What do clear float glass, gypsum plasterboard, soda ash (also known as disodium carbonate) and wire ropes have in common? Will it clarify matters if I add Egypt, Germany, Indonesia, China, Saudi Arabia, Thailand, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), the UK and the US to the mix?

There is no correlation; their only commonality is that next year marks the fifth anniversary of the antidumping duty imposed on the unique relationship between a specific product and a specific country (of origin or of exportation).

The ‘five years’, of course, refers to the most recent imposition and duration of the antidumping duties, which, as you well know, tend to linger. If you need reminding of their extended duration, you could revisit previous instalments of this column that were published under these headlines: ‘Calling a spade’, ‘Numbing dumping’ and ‘Don’t be . . .’.

This brings us to the fading daylight, simply known as the sunset, which is said to symbolise the myriad emotions we experience – the golden glow of hope, the fiery passion within, and the serene. If only there were hope in what the International Trade Administration Commission of South Africa (Itac) calls a ‘sunset review’ in its Anti-Dumping Regulations (ADR). In the immortal words of Brian Stimpson from the movie Clockwise: “It is not the despair. I can take the despair. It is the hope I cannot stand.”

According to the ADR, an antidumping duty will be terminated no later than five years from the date of imposition, unless . . . yes, there is an ‘unless’. Unless Itac determines otherwise in a review – which is called a sunset review and is initiated before the end of the five-year period.

As for how a sunset review can be initiated, it could either be at Itac’s own initiative or on receipt of a duly substantiated request made by or on behalf of the Southern African Customs Union (Sacu) industry – in other words, the domestic industry. I cannot recall a time when the domestic industry brought a substantiated request on its own initiative. Such a request needs to provide substantiation that the expiry of the antidumping duty would likely result in the continuation or recurrence of dumping and material injury.

This brings us to a Government Gazette notice of June 7, in which Itac extended an invitation to the Sacu manufacturers of the aforementioned products to submit a request by July 8 for the antidumping duty to be reviewed before its expiry. If no responses are received from the Sacu manufacturers, Itac will recommend to the Trade, Industry and Competition Minister for the termination of the antidumping duties on its expiry date.

The products in question are clear float glass from Egypt (27.26%), from Saudi Arabia (23.9%) and from the UAE (16.8%); soda ash from the US (40%); gypsum plasterboard from Indonesia (34.6%), from Thailand (45%); wire ropes from Germany (93%), from China (113.25%), and from the UK (76.17%).

So, which antidumping duties would one expect to be allowed to age for another five years? In other words, those antidumping duties that have no residual duties, meaning those solely imposed against a country and not the companies within that country. Care to wager? Alright then, rien ne va plus – no more bets.

Clear float glass from Saudi Arabia; soda ash from the US; gypsum plasterboard from Thailand, and unsurprisingly (no prizes for this) wire ropes from China. Thus, four of the nine, or nearly half (44.44%) of the antidumping duties are expected to age. Gracefully?

As for the others, expect the following overseas manufacturers/exporters to defend the sunset review: Guardian Egypt – Egyptian Glass Company SAE; Guardian Zoujaj (UAE); PT Siam-Indo Gypsum Industry (Indonesia), Bridon International Gmbh (Germany), Pfeifer Drako (Germany), and Bridon International Limited (Germany).

Let me take my leave as I recall the 1987 AHA song: “I’ve been waiting long for one of us to say, ‘Save the darkness, let it never fade away; Oh, the living daylights; Oh, the living daylights.’”