Vietnam Bike Makers Affirm No Dumping in Canada Markets

 

As of schedule, Vietnamese bicycle manufacturers will have to send their replies for 23 questionnaires given by the Canadian Internal Trade Tribunal (CITT) on March 17, 2005.

However, these enterprises have proposed to delay until April 5, 2005 due to a shortage of time for data preparation. As this date is fast approaching, what data have these enterprises been preparing for the lawsuit? And in what direction wills this lawsuit go?

A reporter from VIB Forum has held talks with Le Quoc Tao, General Secretary of the Vietnam Motorbike and Bicycle Association (VBMA) about this issue. 

Could you please point out the Vietnam’s bicycle manufacturing potential and give more details on CITT’s anti-dumping lawsuit against Vietnamese bicycle manufacturers?

Since February 2, 2005, the CITT has managed to go ahead with an anti-dumping investigation into bicycle importers into Canada. Accordingly, all bicycles and bicycle spares with chain wheel diameter over more than 38.1 cm (or 15 inches) will be closely inspected in order to decide whether certain categories of bicycles exported to Canada have seriously damaged or threatened to damage the country’s bike manufacturing industry.

On behalf of VBMA, I assert that the Vietnamese bicycles weren’t dumped on the Canadian market despite the fact that Vietnam has huge potential to export bicycles to the country with an annual export turnover of US$230 million. In fact, domestic bicycle manufacturers currently lack adequate facilities and have yet to produce high-quality bicycles.

Thus, their products are not attractive enough to lure Canadian partners. At present, only foreign-invested enterprises can meet export requirements. Ho Chi Minh City now has 31 bicycle manufacturers in total, including five complete bicycle exporters while the remainders are bicycle spare suppliers.

The anti-dumping lawsuit is aimed at five key bicycle manufacturers, that is, Asama YuH Jiun International Vietnam Co. Ltd., Dragon Bicycle Co. Ltd., Sheng Fa International Co., Ltd., AWAY Co. Ltd., and Astro Co. Ltd. Asama YuH Jiun International Vietnam Co. Ltd. is selected to represent these five concerned companies. Among them, three enterprises are under VBMA and the two others will become members of VBMA in the coming time.

How much data do Vietnamese enterprises collect for replying to CITT’s questionnaires?

According to Commercial Affair Bureau in Canada, major bicycle exporters to the country include China, Vietnam, Taiwan, the US, Thailand, the Philippines, and Indonesia… To date, only Chinese bicycle makers have moved to meet with lawyers while the others have given no reaction. It is the second time that Vietnamese bicycle manufacturers have been involved in such a probe. In the first case, Vietnamese enterprises were charged for selling their bicycles on the EU market at dumping prices. Domestic bicycle makers will individually prepare their feedback and send them to CITT via their own lawyers. VBMA, meanwhile, will keep a close watch on the lawsuit and directly work with Canadian Bicycle Manufacturer Association. The lawsuit has had a negative impact on the local bicycle industry although the country’s bicycle exports to Canada remain low.   

Could you please give your own prediction on the probe?

VBMA is ready to vigorously support domestic bicycle makers in the litigation by sending related documents to CITT. In terms of policy mechanism, the government of Vietnam can’t give any support to these enterprises. Actually, Vietnamese enterprises are themselves active in manufacturing as well as in seeking investments for their products. Moreover, it is unable to blame Vietnamese bike makers for dumping prices on Canadian markets as a bicycle is currently sold for just US$40 in the domestic market. Cheap price is mostly attributed to low production costs and cheap labour hire. Regarding a similar anti-dumping case initiated by the European Commission, I expect a satisfactory result from the lawsuit. However, we have to wait for the final impartial decision made by the CITT on August 9, 2005.

• Kim Phuong