date of [text deleted due to confidentiality] Elephant is the date that it considers the material terms and conditions of sale are agreed. Therefore, the date of [text deleted due to confidentiality] the date of sale, as defined by the Agreement.
113. The date of the [text deleted due to confidentiality] is [text deleted due to confidentiality], which is when the goods are [text deleted due to confidentiality].
Adjustments
114. Adjustments made under section 4 of the Act relating to costs incurred solely because the goods are exported, appear below. The Investigating Team has allowed for the following adjustments based on the information presented by SGI/SCT.
115. SGI/SCT incurs costs relating to exports to New Zealand [text deleted due to confidentiality].
116. SGI/SCT uses Cement Thai Logistics (CTL) for all its logistical requirements for goods that are exported to New Zealand. As CTL is a related company to SGI/SCT, the Investigating Team enquired as to the basis of the invoiced charges.
117. SGI/SCT stated that all of CTL's [text deleted due to confidentiality] and SGI/SCT [text deleted due to confidentiality] these charges with [text deleted due to confidentiality] costs. The provision of logistic services to SGI/SCT is contestable and SGI/SCT stated that CTL's prices are competitive [text deleted due to confidentiality] rates available in the market.
118. SGI/SCT provided a service purchase order to CTL dated [text deleted due to confidentiality] 2005 that matched a shipment to Elephant xxxx as shown on the order. There was one item on the order that related to non-subject goods and this has been excluded from the amounts upon which the adjustments were calculated. The service purchase orders from SGI/SCT confirm the details of the shipment to be delivered to the wharf and the cost of each service CTL provides to that point, including some costs per 20 foot container and others per metric tonne. The actual adjustments made are detailed in the following paragraphs.
119. The Investigating Team discussed with SGI/SCT the use of the [text deleted due to confidentiality] charges [text deleted due to confidentiality]. SGI/SCT commented that the costs for a 20 foot container [text deleted due to confidentiality]. Elephant is the [text deleted due to confidentiality] but they [text deleted due to confidentiality] 20 foot container.
Inland Freight
120. From the service purchase order [text deleted due to confidentiality] inland freight was charged at THBxxxx per metric tonne. Although the current arrangements are different to those in 2002 this is an increase from THBxxxx verified at that time.
121. The Investigating Team has apportioned inland freight to each shipment on the basis of the percentage of the total shipment weight that standard plasterboard accounted for. This amount was then divided by the number of square metres of standard plasterboard in each shipment.
122. An adjustment ranging from THBxxxx to xxxx per square metre has been made for each shipment.
Terminal Handling Charge
123. The service purchase order xxxx included a terminal handling charge of THBxxxx for a 20 foot container. Although the current arrangements are different to those in 2002 this is an increase from THBxxxx verified at that time. The 2005 order showed a quantity of xxxx containers, with a total sum of THBxxxx. However, the number of containers for each shipment was not provided to the Investigating Team, so the adjustment for all shipments has been based on the proportion of the total shipment accounted for by standard plasterboard as displayed in service purchase order xxxx.
124. An adjustment for the terminal handling charge of THBxxxx per square metre has been made to all shipments.
Container Freight Station Charge
125. A Container Freight Station Charge (CFS) was listed on the service purchase order xxxx. This charge is a gate charge for rendering documents of THBxxxx for a 20 foot container. The order showed a quantity of xxxx containers, with a total sum of THBxxxx. However, the number of containers for each shipment was not provided to the Investigating Team, so the adjustment for all shipments has been based on the proportion of the total shipment accounted for by standard plasterboard as displayed in service purchase order xxxx.
126. An adjustment for the CFS Charge of THBxxxx per square metre has been made to all shipments.
Packing
127. There was also a small charge called "other charge" which SGI/SCT stated was related to packing. Service purchase order xxxx showed this other charge at THBxxxx for the entire shipment.
128. The adjustment for packing has been based on the proportion of the total shipment accounted for by standard plasterboard divided by the number of square metres of standard plasterboard in each shipment.
129. An adjustment ranging from THBxxxx to xxxx per square metre has been made for each shipment.
130. During the last reassessment there was much more detailed evidence submitted on export packaging costs including an adjustment allowed for [text deleted due to confidentiality]. The Investigating Team asked SGI/SCT to comment on the nature of the export packaging. SGI/SCT stated that the plasterboard is packed [text deleted due to confidentiality] market apart from the amount that is specified in the above service purchase order.
Credit
131. SGI/SCT said that the credit terms it extends to Elephant are shown on each invoice. Most invoices to Elephant for the year ended 31 August 2005 show credit terms as [text deleted due to confidentiality] with the exception of [text deleted due to confidentiality] that were [text deleted due to confidentiality]. SGI/SCT stated that [text deleted due to confidentiality] effectively means it extends credit to Elephant for [text deleted due to confidentiality] the goods.
132. SGI/SCT initially stated that it did not have a policy of [text deleted due to confidentiality] via the use of [text deleted due to confidentiality] and [text deleted due to confidentiality] to Elephant to calculate any exchange rate conversion. However, when the Investigating Team asked to sight evidence of payment for sales to Elephant it was noted that [text deleted due to confidentiality] the total payments were converted into THB using [text deleted due to confidentiality]exchange rate. SGI/SCT then commented that [text deleted due to confidentiality] its sales to Elephant [text deleted due to confidentiality] exchange rates.
133. SGI/SCT provided copies of two credit advices for payments from Elephant from its bank, the [text deleted due to confidentiality] The term of credit for both invoices was [text deleted due to confidentiality].
134. The exchange rates for xxxx for which the Investigating Team has details of have been used for the [text deleted due to confidentiality] invoices to which those [text deleted due to confidentiality] relate. [Text deleted due to confidentiality] of the currency conversions for the date of sale are made on the date of the invoice using the oanda rate, as outlined in paragraph 25.
135. The first credit advice was dated xxxx 2004 and related to invoice xxxx of xxxx 2004 with an invoice total of xxxx. Of this total xxxx was converted at the [text deleted due to confidentiality] exchange rate of xxxx, as specified in [text deleted due to confidentiality] and the remainder of xxxx was converted at the [text deleted due to confidentiality]. The credit extended for this shipment is xxxx days, being the number of days from xxxx 2004 to xxxx 2004.
136. The second credit advice was dated xxxx 2005 and related to invoice xxxx of xxxx 2005, with an invoice total of xxxx. Of this total Elephant paid xxxx. The Investigating Team was unable to ascertain why the payment was for xxxx, or xxxx percent [text deleted due to confidentiality] than the total invoice. The amount paid was converted at the xxxx exchange rate of xxxx as specified in xxxx. The credit extended for this shipment is xxxx days, being the number of days from xxxx 2005 to xxxx 2005.
137. Subsequent to the verification visit another two copies of credit advice documentation was provided to the Investigating Team. These also illustrated the use of xxxx exchange rates and the specific rate of [text deleted due to confidentiality] has been applied when converting the amount for the relevant invoice.
138. Short term borrowing rates from the Bank of Thailand's website as at 1 March 2005 were also provided by SGI/SCT. It was agreed that the most appropriate rate to use in determining the cost of credit was the xxxx month rate of xxxx percent per annum. A similar 6 monthly rate of xxxx percent was used in the most recent reassessment.
139. The cost of credit has therefore been calculated using xxxx days credit extended at the rate of xxxx percent for the remaining invoices for which no credit advice was provided. This equates to a credit adjustment of xxxx percent of the value of these shipments. This resulted in adjustments between THBxxxx and xxxx.
Overseas Freight
140. The overseas freight is paid separately [text deleted due to confidentiality]; therefore no adjustment for this amount needs to be made.
Bill of Lading
141. SGI/SCT contracts [text deleted due to confidentiality] to prepare its bills of lading. SGI/SCT provided an invoice in its response to the Investigating Team's questionnaire showing the bill of lading fee for a shipment on the vessel [text deleted due to confidentiality], which it stated was for an export sale to Elephant. Although there was no corresponding reference to Elephant or an order number on this invoice that links the sale to Elephant, the named vessel is one that also appears on invoices to Elephant.
142. The bill of lading charge is a set fee of THBxxxx per shipment. The Investigating Team notes that this is the same amount as was allowed for this cost during the 2002 reassessment carried out by the Ministry.
143. The Bill of Lading fee has been apportioned on the basis of the weight of standard plasterboard compared with the total weight of each shipment. This has resulted in an adjustment ranging from THBxxxx to xxxx per square metre.
Customs Clearance Fee
144. A customs clearance fee was listed on the xxxx service purchase order. This fee was xxxx per container with xxxx containers giving a sum of THBxxxx.
145. The number of containers in each shipment was not available, so an adjustment has been based on the percentage that the weight of standard plasterboard represented of the total shipment as displayed in service purchase order xxxx and applied this amount to all other shipments, as no alternative basis for allocating this charge exists.
146. An adjustment for the customs clearance fee of THBxxxx per square metre has been made to all shipments.
Other Adjustments
147. In comparing the adjustments that were made to the export price to arrive at the current dumping margin and that arrived at in the last reassessment the Investigating Team notes that a Consultancy Fee was charged under the previous import arrangements and business structure. The Investigating Team is satisfied that no such adjustment is necessary in the present review.
Export Price Calculation
148. The export prices have been calculated by deducting from the base prices the adjustments outlined above. Export prices for the year ended 31 August 2005 ranged from THBxxxx to xxxx. Table 3.1 shows export price calculation.
Table 3.1: SGI/SCT Export Prices
| Export Price Calculation |
Amount (THB) |
| Base Prices |
xxxx to xxxx |
| Less |
Inland Freight |
xxxx to xxxx |
| |
Terminal Handling Charge |
xxxx |
| |
Container Freight Station |
xxxx |
| |
Packing |
xxxx to xxxx |
| |
Cost of credit |
xxxx to xxxx |
| |
Bill of lading |
xxxx to xxxx |
| |
Customs clearance fees |
xxxx |
| Export Prices |
xxxx to xxxx |
BPB
149. BPB sells plasterboard to one New Zealand importer, BML, its sole distributor in New Zealand. BPB advised that it has a normal commercial relationship with BML, having no corporate affiliation and that all sales to BML are made at arm's length.
150. BPB supplies BML on a made to order basis from its Laem Chebang plant and exported from the nearby port. BPB stated that upon receipt of an order from New Zealand there is a xxxx to xxxx day lead time before [text deleted due to confidentiality].
151. Over the period of investigation BML was invoiced in [text deleted due to confidentiality], the invoice date being the day the [text deleted due to confidentiality]. A discussion with BPB determined that this is the day that the material terms of sale are established and it is this date from which BPB's credit terms commence.
152. The New Zealand bound product is exported as soon as possible after manufacture [text deleted due to confidentiality]. BPB stated it does not store export stock for any length of time as it is manufactured to order and [text deleted due to confidentiality].
Base Prices
153. Exports to New Zealand are made on xxxx basis. BPB stated that due to the [text deleted due to confidentiality] of [text deleted due to confidentiality] to New Zealand the [text deleted due to confidentiality] depended on whether BML [text deleted due to confidentiality] first with the [text deleted due to confidentiality] and a [text deleted due to confidentiality].
154. BPB has not provided any copies of invoices for exports to New Zealand over the period of review, nor any written information on the costs involved in exporting plasterboard to New Zealand. Several invoices were provided by BML and BPB did provide some comments on the cost of credit during the verification visit. Base prices were taken as the FOB amounts listed in the Customs data (which matched the amounts shown on the invoices that the Investigating Team had available to it), which were either NZDxxxx or xxxx per square metre. These amounts convert to THBxxxx to xxxx.
155. In these circumstances the Investigating Team is, in the absence of all the necessary information from BPB, required to calculate a dumping margin using the best information available. The Investigating Team specifically discussed this point with BPB during its verification visit and pointed out that a consequence could be a duty amount being set that is not released to BPB, as it is based on other parties' confidential information.
156. In assessing which of the data sets in front of it provided the best comparison, the Investigating Team considered the suitability of constructing normal values using information provided by BPB during the last reassessment, information from SGI/SCT and information from Winstone in its application for the review. The Investigating Team considered, of these three options, that the most up to date information and most likely to be closest to BPB's actual costs was that provided by SGI/SCT. (The exception to this is some of the information relating to cost of credit.) The amounts provided by SGI/SCT have been compared against those from the other two sources, particularly the data provided by BPB in the last reassessment, to test the reasonableness of these amounts being applied to BPB.
Adjustments
Cost of Credit
157. Terms of payment for sales to BML are [text deleted due to confidentiality] within xxxx days from [text deleted due to confidentiality].
158. BPB stated that the cost of credit should be calculated from the date of the [text deleted due to confidentiality] as it [text deleted due to confidentiality] export goods as soon as possible after manufacture and this is [text deleted due to confidentiality]. The date of the [text deleted due to confidentiality] can be xxxx to [text deleted due to confidentiality] the date of manufacture, making the total [text deleted due to confidentiality] credit actually is extended up to xxxx days, although BPB indicated that the length of credit actually provided is often longer than this. This is also in comparison to xxxx days credit that was used in the last reassessment for exports by BPB and xxxx days extended by SGI/SCT to Elephant in its export sales.
159. The Investigating Team is not satisfied that the information provided in relation to the length of credit actually extended, that is the time it takes BML to pay, is substantive enough upon which to base any adjustment, as it was not able to sight or verify any documentation in relation to this. Therefore, the Investigating Team has taken the length of credit extended that was verified in the last reassessment of xxxx days.
160. BPB stated that the short term loan rate available in Thailand would reflect the cost of credit extended to all its customers, both export and domestic. BPB thought that the short term borrowing rate would be around xxxx percent.
161. The Investigating Team has found consolidated information from the Bank of Thailand on short term lending rates for all of the commercial banks registered in Thailand. The rates available included a minimum overdraft rate, described as "the interest rate at which the lending commercial bank charges its most creditworthy major borrowers on overdrafts" and provided an average for both Thai and foreign owned banks. Given the size of BPB the Investigating Team considers that this would be an appropriate rate to use, with the rates offered by the Thai owned banks being lower than those of the foreign owned banks. The average minimum overdraft rate over the period of review for Thai owned banks was in the region of 6.5 percent. This compares to a rate of xxxx percent per annum used for the SGI/SCT cost of credit adjustment, representing a cost of credit xxxx percent higher than that available to SGI/SCT.
162. Due to the significant difference in the two credit rates, the Investigating Team has used the rate applied in the cost of credit adjustment for SGI/SCT. The length of credit of xxxx days was applied to the interest rate of xxxx percent per annum, which has been applied to the export FOB price of the goods exported to New Zealand to calculate a cost of credit adjustment.
Other Adjustments
163. The Investigating Team has applied the adjustments established for SGI/SCT outlined above from paragraphs 114 to 147 (excluding cost of credit), that is, for inland freight, terminal handling charges, CFS charge, packing, bill of lading and customs clearance fees to BPB's base prices. Where a range of adjustments have been made to SGI/SCT's base prices the Investigating Team has taken the maximum value of each range and where it is deemed appropriate an adjustment has been based on the figures verified for these costs in 2002 by the Ministry. The adjustments made are outlined below.
Inland Freight
164. SGI/SCT's inland freight was charged at THB xxxx per metric tonne, which was an increase from THB xxxx verified in 2002. This is much higher than the THB xxxx verified for BPB's inland freight cost in 2002, being xxxx percent higher against a corresponding increase for SGI/SCT for the same period of xxxx percent.
165. An adjustment for inland freight of THB xxxx per square metre has been made to all shipments based on the highest adjustment allowed for SGI/SCT in the absence of any other information.
Packing
166. SGI/SCT's export packing charge was THB xxxx per shipment. This cost was not charged on a comparable basis in 2002. In 2002 an export packing charge of THB xxxx per container was verified for BPB, representing an amount xxxx percent higher than the level of the SGI/SCT based charge.
167. An adjustment for export packing of THB xxxx per square metre has been made to all shipments based on the highest adjustment allowed for SGI/SCT in the absence of any other information.
SGI/SCT Adjustments
168. Adjustments were also made to SGI/SCT's base prices for a CFS charge of THB xxxx and a customs clearance fee of THB xxxx both per container. No adjustments were made to BPB's base price for these charges in 2002. However, when comparing the total costs incurred by SGI/SCT in the current review for the CFS charge, customs clearance, inland freight and packing costs of THB[text deleted due to confidentiality] with the amounts verified for BPB for inland freight and packing figures in 2002 of THB xxxx, it shows that BPB's 2002 verified costs across these items was only xxxx percent higher than those allowed for SGI/SCT. This indicates that it is the split or the naming of the adjustments that is the real difference between the two companies rather than any true cost differences. The Investigating Team considers the adjustments made for BPB for inland freight and packing costs in the 2002 reassessment encompass the adjustments made for SGI/SCT for CFS charge, customs clearance, inland freight and packing costs.
Container Freight Station Charge
169. An adjustment for the CFS Charge of THB xxxx per square metre has been made to all shipments based on the SGI/SCT cost outlined from paragraph 125.
Customs Clearance
170. An adjustment for the customs clearance fee of THB xxxx per square metre has been made to all shipments based on the SGI/SCT cost outlined from paragraph 144.
Terminal Handling Charge
171. SGI/SCT's terminal handling charge was based on a fee of THB xxxx for a 20 foot container. This is [text deleted due to confidentiality] same as the amount verified for this cost for BPB in 2002.
172. An adjustment for the terminal handling charge of THB xxxx per square metre has been made to all shipments.
Bill of Lading
173. The SGI/SCT adjustment was based on a bill of lading fee of THB xxxx per shipment. This was the same amount verified for SGI/SCT during the 2002 reassessment, which compares against a cost of THB xxxx per shipment at the same time for BPB. The Investigating Team considers the SGI/SCT fee is a fair basis for an adjustment being only xxxx percent lower than the amount verified for this cost for BPB in 2002.
174. An adjustment for the bill of lading charge at the maximum adjustment allowed for SGI/SCT of THB xxxx per square metre has been made to all shipments.
Other Charges
175. In the 2002 reassessment adjustments were also made to BPB's base prices for amounts relating to sea freight, emergency BAF surcharge and overseas insurance. As the Investigating Team has used FOB prices for the base export prices to BML, adjustments for these costs are not required.
Export Price Calculation
176. The export prices have been calculated by deducting from the base prices the adjustments outlined above. Export prices for the year ended 31 August 2005 ranged from THB xxxx to xxxx. Table 3.2 below shows BPB's export price calculation.
Table 3.2: BPB Export Prices
| Export Price Calculation |
Amount (THB) |
| Base Prices |
xxxx to xxxx |
| Less |
Inland Freight |
xxxx |
| |
Terminal Handling Charge |
xxxx |
| |
Packing |
xxxx |
| |
Cost of credit |
xxxx to xxxx |
| |
Container Freight Station |
xxxx |
| |
Customs clearance fees |
xxxx |
| |
Bill of lading |
xxxx |
| Export Prices |
xxxx to xxxx |
3.2 Normal Values
177. Normal values are determined in accordance with section 5 of the Act, which states in part:
5 (1) Subject to this section, for the purposes of this Act, the normal value of any goods imported or intended to be imported into New Zealand shall be the price paid for like goods sold in the ordinary course of trade for home consumption in the country of export in sales that are arm's length transactions by the exporter or, if like goods are not so sold by the exporter, by other sellers of like goods.
…
(3) Where the normal value of goods imported or intended to be imported into New Zealand is the price paid for like goods, in order to effect a fair comparison for the purposes of this Act, the normal value and the export price shall be compared by the [Chief Executive]-
(a) At the same level of trade; and
(b) In respect of sales made at as nearly as possible the same time; and
(c) With due allowances made as appropriate for any differences in terms and conditions of sales, levels of trade, taxation, quantities, and physical characteristics, and any other differences that affect price comparability.
SGI
178. Following the Interim Report Elephant made submissions regarding the selection of a Thai domestic customer that its exports prices were compared to. Elephant's arguments are addressed in the relevant sections below.
179. SGI manufactured product is sold into the Thai domestic market through CementThai (CSM) the Thai domestic distribution company of the Siam Cement group, an equivalent organisation to SCT on the export side.
180. CSM does not physically hold any stock and stock is transferred directly from SGI to domestic customers in much the same way as goods go directly from SGI to the wharf for export sales. SGI stated that it generally has [text deleted due to confidentiality] stock on hand for the Thai domestic market.
181. SGI transfers plasterboard to CSM at xxxx an agreed commission of xxxx percentof CSM's xxxx from which CSM must cover all its costs.SGI invoices CSM monthlyand extends xxxx days credit on these sales and CSM invoices SGI monthly for its commission of [text deleted due to confidentiality]. The level of the commission was that verified during the 2002 reassessment.
182. Elephant stated that the Investigating Team was incorrect in stating that CSM and SCT are "equivalent organisations". In support of this Elephant distinguished the nature of the relationship between SGI and CSM and that between SGI and SCT. It stated that CSM is "more or less [an] arm's length distributor, taking substantial margins in the form of commission. By contrast, SCT operates as little more than a freight forwarder, arranging the export documentation and taking a modest commission." As the contents of paragraphs 106 and 181 illustrate Elephant is mistaken in its understanding of the commissions earned by these two entities. In fact from the information available to the Investigating Team is appears that both CSM and SCT act merely as freight forwarders taking [text deleted due to confidentiality] commissions to cover their respective costs. The Investigating Team disagrees with Elephant that functionally CSM and SCT are distinct enough to preclude them occupying the same level of trade.
183. Additionally Elephant stated that the Investigating Team was wrong in assuming that because it purchases from SCT then it must be at a lower level of trade than SCT. The Investigating Team notes that purchasing from an entity at a certain point in the supply chain will normally mean that the purchaser is at a lower level of the supply chain than the seller, but that this does not translate so easily into international sales, even more so when exclusive supply agreements exist. The Investigating Team considers that, while not conclusive, the point of a supply chain occupied by a seller is a relevant consideration in determining the level of trade of the purchaser.
184. CSM sells to wholesalers and retailers. CSM has customers it terms both exclusive and non-exclusive for its entire range of products, including plasterboard.An exclusive customer is one that buys products only from CSM, unless a product is not available when they may purchase from a third party and non-exclusive customers are able to purchase from any source. SGI stated that CSM's exclusive customers have the advantage of being able to use CSM's logo "Elephant" and store design.
Base Prices
185. CSM has a standard price list that is available in the market, from which discounts are deducted. The Investigating Team has not at any time during the course of the present review dealt directly with a CSM representative, dealing instead with SGI/SCT representatives.
186. CementThai HomeMarts (CTHM) franchise operation is CSM's [text deleted due to confidentiality] customer and has hundreds of distributors, with at least one in every province. CTHM are independently operated and SGI stated that they have no related ownership with CSM, although there are some CSM customers with whom CSM has ownership. SGI said that CSM did not have a customer in the domestic market that exactly matched Elephant and the functions it performed in New Zealand, although it does have a few customers purchasing comparable volumes of plasterboard. [Text deleted due to confidentiality] had been suggested as the customer upon the Thai domestic market with whom sales prices to Elephant should be compared. [Text deleted due to confidentiality] is classified as a code [text deleted due to confidentiality] customer, meaning it is an exclusive customer that must purchase products from CSM and involves sales to both distributors and retail sales to end users.
187. A copy of CSM's top five customers was provided from its sales reports that showed [text deleted due to confidentiality] was its [text deleted due to confidentiality] largest customer and its purchases of standard plasterboard over the year ended 31 August 2005 was the closest in volume to Elephant, being xxxx percent lower than sales to Elephant over the same period. This was compared to xxxx percent higher for the xxxx ranked customer and xxxx percent lower for the xxxx ranked customer. (Although the volume of Superspand has been removed from the dumping investigation and therefore the volume exported to Elephant has been reduced, the customer chosen in the domestic market is still the closest comparable customer to Elephant in terms of sales volume.)
188. Elephant considers that the Investigating Team erred in the Interim Report comparing its export prices from SCT to those of a customer of CSM as Elephant regards itself at the same level of trade as CSM. Further, Elephant submitted that the Investigating Team erred in focusing on purchase volumes in assessing level of trade. Elephant pointed to the hierarchy of the paragraphs within sub-section 5(3) of the Act as supporting its interpretation.
189. Elephant stated that the inclusion of the quantities within the due allowances for differences in section 5(3)(c) of the Act precludes the incorporation of an assessment of quantity in determining the "same level of trade" in section 5(3)(a). Elephant argues that the hierarchal structure of the section means that "level of trade" and "quantity" are separate factors to be addressed.
190. The Investigating Team does not agree with the interpretation put forward by Elephant. First, such an interpretation has no regard to the form of sub-section 5(3) of the Act, where matters to be addressed in order to effect a fair comparison (as required by the preface) are listed. Second, the interpretation rendered by Elephant ignores the inclusion of the term "levels of trade" within paragraph (c), in addition to the dedication of paragraph (a) of section 5 to level of trade. The inclusion of both "levels of trade" and "quantities" within paragraph (c) merely indicates that it may not be possible to find sales in the domestic and export markets that are like in every respect and every effort must be made to ensure that a fair comparison is effected. This means that any circumstance that prevents a fair comparison being made, usually through a lack of price comparability, an adjustment must be made when a possible basis for such an adjustment exists. Even though the point in the supply chain and volumes purchased are important in determining the level of trade, using these factors in determining the level of trade does not prohibit adjustments being made upon these basis in order to effect a fair comparison.
191. For example, take a situation where there is an export customer who is a distributor that sells direct to end users that are construction companies. There are two domestic customers, one of whom sells to end users that are construction companies and the other is a distributor who sells only to retailers. The quantity of sales to the domestic distributor that sells to construction companies is seven times greater than those to the export customer, and this difference in quantities has affected price comparability. The quantity of sales to the domestic distributor that sells to retailers is close to those sold to the export customer and there is no affect on price comparability because of differences in quantities.
192. In this example, the domestic customer that sells to construction companies is considered to be at the same level of trade as the export customer, while the domestic customer that sells to retailers is considered to be at a different level of trade to the export customer because of its different position in the supply chain. Following the scheme of the Act, the domestic customer selected to establish normal values would be the customer selling to construction companies, even though in simple quantity terms the other domestic customer appears to be a more suitable comparison. Having established base normal values on the basis of sales to the domestic customer that sells to construction companies, an adjustment would then be made for differences in quantities.
193. Cognisance must also be had of footnote 7 of paragraph 4 of Article 2 of the Agreement (that the Act is based upon), which specifically states in reference to the types of adjustments that should be made in order to affect a fair comparison between export prices and normal values that "It is understood that some of the above factors may overlap, and authorities shall ensure that they do not duplicate adjustments that have been already made under this provision."
194. The Investigating Team agrees, as submitted by Elephant, that the function of an entity is important in establishing the relevant level of trade. Elephant states that "it is normal in a dumping investigation to put the importer at the same level of trade as a party purchasing from the factory gate in the country of export. " It is important to note that due to the information available to the Investigating Team and the integrated nature of the SGI, SCT and CSM operations, the Investigating Team has never, at any time in the past seventeen years since the initial imposition of anti-dumping duties, been able to calculate a pure ex-factory price. In being unable to do so the Investigating Team has been satisfied that the respective sales from SCT and CSM are the first arm's length sales made of the SGI manufactured product. In this respect, the three companies are viewed as a single entity, in the absence of any satisfactory evidence presented illustrating that the three companies are completely separate and autonomous entities. The Investigating Team is satisfied that the function of xxxx and Elephant are similar enough to be considered at the same level of trade but also acknowledges that there may be some aspects of CSM's function that Elephant's operations are similar to, however, this does not preclude a comparison of the price to Elephant with that to xxxx.
195. Elephant has argued that as CSM does not hold stock this indicates that Elephant is at a higher level of trade than CSM. The Investigating Team agrees that stock holding is a cost that can, depending on the circumstances, not be an insignificant one.
196. In assessing the lack of stock holding by CSM as meaning that Elephant is at a higher level of trade, the Investigating Team assumes that Elephant is interpreting the lack of stock holding as meaning CSM's operations are similar to those of an organisation making indent or direct to trade sales. The Investigating Team believes that the lack of any stock holding by CSM, when assessed in combination with the integrated ownership with SGI and the revenue making mechanism for CSM, that is, a set commission, it adds to the inability to distinguish costs between CSM and SGI. Combined these factors indicate that sales to CSM are not arm's length transactions and only constitute a slightly more complex method of a manufacturer selling its goods within the domestic market than a purely in-house sales team. In this context, SGI actually does hold some stock but this is largely irrelevant as the sale's prices to Elephant have been compared to those to xxxx
197. It is important to note, that to the Investigating Team's knowledge, all domestic sales of SGI manufactured plasterboard must be processed through CSM and all export sales of SGI manufactured plasterboard must be processed through SCT. In this respect there is (currently on the basis of arrangements in place during the review period) no potential for Elephant to purchase SGI manufactured plasterboard without that plasterboard being handled by SCT, regardless of which of these two organisations Elephant has the most direct contact with. In addition, both Elephant SGI and SCT talked of SCT and SGI as being essentially the same organisation.
198. In arguing that it is at the same level of trade as CSM, Elephant stated that, like CSM, it only sells to distributors and does not sell directly to end users. The Investigating Team notes from information presented in the last reassessment on CSM's customer codes, which SGI advised were still in operation, customers are grouped by type. The customer codes show that CSM makes sales to a wide range of customers in the Thai domestic market, including manufacturers, other affiliated companies, exclusive and non-exclusive distributors, large contractors, retailers and also "single time" customers. CSM does not consider that its sales to large contractors and one off customers are sales to end users. The Investigating Team does not have any detailed information on the customers that [text deleted due to confidentiality] sells to other than it acts as a distributor and a retailer. The Investigating Team does not consider that if CSM did not sell to large end users that this would alter the above analysis.
199. Elephant has incorrectly interpreted the Investigating Team's determination of level of trade as being solely based upon volume, when the nature of the entity and the point of the supply chain at which it operates were expressly considered in SGI's verification document and also in the Interim Report. Based on this mis-understanding Elephant presented examples of potential high volume purchasers in the New Zealand market and stated that this would mean that high volume purchasers would necessarily sit at a higher level of trade, which it automatically assumed would result in a lower dumping margin.
200. Due to the size and nature of the New Zealand market, it would be highly unusual to see a customer a step further towards the end user buying larger volumes headustomer closer to the manufacturing end of the supply chain. This, however, is not necessarily the case in larger economies when there may be large and smaller purchasers at every level of the supply chain, even more so when there are multiple manufacturers in a domestic market.
201. Elephant's submission that the higher the determined level of trade the less likely a dumping margin will be established is incorrect. The calculation of a dumping margin involves the comparison of prices at the same level of trade and, despite the level of trade established, adjustments are made to bring these prices back to the ex-factory level in order to exclude downstream costs in the calculation of a dumping margin. This is done because dumping is primarily about price discrimination by manufacturers between export and domestic markets and the comparison of prices needs to occur at this level. So, while the establishment of a higher level of trade may mean that fewer adjustments need to be made to reach an ex-factory price, it does not necessarily follow that a positive dumping margin is less likely to be established.
202. Elephant further stated that the information presented by Winstone on prices of Thai exports to third countries indicated that there is no correlation between price and volume. The Investigating Team disagrees that this data can be used to support the statement that there is no correlation between price and volume. Due to the existence of anti-dumping duties in place for exports to New Zealand and the corresponding lack of any such duties in place in those other export markets, it is not possible to look at corresponding volumes and prices and say that there is no correlation between the two, for purchases made by Elephant.
203. In fact statements made by both Elephant and SGI regarding price negotiations indicated that the volume of forecast purchases is a factor affecting the price that is agreed upon. The Investigating Team accepts Elephant's statement that the total purchases by a company may be taken into account when arriving at a price for a customer, rather than just the volume of the subject goods. However, given the restrictions of the Act to assess only subject goods, the other products that Elephant purchases from SCT are primarily performance plasterboards and that standard plasterboard still constitutes the majority of Elephant's purchases from SCT, the Investigating Team does not consider that any huge anomaly would arise from this in the present case. In situations where the subject goods only formed a small portion of the total purchases from the exporting company, or there were extremely large price differentials between the varying products that made up the purchase catalogue, some attempt at making an adjustment would likely be considered, but this would be dependant upon how prices were arrived at including the calculation of any discounts and/or rebates.
204. SGI provided three purchase orders from the period of review made by xxxx to CSM for standard plasterboard. These purchase orders were sourced from CSM's e-ordering system. SGI stated that the three purchase orders provided were representative of the period of review as one was from [text deleted due to confidentiality] 2004 and two from [text deleted due to confidentiality] 2005. The prices displayed on the purchase orders are automatically calculated when the customer selects their desired products and are net of discounts.
205. Base prices have been taken as those shown on the purchase orders for [text deleted due to confidentiality]. The net price shown on the [text deleted due to confidentiality] 2004 invoice was applied from [text deleted due to confidentiality] 2004 until [text deleted due to confidentiality] 2005 when the net price shown on the [text deleted due to confidentiality] 2005 purchase order was applied for all sales from this date. Base prices were either THB xxxx or THB xxxx.
Adjustments
Level of Trade
206. As [text deleted due to confidentiality] is involved in retail sales and has the associated infrastructure, which Elephant does not, the Investigating Team discussed with SGI whether an adjustment for the level of trade should be made. SGI said that the price CSM sells to a retailer would be different from the price CSM sells to a distributor. Elephant sells to distributors with no retail sales being made. However, while the level of the supply chain at which a company operates has some relevance to the price at which a manufacturer sells goods to it, the quantity of the goods sold often has greater impact upon the price.
207. The Investigating Team discussed a possible basis for such an adjustment with SGI as being the amount of CSM's commission but the Investigating Team considers that making an adjustment on such a basis would over compensate for any difference in level of trade, given the level of the purchase volumes by [text deleted due to confidentiality] and Elephant and when having regard to CSM's costs that have to be covered from its commission. In response to the Interim Report Elephant submitted that the preceding comments indicated that the Investigating Team was unwilling to make a level of trade adjustment for the fact that [text deleted due to confidentiality] conducts retail sales. This is incorrect. The Investigating Team was willing to make an adjustment for this partial difference in level of trade, had a suitable basis for such an adjustment been available to it and evidence was presented that illustrated the difference affecting making a fair comparison. The statement above merely indicates that to make an adjustment for level of trade based on the total commission earnt by CSM would be to make an adjustment in excess of the amount for which it was trying to adjust. Given the similarity of the volumes of purchases made by [text deleted due to confidentiality] and Elephant, the fact that even using the total commission rate would have resulted in a tiny adjustment per square metre and more importantly that no reasonable basis for such an adjustment was proffered by any interested party, no adjustment has been made.
Discounts and Rebates
208. As stated above the prices displayed on [text deleted due to confidentiality] purchase orders are net of discounts. The list price for 9 mm 1200 mm by 2400 mm plasterboard is THB xxxx. When the list price was compared to the net prices shown on the xxxx purchase orders it showed discounts of xxxx to xxxx percent.
209. SGI stated that normally the discounts offered are quite stable and that even the small change introduced towards the end of 2004 was an anomaly. As a result, prices were slightly lower at the beginning of the period of review than they were at the beginning of 2005. SGI stated that there is usually a standard discount rate across each customer group.
210. Given that [text deleted due to confidentiality] CSM's [text deleted due to confidentiality] standard plasterboard customers, the sample of purchase orders provided were from two points over the period of review, SGI's comments and the lack of any further information the Investigating Team considers it reasonable that the prices shown on the three purchase orders are representative of the discounts given to [text deleted due to confidentiality].
211. SGI stated that CSM does not award any rebates as all discounts are included in the net invoice price and takes [text deleted due to confidentiality]. However, the Investigating Team notes that during the 2002 reassessment a xxxx percent rebate was awarded to CSM's exclusive customers. No further adjustment has been made for discounts or rebates beyond the net amount on [text deleted due to confidentiality] purchase orders.
212. In response to the Interim Report Winstone submitted that the Investigating Team had erred in not making any deductions from the normal values calculated for discounts and rebates beyond those shown on invoice. Winstone specifically referred to the adjustment made in the 2002 reassessment and noted in paragraph 211. Winstone also referred to the New Zealand Trade and Enterprise (NZTE) report submitted in its application that indicated off-invoice discounts of xxxx to xxxx percent are standard in the Thai domestic market.
213. The Investigating Team requires some form of positive evidence upon which to base adjustments that are made to both the export price and normal value. It was not considered that the information in the NZTE report was sufficient upon which to base an adjustment. However, as canvassed in the verification reports for both SGI and BPB, discussions did occur about the level of discounts in the Thai domestic market. Neither manufacturer provided any information on further off-invoice discounts. As evidence of these discounts would have been in the manufacturer's favour, effectively decreasing the normal value and any corresponding dumping margin, the Investigating Team considers that it was not appropriate to make any adjustment in these circumstances.
Cost of Credit
214. [Text deleted due to confidentiality] credit terms are "[text deleted due to confidentiality]". SGI stated that orders are delivered within [text deleted due to confidentiality]. An adjustment for cost of credit for THB xxxx per square metre has been made based on credit costs outlined in paragraph 161.
Delivery Costs
215. Delivery costs are recorded as a separate column on the electronic purchase order and have been excluded from base prices, so no adjustment is required.
Taxation
216. Thailand has a domestic Value Added Tax (VAT) of 7 percent. This tax is recorded as a separate line on the purchase orders and therefore base prices used in the dumping calculations are exclusive of VAT.
217. SGI's company accounts show a [text deleted due to confidentiality] for the year ended 2004 compared to the previous year. SGI stated this was due to 2004 being the first year since the expiry of its Thailand Board of Investment tax exemption. Under the tax exemption SGI had [text deleted due to confidentiality] from the corporate tax rate of 30 percent. The effect of SGI being required to pay corporate tax again affects export and domestic sales equally and no adjustment is required.
Quantities
218. The quantities of plasterboard sold to both CSM and Elephant have already been outlined in paragraph 187. It is considered that the volumes sold are of a comparable level and that no adjustment for quantities is required.
Physical Characteristics
219. SGI stated that the only difference in the physical characteristics between the domestic standard 9 mm plasterboard and the 10 mm plasterboard exported to New Zealand is the difference in the thickness of the board.
220. SGI supplied the costs involved in manufacturing plasterboard for export and domestic sales and the corresponding sales price structure was provided, although the Investigating Team was unable to verify these costs. Subsequent to the verification visit SGI also provided, as requested, a breakdown of the materials for the 9 mm plasterboard sold domestically and the 10 mm plasterboard exported to New Zealand.
221. The information provided showed that the cost of gypsum in the exported 10 mm plasterboard is THB xxxx per square metre higher than the domestic plasterboard and the cost of additives in the 10 mm plasterboard is THBxxxx per square metre higher. This gives a physical difference adjustment of THBxxxx per square metre and this amount has been added to the base normal value.
Warehousing
222. SGI stated that it maintains about xxxx worth of stock on hand to supply the domestic market. Goods exported to Elephant are not warehoused and are shipped out as soon as possible after manufacture.
223. No information was provided on the cost of warehousing upon which to base an adjustment and given the length of time that stock is held any adjustment would likely be minimal. No adjustment for warehousing has been made.
Normal Value Calculation
224. The normal values have been calculated by making the adjustments outlined above to the base prices. Normal values for the year ended 31 August 2005 ranged from THBxxxx to THB xxxx per square metre. Table 3.3 shows the normal value calculation for SGI.
Table 3.3: SGI Normal Values
| Normal Value Calculation |
Amount (THB) |
| Base Prices |
xxxx to xxxx |
| Less: |
Cost of credit |
xxxx |
| Plus: |
Physical characteristics |
xxxx |
| Normal Values |
xxxx to xxxx |
BPB
Base Prices
225. BPB supplied invoices relating to two domestic customers [text deleted due to confidentiality] and [text deleted due to confidentiality] for the year ended August 2005. BPB advised that it does not have any ownership in either of these companies and that all sales to them are at arm's length. BPB provided one invoice per month, where available, for each of the two customers for the period of review and also provided similar invoices for the same customers for the year to August 2002 as a comparison.
226. The Investigating Team discussed with BPB the suitability of sales to these customers to establish normal values. BPB stated that it provided invoices relating to these customers as they had been used by the Ministry to establish normal values in the most recent reassessment. The Investigating Team notes that the customers provided were not those used in the 2002 reassessment to establish normal values.
227. The sales volume to BML for all types of plasterboard for the year ended 31 August 2005 was xxxx square metres. The Investigating Team does not have any sales volume data for [text deleted due to confidentiality] or [text deleted due to confidentiality] over the same period against which to assess the suitability of the customers for comparison with BML.
228. BPB stated that both these customers were in the top [text deleted due to confidentiality] customers in terms of standard plasterboard sales volume per annum and that these volumes were well in excess of the volume exported to BML. BPB stated that the top five domestic customers would provide xxxx percent of BPB's total sales volume. BPB also explained that rebates vary according to sales volume, with total sales volume of all types of plasterboard, including performance plasterboards, used to determine rebate levels, thus magnifying the distorting effect of any volume differences for the purpose of export price and normal value comparison.
229. Terms of credit extended to the customers [text deleted due to confidentiality] were xxxx days and xxxx days for [text deleted due to confidentiality]. BPB stated the difference in the credit offered to these two customers was due to them being in different "industries" or at differing levels of trade, one being a construction company and the other a retailer. BPB stated that most of its domestic sales are done by way of xxxx days and that credit terms are driven by the market. BPB stated that normally it [text deleted due to confidentiality] and sometimes [text deleted due to confidentiality] and [text deleted due to confidentiality]. BPB stated that the domestic short term loan rate would reflect the cost of credit extended to these customers.
230. The Investigating Team explained that prices to these customers may not be suitable to compare with prices to BML due to the differences in the volume of sales and requested that BPB provide invoices relating to a customer that purchased annual volumes of standard plasterboard closer to those purchased by BML. BPB stated that there would be about [text deleted due to confidentiality] to [text deleted due to confidentiality] customers that purchased similar volumes of standard plasterboard from BPB to those purchased by BML and that were also distributors. The Investigating Team stated that sales relating to one or more of this group of customers would be more appropriate for the purpose of a price comparison and BPB stated it would consider providing additional information. The Investigating Team did not receive any additional information from BPB.
231. BPB offer a same day delivery service ex-works and the date of order is usually the date shown on the invoice, with some orders made late in the day not dispatched until the next day. The date of dispatch is always the date on the invoice. Sales incur a delivery charge [text deleted due to confidentiality] that this is [text deleted due to confidentiality].
232. The Investigating Team considers that it is not appropriate to use prices to the selected customers as a base for normal values, as no details other than invoices have been provided for these customers, including purchase volumes. Therefore the base prices used for BPB are those established for SGI, outlined from paragraph 185, being either THBxxxx or THBxxxx per square metre.
Adjustments
Discounts and Rebates
233. Rebates and discounts are standard in the Thai domestic market with their size dependent upon market conditions. The BPB invoices provided show the list price and also the discount awarded, expressed as a percentage. For the sample of invoices provided the discounts ranged from xxxx to xxxx percent. The comparable sample for the year ending August 2002 showed discounts ranging from xxxx to xxxx percent, giving a minimum increase over this period of xxxx percentage points.
234. BPB provided a schedule illustrating the average net sales value for both customers for the years ended August 2002 and 2005. The schedule gave an average list price, less an average discount awarded, to show an average net invoice value. Then further off-invoice deductions were made, [text deleted due to confidentiality]. BPB advised that these discounts were volume dependant [text deleted due to confidentiality] are made at [text deleted due to confidentiality]. The schedule showed total average [text deleted due to confidentiality] discounts ranging from xxxx to xxxx percent. This resulted in an average net selling price of THBxxxx for [text deleted due to confidentiality] and THBxxxx for [text deleted due to confidentiality] for the year ended August 2005. The corresponding values for the year ended 2002 were THBxxxx for [text deleted due to confidentiality] and THBxxxx for [text deleted due to confidentiality].
235. The Investigating Team is satisfied that the discounts shown on the invoices provide a minimum discount awarded but does not have sufficient evidence upon which to match these discount levels against the base prices it is using for BPB.
236. As the SGI base price is net of discounts and within xxxx percent of the average net prices submitted by BPB, no further adjustment has been made for discounts.
237. As outlined at paragraph 212, Winstone submitted in response to the Interim Report that additional adjustments should have been made for off-invoice adjustments as supported by the NZTE report it provided to the Ministry. Winstone further submitted that the off-invoice rebates identified of xxxx to xxxx percent should have been made for sales by BPB, as there was no opposing evidence and these discounts were admitted as being in existence by BPB. The Investigating Team considers, for the reasons already canvassed in paragraph 212, that it is not appropriate to make an adjustment for these amounts.
Distribution Costs
238. Delivery costs are itemised separately on BPB's invoices, which show the method of delivery and the charge. BPB did state that its freight costs were [text deleted due to confidentiality] but the Investigating Team has no information on [text deleted due to confidentiality] on which to base an adjustment.
239. No adjustment for distribution costs has been made.
Taxation
240. Invoice prices are shown net of 7 percent VAT, which appears as a separate line item on the invoices.
241. BPB stated that it does not import many inputs and does not receive any duty drawbacks in relation to the export of standard plasterboard.
242. BPB have a Thai Board of Investment exemption from the corporate tax for sales generated from its recent investment in capacity expansion. This means any profit related to sales of plasterboard manufactured on its new second line, which commenced production in November 2005, are exempt from the 30 percent corporate tax rate. Accounting and manufacturing records are used to verify eligibility. BPB stated that the exemption instrument is common with periods of 8, 10 or 15 year exemptions routinely granted and apply to both import duties and corporate tax.
243. The Investigating Team considers it likely that the benefit of this tax exemption would accrue to the company as a whole and any impact on prices would equally affect export prices and normal values, therefore no adjustment is necessary.
Physical Characteristics
244. BPB stated in its submission that it does not sell 10 mm plasterboard in the Thai domestic market and that an adjustment should be made to the 9 mm prices before any fair comparison can be made.
245. BPB suggested taking the difference between the 9 mm and 12 mm prices in the Thai domestic market and allocating this as a per mm difference and then adding to the 9 mm average price to gain a 10 mm average price. The 9 mm average price was THBxxxx and the 12 mm average price was THBxxxx, therefore BPB proposed method THBxxxx should be added to the 9 mm price to give a theoretical average 10 mm price of THBxxxx per square metre.
246. Given that the amounts listed above for the 9 mm and 12 mm product were unsubstantiated averages the Investigating Team does not consider that it can use these figures as the basis for any physical difference adjustment that needs to be made.
247. The Investigating Team notes that in the 2002 reassessment, BPB (then Thai Gypsum) [text deleted due to confidentiality] the 10 mm board [text deleted due to confidentiality] in 9 mm board, [text deleted due to confidentiality] the thickness of the 10 mm board. Therefore the Investigating Team has not made any adjustment for differences in the physical characteristics.
Warehousing
248. The costs of warehousing were considered in the 2002 reassessment, however no adjustment was made. No information was provided by BPB on these costs. No adjustment has been made.
Cost of Credit
249. For the cost of credit the Investigating Team has used the length of time taken to pay by the domestic customer that was considered most comparable to BML in the 2002 reassessment. This resulted in a length of credit being offered of xxxx days, which is the length of credit that BPB stated is most common for its domestic customers.
250. The Investigating Team has applied xxxx days credit at the rate of credit established for sales by CSM, outlined in paragraph 161, and applied this to the base normal values.
Normal Value Calculation
251. The normal values have been calculated by deducting from the base prices a single adjustment for the cost of credit. Normal values for the year ended 31 August 2005 ranged from THBxxxx to THBxxxx.
Table 3.4: BPB Normal Values
| Normal Value Calculation |
Amount (THB) |
| Base Prices |
xxxx to xxxx |
| Less |
Cost of credit |
xxxx |
| Normal Values |
xxxx to xxxx |
3.3 Conclusions Relating to Dumping
252. Dumping margins have been calculated on a transaction-to-transaction basis by comparing export prices and normal values as established above for each export transaction over the period of review. Table 3.5 shows the range of FOB export prices, the range of the normal values, and range of dumping margins calculated for both SGI/SCT and BPB. The dumping margins are expressed as a percentage of the export price.
Table 3.5: Dumping Margins
| Exporter |
Normal Value (THB) |
Export Price (THB) |
Dumping Margins % |
| SGI/SCT |
xxxx toxxxx |
xxxx to xxxx |
-xxxx% to xxxx% |
| BPB |
xxxx to xxxx |
xxxx to xxxx |
-xxxx% to -xxxx% |
253. SGI/SCT exported xxxx shipments to New Zealand over the period of review, equalling xxxx line transactions. Only xxxx percent (by volume) of these were dumped with dumping margins ranging from -xxxx to xxxx percent, expressed as a percentage of the export price. These figures have been adjusted from the Interim Report to take into account the exclusion of exports of Superspand from the subject goods and therefore the dumping calculations.
254. BPB exported xxxx shipments to New Zealand over the period of review, equalling xxxx line transactions. Based on the calculation of normal values and export prices undertaken by the Investigating Team none of the exports by BPB over the period of review were dumped.
255. Customs data indicates anti-dumping duties have been paid on [text deleted due to confidentiality] of plasterboard from Thailand since the current duty rate was put in place in 2002. This shipment was imported by [text deleted due to confidentiality] in [text deleted due to confidentiality].
256. The Investigating Team concludes there is no evidence of dumping over the period of review that is of sufficient magnitude for the volumes to have caused material injury to Winstone. The assessment of dumping then becomes one of whether dumping is likely to recur if duties were removed, which is addressed in section 5 below.
Back to Top