As Chinese enterprises become increasingly integrated into the global economic stage, economic frictions and disputes among nations have also been on the rise. Although the U.S. Diamond Saw Blade Manufacturers Association’s anti-dumping petition against diamond circular saws and components from China and South Korea remains pending before the U.S. government, intermediary organizations such as the Shanghai Stone Industry Association promptly mobilized dozens of Chinese enterprises from Jiangsu, Zhejiang, and Shanghai to join forces in responding to the U.S. anti-dumping pressure. At the same time, these organizations reached out to relevant bodies like the China National Machinery & Equipment Import & Export Corporation and the China Stone Industry Association, thoroughly studying the U.S. complaint to identify potential breakthroughs in the case. Currently, the Chinese industry has engaged anti-dumping experts from both U.S.-Chinese legal and accounting circles to actively prepare their defense and is striving to secure support from both the Chinese government and its U.S. counterparts. A preliminary team from the Ministry of Commerce has already departed for the United States to begin working on the case. The U.S. Diamond Saw Blade Manufacturers Association had prepared for eight months and raised 1.2 million U.S. dollars before filing its anti-dumping petition against diamond circular saws and components from China and South Korea with the U.S. government on May 3. As of May 31, the number of Chinese companies sued by the U.S. had risen from the initial 23 on May 3 to 53, with enterprises from Jiangsu, Zhejiang, and Shanghai accounting for 60% of the total. The amount involved in the case totals 26 million U.S. dollars. The reason behind the U.S. industry’s lawsuit against Chinese diamond saw blade manufacturers is that U.S. companies claim the surge in low-priced diamond circular saw blades imported from China has caused substantial harm to the domestic U.S. industry. Citing U.S. Customs statistics, the U.S. side pointed out that exports of diamond circular saw blades from China and South Korea to the U.S. increased from 8.7 million units in 2002 to 13.4 million units in 2004, depriving U.S. companies of the benefits brought by the booming construction sector. On the contrary, this has squeezed profit margins for U.S. firms, leading one company to bankruptcy and causing market share losses for many others. U.S. competitors find themselves “caught between rising steel and energy costs and falling product prices.” On May 3, 2005, the U.S. International Trade Commission received a complaint from U.S. producers alleging “anti-dumping” practices against China. Because the U.S. International Trade Commission had doubts about whether the complaint filed by the U.S. Diamond Saw Blade Manufacturers Association had sufficient industry support, it decided to issue a questionnaire to gather relevant information on industry support and launch an investigation into “injury.” The completed questionnaires were submitted by May 25. According to reports, the U.S. International Trade Commission will soon hold its first hearing on the issue of “injury,” and a preliminary ruling is expected to be issued on June 17. Diamond circular saw blades have become a flagship product in China’s international tool export market. Many domestic enterprises and a number of listed companies are ambitiously planning new production lines that are set to come online within the next one or two years. If the U.S. imposes “anti-dumping” measures, these enterprises would undoubtedly face a severe blow. According to Dr. Fan Linggen, Secretary-General of the Shanghai Stone Industry Association, global diamond saw blade production has shifted dramatically toward Asia since 2000, and Chinese enterprises’ products are mainly aimed at the mid-to-low-end markets. According to U.S. statistics, from 2003 to 2004, the volume of diamond circular saw blades exported from China to the U.S. grew by more than 30% year-on-year. In response, the U.S. plaintiffs’ litigation materials appear quite confident, claiming that our products are exported to the U.S. at prices far below normal cost—resulting in a dumping margin as high as 298.39%. In other words, according to U.S. Customs, only if tariffs on Chinese products were increased by 298.39% would they no longer be considered dumped. If Chinese companies involved—or even those not directly involved—in the case fail to respond, their future exports to the U.S. will be taxed at the highest rate determined after the final ruling on the dumping case. Dr. Fan Linggen firmly refutes the U.S. industry’s self-serving “wishful thinking.” He explains that the cost calculation for Chinese products is based on production factors—such as labor hours, raw material consumption, and energy usage—multiplied by the unit prices of comparable countries (India was chosen in this case), reflecting the true cost of production. To this, fixed management expenses and profits are added. As a developing country, China enjoys clear advantages in labor and material costs, making the notion of a “dumping margin as high as 298.39%” utterly absurd.

　　Currently, diamond saw blades are emerging as a new growth area for China’s exports. Typically, investing in a complete set of high-end diamond materials and saw-blade production equipment requires funding amounting to tens of millions of yuan. Many domestic enterprises—and a number of publicly listed companies—have ambitious plans and have either already begun or are preparing to launch new production lines, with the intention of bringing these lines into operation within the next one to two years. Should the United States ultimately decide to impose anti-dumping measures on this product, it would to some extent stifle the nascent development of China’s diamond tool industry. For those enterprises that have been targeting export markets and were poised for significant expansion, this would come as a severe blow. The Chinese industry has already reached a preliminary consensus in response to the “anti-dumping case” initiated by the United States. Leading enterprises under industry associations have already hired experts from both U.S. and Chinese legal and accounting circles to defend their interests; the costs involved could exceed one million U.S. dollars.

Previous: None