REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 35th Annual Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the EU's Anti-Dumping, Anti-Subsidy and Safeguard activities (2016)
Date: 2017-10-17
Institutions: Directorate-General for Trade and Economic Security, European Commission
Subjects: anti-dumping duty, anti-dumping measure, anti-subsidy proceeding, countervailing charge, import (EU), import restriction, originating product, surveillance concerning imports, trade dispute

EUROPEAN 
COMMISSION 

Brussels, 17.10.2017  
COM(2017) 598 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT 

35th Annual Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament 
on the EU's Anti-Dumping, Anti-Subsidy and Safeguard activities (2016) 

{SWD(2017) 342 final} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
  
 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT 

35th Annual Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament  
on the EU's Anti-Dumping, Anti-Subsidy and Safeguard activities (2016) 

 
 
INTRODUCTION 

This is the report of the European Union's anti-dumping, anti-subsidy and safeguard 
activities  during  2016.  It  is  presented  to  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council 
pursuant  to  the  provisions  of  Article  23  of  Regulation  (EU)  2016/1036  of  the 
European Parliament and of the Council on protection against dumped imports from 
countries  not  members  of  the  European  Union  (‘basic  anti-dumping  Regulation’), 
Article  34  of  Regulation  (EU)  2016/1037  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the 
Council on protection against subsidised imports from countries not members of the 
European Union (‘basic anti-subsidy Regulation’) and Article 23 of Regulation (EU) 
2015/478  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  on  common  rules  for 
imports.  This  report  is  accompanied,  as  in  previous  years,  by  a  Commission  Staff 
Working Document, together with detailed annexes 

The  anti-dumping  (AD),  anti-subsidy  (AS)  and  safeguard  (SFG)  investigations 
conducted  by  the  Commission  are  governed  by  the  above  mentioned  European 
Parliament  and  Council  Regulations.  A  comprehensive  overview  of  the  existing 
legislation,  terminology  and  procedures  is  available  in  the  accompanying  Staff 
Working Document.  

2016 was a very busy and challenging year in the area of trade defence. In November 
2016,  the  Commission  adopted  a  legislative  proposal  that  provides  for  a  new 
calculation methodology of normal values in case prices and costs in the market of 
the  exporting  country  are  distorted.  The  proposal  is  presently  undergoing  the 
ordinary legislative procedure. Since the start of the steel crisis, intensive case work 
was  carried  out  so  that  the  European  industry  would  get  swift  and  effective  relief 
from unfairly traded imports. The Commission has used all available tools under the 
existing trade defence legal framework. The steel crisis also demonstrated the need to 
modernise trade defence instruments and proved to be an important impetus for the 
Council to agree on a position in December 2016 on this legislative initiative that the 
Commission  already  adopted  in  April  2013.  The  European  Council  conclusions  of 
June 2016 also called for the swift completion of that work. The proposal is presently 
under the ordinary legislative procedure.  

Many of the trade defence investigations conducted were highly complex, such as the 
investigation  into  hot  rolled  coils,  the  expiry  review  on  solar  panels  and  the 
investigation concerning concrete reinforcing bars and rods. These cases required in-
depth analysis which presented itself as a very resource-intensive process. 

The present report and the Staff Working Document are also available to the public 
at http://ec.europa.eu/trade/issues/respectrules/anti_dumping/legis/index_en.htm . 

1. 

OVERVIEW  OF  ANTI-DUMPING,  ANTI-SUBSIDY  AND  SAFEGUARD  INVESTIGATIONS 
AND MEASURES 

1.1. 

General 

At  the  end  of  2016,  the  EU  had  90  definitive  anti-dumping  measures  and  12 
definitive anti-subsidy measures in force. 

The number of measures in force has shown a slight increase (4%) over the previous 
year  while  the  number  of  ongoing  investigations  (20)  at  the  end  of  the  year 
corresponded to the end of 2015. The number of new cases (15) initiated increased 

3 

 
 
 
slightly while a significant number of cases (9) were re-opened in order to implement 
judicial findings. The number of reviews initiated (15) was still important although it 
was lower than in 2015. The majority of the reviews were expiry reviews.  

In 2016, 0,27% of total imports into the EU were affected by AD or AS measures. 
Although  comprehensive  data  are  not  available,  the  expiry  review  investigations 
show, in many cases, that the imposition of measures leads to a significant reduction 
of the imports of the product concerned. 

A  detailed  overview  is  given  in  the  Staff  Working  Document  accompanying  this 
report. The references to the Annexes of the Staff Working Document can be found 
beside the titles.  

1.2. 

New investigations (see Annexes A through E and Annex N) 

In 2016, 15 new investigations  were  initiated (12 concerned the sector of steel and 
metals),  while  there  were  9  re-openings  of  cases  to  implement  judicial  findings. 
Provisional duties were imposed in 9 proceedings. A total of 7 cases were concluded 
with the imposition of definitive duties while8 investigations were concluded without 
measures.  

1.3. 

Review investigations 

Review  investigations  continue  to  represent  a  substantial  part  of  the  work  of  the 
Commission  Trade  Defence  services.  Table  2  in  the  Staff  Working  Document 
provides statistical information for the years 2012-2016. 

1.3.1.  Expiry reviews (see Annex F) 

Articles  11(2)  of  the  AD  and  18  of  the  AS  Regulations  provide  for  the  expiry  of 
measures after five years, unless an expiry review demonstrates that they should be 
maintained  in  their  original  form.  During  2016,  5  measures  expired  automatically 
following their 5-year duration. 

During  2016,  13  expiry  review  investigations  were  initiated  and  5  expiry  reviews 
were concluded with a confirmation of the duty for a further period of 5 years Only 1 
expiry review was concluded by the termination of measures.  

1.3.2. 

Interim reviews (see Annex G) 

Articles  11(3)  of  the  AD  and  19  of  the  AS  Regulations  provide  for  the  review  of 
measures  during 
to 
dumping/subsidization or injury aspects. 

their  period  of  validity.  Reviews  can  be 

limited 

During  2016,  a  total  of  2  interim  reviews  were  initiated.  There  were  4  interim 
reviews  concluded  with  confirmation  or  amendment  of  duty.  There  were  5  interim 
reviews concluded with the termination of the measures.  

1.3.3.  “Other” interim reviews (see Annex H) 

There  were  3  'other'  reviews,  i.e.  not  falling  within  the  reviews  ordinarily 
commenced  pursuant  to  Articles  11(3)  of  the  AD  or  19  of  the  AS  Regulations, 
concluded  or  terminated  during  2016.  No  new  reviews  falling  within  the  'other' 
category were initiated. These reviews usually concern the implementation of rulings 
by the Court. 

4 

 
 
1.3.4.  New exporter reviews (see Annex I) 

Articles  11(4)  of  the  AD  and  20  of  the  AS  Regulations  respectively  provide  for  a 
“newcomer”  and  “accelerated”  review  in  order  to  establish  an  individual  dumping 
margin  or  an  individual  countervailing  duty  for  new  exporters  located  in  the 
exporting  country  in  question  which  did  not  export  the  product  during  the 
investigation  period.  Such  exporters  have  to  show  that  they  are  genuine  new 
exporters  and  that  they  have  actually  started  to  export  to  the  EU  after  the 
investigation  period.  As  such,  an  individual  duty,  which  is  usually  lower  than  the 
country-wide duty, can be calculated for them.  

In 2016, no new exporter reviews were either initiated or concluded.  

1.3.5.  Absorption investigations (see Annex J) 

Where  there  is  sufficient  information  showing  that,  after  the  original  investigation 
period  and  prior  to,  or  following  the  imposition  of  measures,  export  prices  have 
decreased or that there has been no or insufficient movement in the resale prices or 
subsequent selling prices of the imported product in the EU, an "absorption" review 
may  be  opened  to  examine  whether  the  measure  has  had  effects  on  the  above-
mentioned  prices.  Dumping  margins  may  as  such  be  recalculated  and  the  duty 
increased to take account of such lower export prices. The possibility of "absorption" 
reviews is included in Articles 12 of the AD and 19(3) of the AS Regulations. 

In 2016, no anti-absorption reviews were either initiated or concluded.  

1.3.6.  Circumvention investigations (see Annex K) 

The possibility of investigations being re-opened in circumstances where evidence is 
brought to show that measures are being circumvented is provided for in Articles 13 
of the AD and 23 of the AS Regulations. 

In  2016,  1  such  investigation  was  initiated.  There  were  6  anti-circumvention 
investigations  concluded  with  extension  of  the  measures.  The  most  important  one 
related to the circumvention of measures on imports of solar modules and cells from 
the People's Republic of China by transhipment via Malaysia and Taiwan. 

1.4. 

Safeguard investigations (see Annex L) 

During 2016, there was no safeguard investigations opened nor measures imposed.   

2. 

ENFORCEMENT OF AD/AS MEASURES 

2.1. 

Follow-up of measures 

Follow-up activities concerning measures in force were centred on four main areas: 
(1)  to  pre-empt  fraud;  (2)  to  monitor  trade  flows  and  market  developments;  (3)  to 
improve  the  effectiveness  with  the  appropriate  instruments  and  (4)  to  react  to 
irregular  practices.  These  activities  enabled  the  Commission  -  in  cooperation  with 
Member  States  -  to  pro-actively  ensure  the  proper  enforcement  of  trade  defence 
measures in the European Union.  

2.2.  Monitoring of undertakings (see Annexes M and Q) 

Monitoring  of  undertakings  forms  part  of  the  enforcement  activities,  given  that 
undertakings  are  a  form  of  AD  or  AS  measures.  They  are  accepted  by  the 
Commission  if  it  is  satisfied,  after  an  investigation,  that  they  can  effectively 
eliminate the injurious effects of dumping or subsidisation. 

5 

 
 
At  the  beginning  of  2016,  there  were  122  undertakings  in  force.  During  2016,  the 
following  changes  to  the  portfolio  of  undertakings  took  place:  The  undertakings  of 
13  companies  were  withdrawn  as  it  was  established  that  breaches  had  occurred  or 
that the monitoring of the undertakings became impracticable. The undertakings of 7 
companies  were  withdrawn  as  these  companies  had  notified  the  Commission  that 
they wished to withdraw from the undertaking. No new undertaking was accepted by 
the Commission. This brought the total number of undertakings in force at the end of 
2016 to 102.  

3. 

REFUNDS  

Articles 11(8) of the AD and 21(1) of the AS Regulations allow importers to request 
the  reimbursement  of  the  relevant  collected  duties  where  it  is  shown  that  the 
dumping/subsidy margin has been eliminated or reduced to a level below that of the 
duty in force. 

During 2016, 42 new refund requests were submitted. At the end of 2016, 4 refund 
investigations  were  on-going,  covering  80  requests.  In  2016,  no  Commission 
Decision granting full or partial refund or rejecting refund requests was adopted. 

4. 

TDI MODERNISATION  

In April 2013, the Commission adopted a proposal and a communication in order to 
modernise  the  EU’s  trade  defence  instruments  (‘TDI’).  The  aim  of  the  proposed 
Regulation  was  to  increase  transparency,  efficiency  and  effectiveness  of  the  EU’s 
TDI in the face of proliferating unfair trade practices.  

While the European Parliament adopted its position in April 2014, the Council was 
not able to achieve its position. However, in light of the steel crisis, the Council put 
the  modernisation  file  on  the  agenda  again,  as  of  spring  2016.  The  Council 
subsequently adopted its position on 13 December 2016.  The proposal is under the 
ordinary legislative procedure.  

5. 

LEGISLATIVE PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE EU'S AD AND AS LEGISLATION  

On 9 November 2016, the Commission adopted a proposal to change the EU's anti-
dumping and anti-subsidy legislation. The main elements of the proposal are: 

(a)  Introduction  of  a  new  anti-dumping  methodology  to  capture  market  distortions 
linked  to  state  intervention  in  third  countries.  These  distortions  can  exist  in  a 
country as a whole or in a given sector. The purpose of the new methodology is 
to  address  any  pervasive  state  influence  over  the  economy  and  to  address  new 
economic realities. This new methodology is to be country neutral and  applied 
equally to all WTO countries. This would mean that in the future, there would 
no  longer  be  a  distinction  between  WTO  Members  that  are  market  economy 
countries and WTO Members that are not. However, if a third country maintains 
state-induced distortions in its economy, the new methodology could apply.  

(b)  Strengthening the anti-subsidy instrument to increase the EU's ability to capture 
the  full  magnitude  of  subsidisation  (by  making  it  possible  to  address  also 
subsidies which were identified only in the course of an investigation). 

6 

 
 
 
 
 
 
The proposal was accompanied by an Impact Assessment, a public consultation and a 
dedicated public event where all parties affected by trade defence investigations were 
invited  to  participate.  There  was  active  engagement  from  parties  representing 
industry,  trade,  users  and  third  countries.  The  proposal  is  under  the  ordinary 
legislative procedure.  

6. 

COUNTRY-WIDE MARKET ECONOMY STATUS (MES) 

The  current  practice  is  that  a  country  can  be  considered  a  market  economy  for  the 
purposes of anti-dumping investigations if it fulfils five criteria as set out in the Staff 
Working Document accompanying this report. Six countries have requested country-
wide MES: China, Vietnam, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Mongolia and Belarus. 

During 2016, dedicated discussions regarding the MES process for China, Vietnam, 
Armenia,  Kazakhstan  and  Mongolia  were  put  on  hold  while  the  Commission 
considered making changes to the EU's anti-dumping legislation which could have an 
impact on the legislative framework applicable to these countries.  

In December 2016, Belarus signalled its intention to engage in the MES process. In 
this context, Belarus agreed to update the Commission on progress in relation to its 
ongoing WTO accession negotiations.   

7. 

INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION ACTIVITIES/ BILATERAL CONTACTS  

7.1. 

Small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) 

During  2016,  the  SME  Helpdesk  continued  to  deal  with  requests  for  information 
relating  to  the  trade  defence  instruments.  The  assistance  offered  to  SMEs  by  the 
helpdesk  covered  specific  case  related  queries  as  well  as  provisions  on  both 
procedural  and  substantial  elements  of  anti-dumping  and  anti-subsidy  proceedings. 
This helpdesk was set up in 2004 as a response to the difficulties which SMEs face, 
owing  to  their  small  size  and  resource  constraints,  when  dealing  with  the 
complexities of trade defence investigations. 

7.2. 

Bilateral contacts/information activities – industry and third countries 

Explaining  the  legislation  and  practice  of  the  EU's  trade  defence  activity  and 
exchanging views on third country practices continues to be an important part of the 
work of the TDI services. 

In 2016, the Commission organized its yearly training seminar on trade defence for 
officials  from  third  countries  (participants  from  Egypt,  Tunisia,  Turkey,  Vietnam, 
Thailand, Japan and the WTO secretariat). In addition, there were a number of other 
bilateral contacts dedicated to discussing various trade defence topics with a number 
of  third  countries  including  China,  Japan,  Australia,  Brazil,  Mexico,  Turkey,  USA, 
Russia, Indonesia, Thailand, Canada, India, Switzerland. 

During  2016,  the  trade  defence  services  participated  in  meetings  with  various  key 
stakeholder organisations, continuing the regular meetings with Business Europe as 
well as other sector associations.  

7 

 
 
 
 
8. 

JUDICIAL REVIEW: DECISIONS RENDERED BY THE COURT OF JUSTICE (CJ) / 
GENERAL COURT (GC) (SEE ANNEX S) 

In  2016,  the  General  Court  ('GC')  and  the  Court  of  Justice  ('CJ')  rendered  38 
judgments in the areas of anti-dumping or anti-subsidy. Out of them, 23 actions were 
brought  before  the  GC1.  Seven  of  the  judgments  were  of  the  CJ  and  concerned 
appeals  against  the  General  Court.  In  2016,  the  CJ  also  rendered  8  preliminary 
rulings in the Trade Defence Instruments field. 

There were 34 new cases lodged in 2016. Of  these, 20 were lodged  before  the GC 
and 14 before the CJ. 

A list of the AD/AS cases before the GC and the CJ still pending at the end of 2016 
is presented in Annex S of the Staff Working Document. 

9. 

ACTIVITIES IN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION (WTO) 

9.1. 

Dispute settlement in the field of AD, AS and SFGs  

The WTO provides for a rigorous procedure for the settlement of disputes between 
WTO Members concerning the application of the WTO agreements. 

On 6 October 2016, the Appellate Body circulated its report in the case against the 
EU  on  Anti-Dumping  Measures  on  Biodiesel  from  Argentina.  The  Appellate  Body 
confirmed  the  panel's  findings  that  Article  2(5)  of  the  basic  anti-dumping  EU 
regulation which is the provision used in the biodiesel case to adjust the costs of the 
Argentinian  producers  was  WTO-consistent.  It  also  confirmed  all  other  findings  of 
the panel and rejected all the appeals made by the European Union and Argentina.   

In the case concerning Anti-Dumping Measures on Imports of Certain Fatty Alcohols 
from  Indonesia  (DS442),  the  panel  issued  its  report  on  16 December 2016.  In  that 
report  the  panel  rejected  Indonesia's  claims  that  (i)  the  EU's  treatment  of 
commissions paid by exporters to related traders in dumping calculations and (ii) the 
analysis  of  "other  known  factors"  also  causing  injury  to  EU  industry  analysis  was 
inconsistent with WTO rules.  

On 12 December 2016, the People's Republic of China requested consultations with 
the EU on the provisions of the EU Basic anti-dumping regulation which govern the 
establishment of normal value in relation to imports from China (DS516).  

In the second complaint by Russia against the EU's Cost Adjustment Methodologies 
and  Certain  Anti-Dumping  Measures  on  Imports  from  Russia  (DS494),  further 
consultations were held in 2016 and a panel was established 16 December 2016.  

In the dispute concerning Countervailing Measures on Imports of PET from Pakistan 
(DS486), the panel continued its work during 2016 holding meetings with the parties. 
The EU submitted its second written submission in the case.   

9.2. 

Other WTO activities  

In  2016  discussions  on  fisheries  subsidies  were  reinvigorated  with  the  adoption  of 
Sustainable Development Goal 14 target 6 ('SDG 14.6'). The EU has a clear interest 
in strengthening disciplines on fisheries subsidies in the WTO. Therefore, in October 
2016 the European Union tabled at the WTO a concrete textual proposal which aims 

1  

The  cases  counted  are  direct  actions  seeking  the  annulment  or  partial  annulment  of  a  Commission  Decision  and 
interim measures. The 1 rectification request in 2016 is not counted as a separate request. 

8 

 
 
                                                 
at  implementing  SDG  14.6,  namely  to  prohibit  certain  forms  of  fisheries  subsidies 
which contribute to overcapacity and overfishing, eliminate subsidies that contribute 
to  illegal,  unreported  and  unregulated  fishing  (IUU)  and  refrain  from  introducing 
new such subsidies. The proposal also contains provisions on enhanced transparency 
as  well  as  disciplines  on  special  and  differential  treatment  for  developing  and  least 
developed countries. The EU is actively involved in WTO negotiations with the aim 
of achieving a multilateral agreement on fisheries subsidies at the WTO Ministerial 
Conference 11 to be held in December 2017 in Buenos Aires. 

In  2016,  in  line  with  its  WTO  obligations,  the  EU  participated  in  the  continuing 
review of the 2015 subsidy notification in the two special sessions of the Subsidies 
and  Countervailing  Committee  which  were  held  in  April  and  October  2016.  In 
addition the Commission services participated in the regular work of the WTO Anti-
dumping,  Subsidies  and  Countervailing  and  Safeguards  Committees.  In  October 
2016 the EU (along with Canada, Japan and the US) presented a paper in the WTO 
Subsidies and Countervailing Committee regarding the links between subsidies and 
the creation of excess capacity in various sectors of economic activity.  

,  At  two  meetings  of  the  Implementation  Group  (a  sub-group  of  the  Anti-dumping 
Committee), in April and October 2016, members shared information on 'Gathering 
and compilation of injury data' and 'Treatment of confidential data in Anti-dumping 
investigations'.  In  this  context,  the  EU  presented  information  on  the  relevant  rules 
and practice applicable for trade defence in the EU.   

The  Technical  Group,  a  subgroup  of  the  DDA  Negotiating  Group,  was  convened 
twice  during  the  year.  The  group  discussed  a  number  of  issues  relating  to  the 
practical  aspects  of  conducting  anti-dumping  investigations  including  product 
matching and adjustments and alternative methods for determining normal value.  

10. 

CONCLUSION 

2016 saw a slight increase in the number of new investigations opened, against the 
backdrop of a prolonged crisis caused largely by industrial overcapacities in China, 
notably in, but not limited to, the steel sector. Given that the level of activity in anti-
dumping investigations is complaint-driven, the number of cases reflects the number 
of complaints received  from  industry which contained sufficient evidence from EU 
industry to support allegations of injurious dumping or subsidies. There was a slight 
decrease in the number of provisional and definitive measures imposed as well as the 
number  of  review  investigations  opened.  At  the  same  time,  many  of  the 
investigations conducted, notably those in the steel sector, have been very complex 
and resource-intensive. As was the case with previous years, no safeguard action was 
taken by the EU. 

Moreover, 2016 was marked by the preparation for, and adoption by the Commission 
of,  a  legislative  proposal  to  change  the  EU's  trade  defence  legislation  in  order  to 
ensure  that  the  EU  would  be  equipped  with  sufficiently  robust  instruments  to  deal 
with the challenges faced by industry.  In this context the Commission conducted an 
impact  assessment  as  well  as  a  public  consultation  and  actively  engaged  with 
interested parties across the whole spectrum of economic interest in the EU and also 
from third countries.  

At the same time, the Commission actively engaged with the Council in relation to 
the Trade Defence Instruments Modernisation proposal. These efforts culminated in 

9 

 
 
the  Council  reaching  a  position  at  the  end  of  2016  allowing  for  the  ordinary 
legislative procedure to progress.   

10