REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL 40th Annual Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the EU’s Anti-Dumping, Anti-Subsidy and Safeguard activities and the Use of Trade Defence Instruments by Third Countries targeting the EU in 2021
Date: 2022-09-19
Institutions: Directorate-General for Trade and Economic Security, European Commission
Subjects: activity report, anti-dumping measure, anti-subsidy proceeding, countervailing charge, import (EU), import restriction, originating product, surveillance concerning imports, third country, trade dispute

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 19.9.2022  COM(2022) 470 final  REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL 40th Annual Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the EU’s Anti-Dumping, Anti-Subsidy and Safeguard activities and the Use of Trade Defence Instruments by Third Countries targeting the EU in 2021     {SWD(2022) 294 final}  
 
 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

This is the 40th Report to the European Parliament and the Council covering the EU’s anti-
dumping (AD), anti-subsidy (AS) and safeguard (SFG) activities, as well as the trade defence 
activity of third countries against the EU in 2021 and the activities of the Hearing Officer. 

Despite  the  ongoing  difficulties  in  2021  resulting  from  the  COVID-19  pandemic,  the 
Commission continued to robustly apply the trade defence instruments.  Well-tested working 
methods,  developed  at  the  beginning  of  the  pandemic,  ensured  that  all  investigations  were 
conducted  to  the  highest  standards,  guaranteeing  the  protection  of  EU  producers  against 
injurious unfairly traded imports.  

Enforcement and effectiveness of measures is a primary concern for the Commission and the 
report stresses the improved monitoring practices put in place during the year.  Mindful of the 
fact that actions to avoid paying duties could increase in the post COVID-19 recovery phase, 
the measures, especially those presenting an increased risk of duty avoidance, were subject to 
improved scrutiny.   Where necessary, the Commission opened anti-circumvention as well as 
anti-absorption  investigations, signalling to  operators that the EU is  intent  on tackling these 
practices.  

This  report  also  addresses  the  implementation  of  legislative  changes  made  in  2017/2018, 
adopted  to  ensure  that  the  instruments  can  address  policies  and  challenges  in  global  trade.  
These include social and environmental standards in TDI, which are now taken into account in 
investigations  where  target  prices  were  adjusted  to  account  for  future  costs  resulting  from 
Multilateral  Environmental Agreements to  which the EU is a party.  This  resulted in  higher 
duties  in  some  cases  ensuring  that  injury  margins  remain  meaningful  and  measures  bring 
effective relief to the EU industry.  
Implementing  the  European  Court  of  Auditors’  recommendations  from  20201,  following  its 
audit of the EU’s trade defence instruments, was a Commission priority during the year. Most 
of the recommendations were implemented in 2021.  These actions reinforce the EU’s already 
high standards in the application of the instruments.   
In this context, helping small and medium sized enterprises understand what the instruments 
are and how they can be used and benefitted from was paramount.  

In 2021, the Commission held third-country users of trade defence instruments to the same high 
standards that the EU applies to its investigations. Increasingly, our EU exporters are facing 
more third-country trade defence actions which, unfortunately, are often not conducted in line 
with  WTO 
investigations  against  EU 
industry/exporters,  which  aim  at  reducing  the  negative  economic  impact  and  eliminate 
unfair/unjustified  imposition  of  measures,  yielded  a  number  of  positive  outcomes  thereby 
ensuring continuation of market access for EU exporters.  

third  country 

interventions 

rules.  Our 

in 

1  Special  Report  17/2020:  Trade  defence  instruments:  system  for  protecting  EU  businesses  from  dumped  and 

subsidised imports functions well (europa.eu) 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
  
 
 
                                                 
Finally, the report highlights the relationship between TDI and other EU policies. The EU’s 
Trade Policy Review, published in February 2021, called for all trade tools to be used to support 
EU policy objectives. The trade defence instruments continue to play a very important role in 
that context, not only by protecting over 460,000 jobs, but by ensuring the EU’s commitment 
to open fair trade as well as supporting other policy areas, such as the European Green Deal and 
the  Digital  Agenda  for  Europe  by  protecting  EU  production  of  crucial  elements  of  the 
renewables and digital value chains.  

The  report,  in  line  with  the  Commission’s  reporting  obligations2,  is  accompanied  by  a 
Commission  Staff  Working  Document,  with  annexes,  providing  more  information  and 
statistics.   

2 Article 23 of the Basic Anti-Dumping Regulation (OJ L 176, 30.6.2016, p.21), of Article 34 of the Basic Anti-
Subsidy Regulation (OJ L 176, 30.6.2016, p.55) and of Article 23 of the Basic Safeguards Regulation 
(OJ L 83, 27.3.2015, p.16). 

2 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
1 

APPLICATION OF TRADE DEFENCE INSTRUMENTS (TDI) IN 2021 

1.1 

Investigative activity 

1.1.1  General Overview 

At the end of 2021, the EU had 163 definitive trade defence measures in force: 109 definitive 
anti-dumping (AD) measures (extended in 31 cases), 19 anti-subsidy (AS) measures (extended 
in  1  case)  and  3  safeguard  (SFG)  measures.  This  is  an  increase  of  13  measures  over  2020.   
These measures protected over 462,000 direct jobs.  

The  level  of  investigative  work  in  2021  was  in  line  with  previous  years.    There  were  88 
investigations ongoing, comprised of 29 original investigations and 59 reviews, compared to 
85 in 2020.  At the end of 2021, 43 investigations were ongoing, the same as at the end of 2020.  

In  2021,  many  sectors  sought  the  suspension  of trade  defence  measures  to  address  negative 
market developments, particularly alleged disruptions to supply chains caused primarily by the 
COVID-19  crisis.      This  rarely  used  provision  sets  strict  criteria  for  suspension.  In  October 
2021, the Commission  suspended, for 9 months, measures on aluminium  flat  products  from 
China  while  introducing  monitoring  of  imports  of  the  product.  In  December  2021,  the 
Commission  rejected  the  suspension  of  measures  on  Birch  Plywood  from  Russia  as  the 
conditions were not met.      

A  Commission  Staff  Working  Document  (SWD),  providing  more  information  and  statistics 
accompanies this Report and includes annexes for the sections below.  

1.1.2 

Anti-dumping and Anti-subsidy investigations (see Annexes A to I)  

In 2021, the Commission initiated 14 new investigations (11 AD and 3 AS) compared to 15 in 
2020. It imposed provisional duties in 10 AD investigations and concluded 12 investigations 
by imposing definitive duties (11 AD and 1 AS). The Commission terminated one anti-subsidy 
investigation without imposing measures as the complaint was withdrawn.   

Reviews  of the measures  in  force  initiated in  2021  increased  slightly  compared to  2020, 30 
versus 28. These included 10 expiry and 4 interim reviews.  15 expiry reviews were concluded 
with a confirmation of the duty in 2021.   

The total number of initiations of all types of investigations was 48, i.e. higher than in any of 
the previous five years. 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
 
2017 - 2021 TDI Activity

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

New investigations

Reviews

Definitive measures

1.1.3 

Safeguard investigations 

There were no new safeguard investigations initiated in 2021. 

The  Commission  carried  out  a  review  of  the  EU’s  safeguard  measure  imposed  in  2019  on 
imports of certain steel products. This resulted, in July 2021, in its prolongation until 30 June 
2024  and  an  adjustment  of  certain  aspects.  The  Commission  concluded  that  the  measure 
continued to be necessary to prevent or remedy serious injury and that the Union steel industry 
was  adjusting.  The  Commission  found  that  during  the  period  of  the  safeguard  measure,  the 
economic situation of the Union industry continued to worsen due to import pressure in a period 
where adjustments made by the industry had not yet produced positive effects. On 17 December 
2021,  the  Commission  initiated  the  third  functioning  review  of  the  measure  with  possible 
adjustments to take effect on 1 July 2022.  

1.1.4 

Verifications in investigations 

Stymied by the health risks and travel restrictions, the Commission continued verifying data 
submitted by interested parties by remote cross-checking rather than on-spot verifications.     

Building on the experience developed in 2020, the Commission fulfilled its obligations while 
ensuring  the  rights  of  interested  parties.  In  2021,  the  Commission  verified  data  from  197 
companies by remote cross-checking.  This included 111 European companies and 86 outside 
of  the  EU.    As  travel  restrictions  eased  in  the  last  quarter  of  2021,  12  on-spot  visits  to  EU 
companies took place.   It is hoped that this signals a resumption of more on-spot verifications 
in future.  

4 

 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
1.2 

Effective application and enforcement of TDI 

1.2.1 

Implementation of recommendations of European Court of Auditors - Audit of the EU’s 
TDI 

In 2021, the Commission worked on implementing the recommendations from the European 
Court of Auditors’ audit report of the EU’s Trade defence policy (published in July 2020). The 
recommendations were: the European Commission should (a) document its assessments of the 
confidentiality  status  of  the  documents  from  parties  (b)  seek  additional  communication 
channels to raise stakeholders’ awareness (c) improve guidance on relevant competition aspects 
(d) improve monitoring activities and carry out regular evaluations of the effectiveness of trade 
defence measures (e) launch more investigations at its own initiative and (f) use clear criteria 
to prioritise the response to measures by third countries. 

In response to these recommendations, in 2021 the Commission developed an IT based solution 
to  document  the  confidentiality  assessments  of  the  documents  which  became  operational  in 
early 2022.  In terms of raising awareness of TDI, the process was launched in 2021 to spread 
informative videos as well as develop a seven-module information package that was placed on-
line early 2022 and will be disseminated through contact points in Member States and relevant 
stakeholders.  Because  of  uncertainty  related  to  COVID-19  pandemic,  in-person  information 
meetings with stakeholders were postponed. Regarding competition aspects in trade defence 
investigations, the Commission developed guidance for stakeholders/interested parties as well 
as case-handlers on how to address these issues in investigations.  

Of the  remaining  recommendations,  the Commission  developed  a new monitoring policy in 
2021, with a robust risk-based prioritisation, enhanced coordination with associated services in 
the Commission (OLAF, DG TAXUD and DG BUDG) and external stakeholders, as well as 
improved documenting and reporting  of  results.  This  new monitoring policy,  effective  from 
December  2021,  will  be  evaluated  in  2023.  The  Commission  did  not  fully  accept  the 
recommendation  on  ex  officio  investigations  as  it  considers  it  already  uses  the  ex  officio 
provisions to the fullest extent possible.  Nevertheless, in 2021 the Commission set out, on its 
website,  more  information  regarding  ex  officio  investigations  in  order  to  address  certain 
misconceptions and provide more guidance for the European industry.  As regards monitoring 
trade defence actions of third countries, in 2021, the Commission established criteria to identify 
those that present the most important economic and systemic interest, as well as where there is 
high degree of cooperation by European exporters.  Finally, the Commission will carry out the 
evaluation of the effectiveness of trade defence measures in 2023.   

1.2.2  Monitoring and Enforcement of measures (see Annexes J, K, M, Q) 

With trade enforcement high on the agenda of the von der Leyen Commission, monitoring of 
existing  trade  defence  measures  remained  one  of  the  key  priorities  also  in  2021.  Particular 
attention was given to those trade defence measures where an increased risk of duty avoidance 
was detected. The robust implementation of measures is crucial to preserve the effectiveness 
and  the  credibility  of  the  Commission’s  enforcement  policy.  The  Commission  is  fully 

5 

 
 
  
 
  
 
 
 
 
determined to address any circumvention practices, reduction of the export price and absorption 
of the resale price that undermine the effectiveness of the measures.  

Circumvention takes place when exporting producers in third countries engage in practices like 
shipping the product through a country not subject to duties (transhipment), slightly modifying 
the product so that it does not fall under the duties, or exporting through an exporting producer 
with lower individual rates of anti-dumping or countervailing duties (company channelling). 
Another practice is the absorption of the duty when exporters, despite the imposed measures, 
decrease their prices to overcome the duties or importers do not reflect the duty when reselling 
the product in the Union. 

The Commission takes action against these practices identified either through monitoring or by 
information  received  from  interested  parties.    To  identify  the  potential  problems  as  early  as 
possible, a risk-oriented prioritisation of monitoring tasks is used.  Attention is given to those 
measures where an increased risk of duty avoidance was detected during the investigation and 
a special monitoring clause is integrated in the Regulations imposing measures. The aim of this 
clause is to minimise the risk of circumvention through company channelling. In 2021, among 
others, such clause was integrated in the measures applied to imports of aluminium converter 
foil and aluminium extrusions from China, hot-rolled flat iron products from Turkey, and birch 
plywood from Russia.   

Monitoring  involves  in-depth  analysis  of  imports  of  the  product  subject  to  a  trade  defence 
measure, including  monitoring trend/dynamics of the export  from  the country subject  to  the 
measures.  This  gives  a  complete  picture  of  trade  flows  and  market  developments  after  the 
measures were imposed.  The Commission uses internal databases, fed by customs authorities 
and  statistical  offices  at  both  EU  and  Member  States'  level,  and,  if  necessary,  commercial 
databases. Additional market information, from the Union industry, together with findings on 
non-compliance with measures documented by OLAF  as a result of its investigations or the 
Member States’ authorities are also taken into account.   

At the end of 2021, a total of 54 products under the trade defence measures were subject to 
special  monitoring.  The  Commission  alerted  national  customs  authorities  to  pay  particular 
attention  to  imports  of  products  subject  to  TDI  measures  where  there  were  concerns  e.g. 
transhipment. OLAF was notified where the Commission had information signifying fraudulent 
activity  on  imports.  OLAF  also  notified  the  Commission  with  relevant  enforcement-related 
information.  Close  contacts  between  the  Commission  and  Union  industry  ensured  more 
complete information on market developments to facilitate the most efficient follow-up actions.  

The Commission also scrutinised over 10 price undertakings with exporting producers in 2021 
and found they were complying in full.  

In  recent  years  the  Commission  has  noted  new  ways  by  exporting  producers,  notably  from 
China, to evade duties for example by shifting certain operations to other countries without real 
economic  justification,  and  exporting  from  there  to  the  EU.  The  Commission  has  been 
persistent in its response to close all loopholes to protect EU industry from injury.  

6 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
In 2021, the  Commission initiated  4 anti-circumvention investigations  and 1 anti-absorption 
investigation bringing the total number of such investigations initiated in the last three years to 
11 and 2 respectively. 

The 4 anti-circumvention cases initiated concern an increase of imports of glass fibre fabrics 
from Turkey and Morocco after anti-dumping and countervailing duties were imposed on these 
products originating in China and Egypt in 2020. Glass fibre fabrics are used, for instance, for 
the production of blades for wind turbines, in the boat, truck and sport equipment production, 
as well as in pipe rehabilitation systems. The investigations focused on transhipment after the 
product  concerned  went  through  assembly  operations  in  Turkey  and  Morocco  respectively. 
Those cases are emblematic of the challenges posed by China’s Belt and Road policy and the 
Commission’s determination to take robust action against unfair trade resulting therefrom. 

The  anti-absorption  investigation  initiated  in  2021  also  concerns  glass  fibre  fabrics.  It 
investigates whether the Egyptian exporting producers have decreased their prices to undermine 
the effectiveness of the anti-dumping duties imposed in 2020.  

Additionally,  in  2021  the  Commission  extended  measures  following  2  anti-circumvention 
investigations. It was established that the anti-dumping duties currently in force on two different 
types of aluminium household foil from China were being circumvented via Thailand, where 
the product was only subject to minor assembly operations. The affected EU industry consists 
mainly of SMEs spread through 12 Member states. 

This  shows  the  Commission’s  determination  to  tackle  all  forms  of  unfair  trade,  including 
circumvention and absorption of trade defence measures.  

1.2.3 

Surveillance measures  

Where there is an indication, and often based on information from the industry concerned, that 
there is a significant increase of imports of a certain product that poses a threat of injury to the 
Union  industry,  the  Commission  can  introduce  surveillance  measures  to  also  monitor  such 
imports3.    In  2021,  the  Commission  continued  its  retrospective  surveillance  on  steel  and 
aluminium imports which had been introduced in May 2020 replacing the prior surveillance 
system. The Commission also monitored, via retrospective surveillance, imports of renewable 
ethanol for fuel.   

The Commission publishes the surveillance data monthly on the ‘surveillance/ monitoring of 
imports’ public page4 of DG Trade’s website. 

1.2.4 

Protecting European small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) 

3 Article 11 of Regulation (EU) 2015/478 of 11 March 2015, OJ L86, 27.3.2015, p.16. 

4 https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/siglbo/post-surveillance 

7 

 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
 
In order to ensure that the resource limitations of SMEs are not an obstacle to using the trade 
defence instruments, the Commission provides full support and guidance to such companies.   

In 2021, the Commission made additional efforts to ensure that SMEs know about, and benefit 
from,  the  instruments,  including  through  its  SME  helpdesk.  This  includes  a  reduced 
requirement on information to be provided in questionnaires and, where possible, investigation 
periods aligned with their financial year. Also in 2021, the Commission developed an on-line 
information  package  explaining  the  instruments  in  plain  terms  with  plans  for  further  video 
tutorials.  In-person  information  sessions  for  SMEs  in  Member  States  will  be  resumed  once 
COVID-19 related conditions allow.  

The Commission’s efforts bear results.  Sectors characterised by SMEs continued to be involved 
in  trade  defence  proceedings  in  2021.  During  the  year,  the  Commission  initiated  an  anti-
dumping investigation on imports of Ceramic tiles from Turkey and India, the anti-dumping 
investigation on imports fasteners from China continued and the expiry review concerning trout 
from Turkey was finalised with measures being extended for another 5 years.  While largely 
characterised  by  SMEs,  through  good  coordination  on  their  side  along  with  guidance  and 
support  from  the  Commission,  the  industries  concerned  benefit  from  the  same  rights  and 
protection from unfair trade as larger companies.   

1.3 

Developments in 2021 relating to the legislative changes in 2017 and 2018  

1.3.1 

Social and environmental standards in TDI 

The EU’s commitment to high social and environmental standards is reflected in certain aspects 
of anti-dumping and anti-subsidy investigations since the 2017 and 2018 legislative changes. 
These include:  

-  When  investigations  concern  countries  with  significant  market  distortions  there  is  a 
need to select an appropriate representative country to construct a non-distorted normal 
value.  When  there  is  more  than  one  country  with  suitable  data  available,  the 
Commission chooses, taking into consideration the level of social and environmental 
protection in the countries proposed.  

-  When  calculating  an  injury  margin  in  investigations,  the  cost  of  compliance  with 
multilateral  environmental  agreements  and  International  Labour  Organisation 
Conventions during the lifetime of TDI measures is built into the EU industry’s costs of 
production and, in some instances, when deciding to accept undertakings.  

As  regards  the  selection  of  an  appropriate  representative  country,  in  the  investigations 
concluded in 2021, the issue of social and environmental standards did not arise, as suitable 
data was available for only one representative country in each case.     

The Commission included the cost of compliance with multilateral environmental agreements 
and International Labour Organisation Conventions when calculating the target profit price in 
several  cases  completed  in  2021.  This  is  particularly  relevant  with  regard  to  the  Emission 
Trading  System.  The  investigations  affected  included  Aluminium  Extrusions,  Aluminium 
Converter  Foil  and  Aluminium  Flat  Products  all  from  China,  Stainless  Steel  Cold  Rolled 
Products (SSCR) from India and Indonesia and Birch Plywood from Russia.  This increased the 

8 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
target  price  for  these  industries  as  it  included  the  future  costs  resulting  from  Multilateral 
Environmental Agreements to which the Union is a party, which the Union industry will incur 
during the lifetime of the measures. In the two cases where the duty was based on the injury 
margins (aluminium converter foil and aluminium flat products), the adjustments made for the 
costs of social and environmental standards increased the level of measures imposed.   

The issue did not arise in the context of undertaking offers in 2021, as they were rejected for 
other reasons.  

1.3.2 

Lesser duty rule  

Under WTO rules, measures can be imposed at the level of the dumping or subsidy margin. 
Prior to the legislative changes in June 2018, the EU always applied the lesser duty rule (LDR). 
This meant measures were always imposed at a level lower than the full extent of dumping or 
subsidisation,  if  a  lower  level,  called  the  ‘injury  margin’,  was  enough  to  remove  the  injury 
suffered  by  the  EU  industry.  However,  since  the  TDI  modernisation  the  LDR  is  not 
automatically applied in anti-dumping and anti-subsidy cases. 

In anti-subsidy cases the LDR no longer applies unless it is against the overall interest of the 
EU to do so, ensuring that the EU can tackle the unfair subsidised imports more rigorously.  In 
one anti-subsidy investigation completed in 2021 (Aluminium Converter Foil from China) the 
Commission imposed the duties at the full rate of the subsidy margins on this basis.  

In anti-dumping cases, measures can be imposed at a lower level than the dumping margin if 
such  lower  level  is  sufficient  to  remove  the  injury  caused  by  the  dumped  imports.  In  case 
significant distortions in the price of raw materials are found in the exporting country, a duty at 
the full dumping margin is considered to be necessary to address the injurious dumping practice. 
The distorted raw material must account for more than 17% of the cost of production and its 
price should be significantly lower than undistorted prices.  

In 8 out of the 11 cases completed, measures were based on the dumping margins as these were 
lower than the injury margin and, in line with the legislation, the highest level which could be 
imposed.   For the three remaining cases, duties were based on the injury margins as these were 
lower  than  the  dumping  margins  and  the  criteria  concerning  export  restrictions  on  key  raw 
material  were  not  met  i.e.  in  Aluminium  flat  products  and  Aluminium  converter  foil  from 
China, the prices for the distorted raw materials were not significantly lower than international 
market prices and, in the steel wind towers from China case, the issue was not raised.   

1.4 

Judicial review by EU Courts (Annex S)  

In 2021, the General Court (GC) and the Court of Justice (CJ) rendered 21 judgments and orders 
in TDI cases: the GC handed down 14 rulings whereas the CJ rendered four preliminary rulings 
and decided on three appeals. 18 new TDI cases were lodged in 2021 - 12 before the GC and 6 
appeals before the CJ.   

The jurisprudence in 2021 provides interesting insights into the admissibility of legal actions 
against TDI measures, particularly into the question of standing and ability of importers and 
users to launch court proceedings in such cases.  

9 

 
 
 
 
In 2021, the GC rendered its first judgement on the articulation of safeguard measures and anti-
dumping/countervailing measures. Moreover, the CG confirmed the Commission's practice to 
implement  adverse  Court  rulings  by  repairing  any  illegality  identified  by  the  Court  and  to 
reimburse duties only to the extent that the corrected duty is lower. Other issues the Courts dealt 
with in 2021 included the methodology used in refund investigations, lasting nature of change 
in interim reviews, various aspects of dumping calculations, injury and causal link assessment 
and use of facts available.   

The most important judgments are described in the Staff Working Document.   

2 

ACTIVITIES OF THE HEARING OFFICER 

In 2021, the Hearing Officer received 25 intervention requests and held 15 hearings. Whenever 
parties submitted the request for an intervention simultaneously with a request for a hearing 
with the Commission services responsible for the investigation, the Hearing Officer maintained 
the approach that the interested parties should first address their concerns to the Commission 
services.  The  Hearing  Officer  would  only  intervene  when  a  solution  was  not  reached.  This 
enabled the interested parties to find a solution directly with the investigation teams in many of 
the  cases.  The  Hearing  Officer  also  received  a  request  for  a  confrontational  hearing,  which 
finally took place with the services in charge.  

On two occasions, the Hearing Officer extended the deadline for comments upon request of the 
parties  concerned.  The  Hearing  Officer  recommended  to  the  Commission  services  to  make 
available certain information to all parties in the non-confidential file. The main issues raised 
at  the  hearings  concerned  requests  for  additional  disclosure,  anonymity  and  confidentiality. 
Two parties requested that the measures to be imposed should be suspended at the time of their 
adoption.  However,  the  conditions  were  not  fulfilled.  In  another  case,  the  party  refused  to 
provide the documents for the file necessary for the verification of the relevant information by 
the  Commission,  claiming  that,  instead,  the  services  should  have  undertaken  an  on-spot 
verification.  However,  this  was  not  feasible  in  the  COVID-19  context.  In  the  other  cases, 
agreement was reached with the services to review the issues at hand, or provide clarifications  
requests remained irregular due to the continuing COVID-19 context but holding hearings was 
simpler with the elimination of travel. 

3 

DEALING WITH TRADE DEFENCE ACTIVITY AGAINST THE EU 

The Commission intervenes where European exports are hampered by third countries imposing 
unjustified  trade  defence  measures.  While  third  countries  are  fully  entitled  to  use  the 
instruments, it is imperative that WTO rules are followed and the trade defence measures do 
not become de facto trade barriers. Given the importance of exports for the European economy 
and their contribution to jobs and growth, the Commission intervenes with the aim of reducing 
the negative economic impact of any measures or to avoid the imposition of unjustified trade 
defence measures on EU exports altogether.  

The  Commission’s  interventions  in  third  country  cases  range  from  technical  written 
submissions  to  participation  in  hearings  to  making  both  written  and  oral  representations  at 
political level, if necessary.  

10 

 
 
 
 
 
  
Examples of the Commission activity in 2021 included participation in hearings conducted by 
the  Canadian  authorities  on  the  AD  and  AS  cases  on  refined  sugar,  with  support  from  DG 
AGRI. Other trade defence cases were discussed in the regular trade committee meetings with 
the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), Canada or South Africa. The Commission also raised 
cases in the World Trade Organisation (WTO) AD and SFG committees.  These interventions 
were coordinated with both EU industry and Member States with priority given to cases with a 
significant economic impact for European business and those with systemic problems. 

In cases where unjustified measures cannot be avoided, the Commission may resort to WTO 
action. It did so in the US AD and AS measures on Spanish ripe olives imposed in 2018. In this 
dispute, the Panel report, in favour of the EU, was adopted on 20 December 2021.  Another 
WTO panel  proceeding  regarding the Colombian AD measures on frozen fries continued in 
2021. The first and second substantial meetings took place on-line in July 2021 and January 
2022 respectively.   

Interventions by the Commission, highlighting legal inconsistencies and systemic flaws in cases 
have played an important part in preventing the imposition of the unjustified measures.  Some 
successes in 2021 were: 

 

 

India terminated an AD investigation on imports of flat rolled products of stainless steel 
in March 2021 without imposing measures. This was an important outcome given the 
economic interest at stake of around €98m.  The Commission, in close cooperation with 
the  industry,  actively  intervened  in  the  case  from  the  outset  with  three  written 
submissions and participation in the public hearing.  
In  September  2021,  the  Gulf  Cooperation  Council  Ministerial  Committee  did  not 
approve the Permanent Committee’s proposal to impose definitive safeguard measures 
on imports of certain steel products.  

 

  The  Commission’s  interventions  in  an  AD  investigation  by  Ukraine  into  imports  of 
aluminium  ladders  from  Poland  and  Slovakia  succeeded  in  the  investigation  being 
terminated in October 2021.  
In May 2021, New Zealand terminated an AD investigation on imports of frozen fries 
from Belgium and the Netherlands, sparing exports valued at €3 m.  This was in part 
thanks to the Commission’s written interventions, in coordination with the EU industry, 
which demonstrated that the conditions to impose AD measures were not met.  
In October 2021, Canada initiated an ex officio re-investigation to reassess the AD and 
AS measures on imports of refined sugar originating in the EU. This was the result of 
the  numerous  interventions  by  the  Commission  explaining  that  these  countervailing 
measures  are  based  on  old  EU  subsidy  schemes  and  do  not  reflect  the  current, 
significantly  lower,  levels  of  subsidisation.  The  AS  duty  was  reduced  considerably 
(58% to 9%). Canada found that the decoupled direct support payments under the EU 
Common Agricultural policy are not specific and not actionable.  

 

At the end of 2021, there were 177 trade defence measures in force affecting EU exports, one 
less than last year which had been the highest number in the Commission’s monitoring activity.  

The AD instrument remains the most used instrument globally, accounting for 128 of the 177 
measures  in  force.  42  of  the  measures  were  SFG  (compared  to  39  in  2020)  and  7  were  AS 
measures. 

The  26  new  investigations  opened  in  2021  concern  comprise  17  AD  and  9  safeguard 

11 

 
 
 
 
 
proceedings (compared to 22 in 2020).  

The US has the highest number of measures against EU exports, with 37 measures in force, 
followed by China with  19, Turkey with 17, Brazil, Canada and India with 12, followed by 
Indonesia with 11. 

Steel products account for the highest number of measures, 62, followed by chemical products 
with 48 measures, agricultural products with 22 measures, textiles with 12 measures and paper 
with 10 measures. 

4 

ACTIVITIES IN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE WTO 

In  2021,  the  WTO  held  meetings  of  the  Subsidies  and  Countervailing,  Anti-dumping  and 
Safeguards Committees in virtual format in April and October. The Informal Group on Anti-
Circumvention  did  not  meet.  The  Anti-dumping  Working  Group  on  Implementation  met  in 
October 2021.   

The  Commission  submitted  the  EU’s  Subsidy  notification  to  the  WTO  in  July  2021.  This 
transparency facilitating exercise is crucial in understanding the level and impact of subsidies 
granted  by  WTO  countries.  Unfortunately,  the  track  record  on  members  submitting 
notifications has been poor so the Commission urged them to meet their obligations.    

In the AD Committee, the EU raised a review investigation on imports of frozen chips / fries 
from Belgium and the Netherlands by the South African Customs Union (SACU); a review of 
measures on refined sugar from Denmark, the Netherlands, UK and Belgium by Canada and 
the preliminary AD duties on imports on common alloy aluminium sheet originating in seven 
EU Member States by the US.  

In the Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing measures, discussion took place on the role 
of below market financing in contributing to overcapacities.  There was also an exchange on 
the harmful impact of overcapacities on the environment as well as loss to investment in R & 
D by competing industries. 

During the WTO Safeguard Committee meetings, the EU raised the following investigations: 
Indonesia: Articles of apparel and clothing accessories, Morocco: hot rolled steel, wire rods and 
reinforcing bars, cold rolled sheets, lighting columns, South Africa: steel screws with hexagon 
heads, Turkey: polyester staple fibres,  and Ukraine: sodium hypochlorite, PVC profiles. The 
EU defended its safeguard measures on certain steel products, which were subject to criticism 
from India, China, Russia, Japan, Switzerland and Korea. 

In instances where unjustified TDI measures are imposed, the Commission can resort to WTO 
dispute settlement, in particular when significant systemic issues have been identified. There is 
currently  one  on-going  dispute  settlement  procedure  brought  by  the  EU,  concerning  the 
Colombian AD duties on frozen fries from Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands. The final 
Panel report in this proceeding is expected after the summer 2022. In the proceeding concerning 
AD and AS duties imposed by the US on imports of Spanish ripe olives, the Panel report was 
adopted  on  20  December  2021.  On  1  July  2022,  the  parties  agreed  on  a  reasonable 
implementation period for the US which will expire on 14 January 2023.  

In  November  2021,  Executive  Vice-President  and  Commissioner  for  Trade,  Valdis 
Dombrovskis met virtually with the Trade Ministers of United States and Japan to renew their 
trilateral  partnership.  They  agreed  to  identify  and  tackle  the  global  challenges  of  market-

12 

 
 
 
distortive policies and practices that are currently not sufficiently addressed by WTO rules nor 
by the existing enforcement tools. The ministers agreed to pursue trilateral discussions on three 
focus areas: 

 

 

 

Identification of problems due to non-market practices 

Identification of gaps in existing enforcement tools, and where further work is 
needed to develop new tools to address such practices, as well as discussing 
cooperation in utilizing existing tools 

Identification of areas where further work is needed to develop rules to address 
such practices 

5 

TRADE DEFENCE IN SUPPORT OF OTHER EU POLICIES 

In  the  EU’s  ‘Trade  Policy  Review  –  An  Open,  Sustainable  and  Assertive  Trade  Policy’ 
published in 2021, the need to align and use all trade tools in support of EU policy objectives 
was highlighted.  In this context, the trade defence instruments play an important role.   While 
their main objective is to protect EU producers against unfairly traded imports, by doing so they 
help reinforce the EU's commitment to open markets and free and fair trade and contribute to 
the goal of the EU’s open strategic autonomy.  Intrinsic in trade defence are the concepts of 
competitiveness,  fairness  and  rules-based  trade,  some  of  the  key  elements  underpinning  the 
EU’s trade policy objectives. 

By  ensuring  a  level  playing  field  and  fair  competition  for  the  EU  producers,  trade  defence 
instruments contribute to growth, job stability, revenues and investment.   It is imperative that 
EU industry is able to invest, inter alia, in research and development to strengthen its viability 
and its ability to meet objectives set out in broader policy initiatives such as the Green Deal and 
the Digital agenda.     

Concretely, in the context of the Green Deal, measures imposed on products or inputs such as 
glass fibre fabrics (used in manufacture of blades for wind turbines) from China and Egypt and 
solar glass (used in manufacture of solar panels) from China, protect important EU-produced 
elements of the sustainable energy value chain against unfair trade practices.    In 2021, anti-
dumping measures were imposed on wind towers from China, also an important product in the 
context  of  the  EU’s  renewable  energy  and  CO2  reduction  targets.    Rather  than  impeding 
renewable energy targets, as brought up by certain stakeholders, the Commission underlined 
that without investment in modern manufacturing and research & development, the European 
industry  would  lose  its  place  in  the  global  race  for  technology  leadership  in  wind  energy.  
Measures will support the wind tower producers in the Union and generate growth, job stability, 
revenues  and  investments.  In  turn,  users  should  benefit  from  a  broad  base  of  competitive, 
reliable and financially sound steel wind tower producers in the Union. Without addressing the 
unfair  competition  from  Chinese  imports,  this  would  not  be  possible.  The  Commission 
concluded that, measures would contribute to  wind energy  deployment across the Union by 
creating a level playing field where all economic operators, including Chinese producers, could 
compete under fair conditions.  

In the context of the EU’s Digital agenda, the AD measures imposed on imports of optical fibres 
from  China  in  2021  play  an  important  role.    Optical  fibre  cables  are  used  in  creating  fast 
broadband  networks.  Such  networks  are  crucial  to  support  home  working,  home  learning, 

13 

 
 
 
running business or providing services by citizens, businesses and public entities across the EU.  
Given  that  one  of  the  main  priorities  of  the  European  Union  is  the  deployment  of  high 
technology broadband infrastructure across the entire EU, optical fibre cables are key in this 
context  and  for the EU’s Digital  Decade and  the EU’s digital  sovereignty.   Some interested 
parties argued that anti-dumping measures would lead to increases in the total price of network 
projects. However, the Commission found that the cost of optical fibre cables represents only a 
minor share of total network project costs and would not have a significant impact.  Without 
measures to address the unfair trade practices of the Chinese exporters, the  future of the EU 
industry  would  be  jeopardised  as  it  would  face  further  financial  deterioration  in  terms  of 
profitability  and  investments.  Given  the  important  role  of  this  industry  in  the  EU’s  digital 
agenda,  ensuring  that  it  remains  viable  and  is  not  weakened  by  unfair  imports  and  unfair 
competition, is crucial.  

It should be recalled that the imposition of measures, where justified, does not prevent imports 
from third countries competing fairly on the Union market. While it is acknowledged without 
measures,  users,  importers,  final  customers  and  public  budgets  may  benefit  from  cheaper 
products in the short term, dumped imports inevitably drive Union producers out of the Union 
market. In the long run, this results in the loss of valuable sources of supply and potentially in 
increase of import prices in the absence of competition from the Union producers.  In turn this 
erodes the EU’s industry base on which it builds other policies.   

Therefore,  by  restoring  fair  competition,  trade  defence  measures  help  maintain  competitive, 
reliable and financially sound production in the Union.  At the same time, the EU’s balanced 
approach to the instruments, which includes applying the lesser duty rule in many circumstances 
as  well  as  carrying  out  a  Union  interest  test  before  imposing  measures,  ensures  that  users 
continue to benefit from a broad base of suppliers.  

CONCLUSION 

2021 presented continued challenges in global trade as the EU returned to normal, post COVID-
19.   The  EU  continued,  through  the  robust  application  of  the  trade  defence  instruments,  to 
protect EU business from unfair trade. This contributed not only to the EU’s overall trade policy 
objectives, but indirectly supported broader policy initiatives such as the Green Deal and the 
Digital agenda.  Improved monitoring and enforcement of measures further strengthened the 
important role trade defence continues to play in building more resilient European business.   

14