REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL 41th 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 2022
Date: 2023-09-06
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, 6.9.2023  COM(2023) 506 final  REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL 41th 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 2022       {SWD(2023) 287 final}  
 
 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

This is the 41st Report of the European Union’s (EU) trade defence activity. It covers the EU’s 
anti-dumping (AD), anti-subsidy (AS) and safeguard (SFG) activities, trade defence activities 
of third countries with respect to goods imported from the EU as well as the activities of the 
Hearing  Officer  in  2022.    It  is  accompanied  by  a  Commission  Staff  Working  Document, 
together with annexes, providing more detailed information and statistics. 

The  report  highlights  the  fact  that  in  2022,  casework  remained  important  with  the  highest 
number  of  cases  initiated  over  the  last  five  years,  mainly  comprised  of  reviews  of  existing 
measures. The year saw a return to pre-pandemic working methods for many cases, as travel 
restrictions began to lift, allowing more on-spot verification visits. The number of new cases 
was lower than previous years, reflecting a lower number of complaints received from industry. 
This is most likely due to less injurious import competition either in terms of lower volumes or 
higher  prices  in  2021  and  2022  during  the  post  COVID  recovery  period  which  may  have 
allowed the EU industry gain market share as well as high profits. A similar drop in new cases 
was seen with major users of trade defence worldwide1. On the other hand, the imposition of 
definitive measures during the year mean that 177 measures were in place at the end of 2022, 
protecting almost half a million jobs. These include manufacturing jobs in the renewables sector 
(such as wind towers and solar glass) and in the digital sector (such as optical fibre cables), 
which are important for the achievement of the EU’s green deal and digital objectives. 

Throughout 2022, the Commission also focussed on ensuring that measures remain effective.  
Risk based monitoring and swift action to address any instances of measures being undermined, 
is reflected in the fact that over a fifth of current measures have resulted from action against 
circumvention practices.   

Despite the lessening impact of, and increased recovery from, the COVID-19 pandemic, the 
year brought new challenges for global trade following Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified 
military aggression against Ukraine. Among the many steps taken to help Ukraine also through 
trade measures, the EU suspended all import duties and all trade defence measures on goods 
imported from the country to help mitigate the severe damage to their economy and support 
Ukrainian producers and exporters.  Additionally, the EU suspended the application of the steel 
safeguard measure with respect to goods imported from Ukraine. 

There was a significant drop of 73% in the number of third-country trade defence investigations 
opened  against  EU  exports,  reflecting  a  global  drop  of  fewer  new  cases  in  2022.  The 
Commission’s interventions in such cases remains important by helping EU exporters to defend 
themselves against unfair trade measures, ensuring that access to export markets is not thwarted 
by unjustified trade defence measures.  

1 WTO Statistics show a drop of 47% in new AD/AS initiations between 2021 and 2022 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
PART 1 - APPLICATION OF TRADE DEFENCE INSTRUMENTS (TDI) IN 2022 

1. 

INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITY 

1.1. 

General Overview 

At the end of 2022, the EU had 177 definitive trade defence measures in force: 117 definitive 
anti-dumping (AD) measures (extended in 34 cases following anti-circumvention investigations 
(AC)), 21 anti-subsidy (AS) measures (extended in 4 cases) and 1 safeguard (SFG) measure. 
This is an increase of 14 measures in comparison to 2021. These measures protect over 494 000 
direct jobs in the EU.  

The  level  of  investigative  work  during  2022  was  in  line  with  previous  years  with  99 
investigations taking place, comprised of 21 original investigations and 78 Reviews, compared 
to 872 in 2021.  At the end of 2022, 48 investigations were ongoing. 

In 2022, the Commission dealt with several calls for the suspension of certain trade defence 
measures. Continued disruption to supply chains, caused originally by the COVID-19 crisis and 
exacerbated  by  Russia’s  military  aggression  against  Ukraine,  prompted  some  economic 
operators  to  seek  a  suspension  of  certain  existing  measures.  However,  no  measures  were 
suspended  in  2022  under  Article  14(4)  of  the  basic  anti-dumping  regulation3,  as  the  legal 
requirements were not met. Furthermore, in July 2022, the Commission lifted the suspension 
on anti-dumping measures on aluminium flat products from China, in place since October 2021.      

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

1.2. 

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

In 2022, the Commission initiated 5 new investigations (4 AD and 1 AS) compared to 14 in 
2021. While this is a drop, it reflects the fact that the trade defence instruments are complaint 
driven and, in 2022, the number of complaints received from EU industry was lower than in 
previous years. This drop in cases may be explained by a decrease in imports in 2021 and 2022, 
partly due to high transport costs, resulting in higher market share for EU industry and high 
prices.  Also, post-COVID-19 rebound, which generated high profits, may have meant industry 
suffered less injury in this period.    

On  the  other  hand,  the  number  of  reviews  initiated  in  2022  increased  significantly  with  41 
initiations compared to 28 the previous year. These included, among others, 27 expiry reviews 
of the existing measures and 4 interim reviews to revise/adjust the level of measures in place.   

The total number of AD and AS initiations of all types of investigations was 46, the record high 
in the last five years. 

The  Commission  imposed  provisional  duties  in  3  AD  investigations  and  concluded  11 
investigations by imposing definitive duties (8 AD and 3 AS). The Commission terminated 1 
anti-subsidy  investigation  without  imposing  measures  as  the  complaint  was  withdrawn.    18 
expiry reviews were concluded with a confirmation of the duty in 2022. 

2  

3  

Incorrectly reported as 88 in the 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. 

Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of 

the European Union (OJ L 176, 30.6.2016, p. 21) 

2 

 
 
 
   
 
 
2018 - 2022 TDI Activity

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

New investigations

Reviews

Definitive measures

1.3. 

Safeguard investigations  

In March 2022, the Commission adjusted the EU’s safeguard measure, imposed in 2019, on 
imports of certain steel products to take into account an import ban on steel from Belarus and 
the  Russian Federation  because  of  the  EU  restrictive  measures  (sanctions)4.  As  a  result,  the 
country-specific quotas of these two origins were re-allocated to other suppliers subject to the 
measure5.  In  April 2022,  the  Commission  again  adjusted  the  measure  to  incorporate  certain 
countries with which the Union has signed an Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) into its 
scope as they were previously excluded due to provisions of the EPA.  

In June 2022, the Commission made several  technical  adjustments to  the functioning  of the 
steel safeguard measure following the third functioning review6. These adjustments included 
an increase in the level of liberalisation from 3% to 4%, an update of the list of developing 
countries subject to the measure, an adjustment to some quotas to avoid undue crowding-out 
effects,  and  the  globalisation  in  the  quota  administration  of  two  product  categories. 
Furthermore, the Commission suspended the application of the measure vis-a-vis Ukraine as a 
result of the EU unprecedented trade liberalisation measures to support Ukraine’s economy.  

In April 2022, the WTO Dispute Settlement Body issued its Panel report in the dispute EU — 
Safeguard Measures on Certain Steel Products (DS595), which had been instigated by Türkiye 
against the EU in March 2020. While the Panel report was overall satisfactory for the EU, it 
identified a limited number of inconsistencies with WTO rules in the EU’s safeguard measure. 
These  pertained  to  the  reasoning  provided  by  the  Commission  in  the  original  determination 
regarding the finding of a threat of serious injury and regarding the link between unforeseen 

4  

5  

6  

Council  Regulation  (EU)  2022/428  of  15  March  2022  amending  Regulation  (EU)  No  833/2014 
concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia's actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine (OJ L 
87 I, 15.3.2022, p. 13). 
Commission  Implementing  Regulation  (EU)  2022/434  of  15  March  2022  amending  Regulation  (EU) 
2019/159 imposing a definitive safeguard measure against imports of certain steel products (OJ L 88, 
16.3.2022, p. 181). 
Commission  Implementing  Regulation  (EU)  2022/978  of  23  June  2022  amending  Implementing 
Regulation (EU) 2019/159 imposing a definitive safeguard measure on imports of certain steel products 
(OJ l 167, 24.6.2022, p.58). 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
developments and increased imports. On 13 January 2023, the Commission implemented the 
Panel’s ruling, thus bringing the steel safeguard measure into conformity with WTO rules. 

The bilateral safeguard measures imposed in 2019 on imports of Indica rice from Cambodia 
and Myanmar, under the Generalised Scheme of Preferences (GSP) expired in January 2022. 
There is an ongoing proceeding regarding the measures, opened in January 2023, to implement 
a General Court judgment7 in this case.  

There were no new safeguard investigations initiated in 2022. 

1.4. 

Verifications in investigations 

While 2022 saw a major return to on-spot verification visits, the Commission was obliged to 
still carry on with remote cross-checking in certain investigations due to continued risks and 
travel restrictions related to COVID-19.  

In 2022, the Commission verified data from 178 companies.  Of these, 129 involved on-spot 
visits while data from 49 companies was verified by remote crosschecking.  This is a significant 
change from 2021 where there were only 12 on-spot visits, signalling a welcome return to pre-
pandemic practice.   

2. 

EFFECTIVE APPLICATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF TDI 

2.1.  Monitoring, surveillance and enforcement of measures (see Annexes J, K, M, Q)  

To ensure an effective and credible trade defence policy, it is  essential,  where measures are 
imposed,  that  they  be  respected  and  achieve  their  intended  purpose.  For  this  purpose,  the 
Commission has the tools to monitor the impact of anti-dumping and countervailing duties on 
import flows of products covered by measures, as well as legal mechanisms to act where the 
measures are being absorbed or circumvented. 

Monitoring of measures aims to tackle such practices and to pre-empt fraud, by defining risk-
related areas, analysing trade flows and market developments; providing information to take 
any actions necessary (e.g. anti-circumvention and anti-absorption investigations, interim/new 
exporter reviews, contact with national administrations) as well as alerting customs authorities 
and  assessing  the  feedback  from  customs  and  economic  operators,  and  co-operating  with 
enforcement services (OLAF and national customs).  Conscious of the potential for duties to be 
evaded, the Commission prioritises those cases presenting a higher risk. In such cases, special 
monitoring provisions are already included in the Regulations imposing measures with the aim 
of  minimising  the  risks  of  circumvention  through  company  channelling.  In  2022,  all  the 
Regulations  imposing  definitive  measures  included  such  monitoring  clauses.    At  the  end  of 
2022, the imports of 58 products subject to measures were covered by monitoring clauses.   

Also  in  2022,  the  Commission  continued  surveillance  on  steel,  aluminium  and  bioethanol 
imports, which had been introduced in 2020. The surveillance data was published monthly on 
the ‘surveillance/ monitoring of imports’ public page8 of DG Trade’s website.  

7 Case T-246/19 Kingdom of Cambodia and Cambodia Rice Federation v Commission 
8 https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/siglbo/post-surveillance 

4 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
to 

identifying  circumvention  practices. 
These  monitoring  exercises  can  contribute 
Circumvention takes place when, following the imposition of trade defence measures, a change 
in the pattern of trade for the products in question is found, which stems from a practice for 
which there is insufficient due cause or economic justification other than the imposition of the 
measures.  This  practice  may  include  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).   Absorption occurs when third country exporting 
producers decide to decrease prices to the EU to minimise or nullify the  intended impact of 
duties imposed on their products.   

Addressing  precisely  such  activities  prompted  the  Commission  to  initiate  two  new  anti-
circumvention  and  one  anti-absorption  investigations  in  2022.    The  first  anti-circumvention 
investigation concerned possible circumvention of AD measures on imports of stainless-steel 
tube and pipe butt-welding fittings from China via Malaysia. The second concerned possible 
circumvention of AD measures on imports of stainless steel hot-rolled sheets and coils from 
Indonesia via Türkiye.  The anti-absorption investigation concerned AD measures on optical 
fibre  cables  from  China.  The  request  showed  that  a  decrease  in  Chinese  export  prices  was 
seemingly impeding the intended remedial effects of the measures in force. The decrease in 
export prices could not be explained by a decrease of the price of the major raw material or a 
change in the product mix.  

During  2022,  the  Commission  concluded  anti-circumvention  investigations  relating  to  anti-
dumping  and  countervailing  measures  imposed  in  2020  on  glass  fibre  fabrics  originating  in 
China and Egypt. Glass fibre fabrics are used, for instance, in the production of blades for wind 
turbines,  in  boat,  truck  and  sports  equipment  production,  as  well  as  in  pipe  rehabilitation 
systems. The circumvention practices concerned an increase of imports of glass fibre fabrics 
from Morocco and Türkiye after anti-dumping and countervailing measures were imposed on 
these products. The investigations focused on imports of the main inputs for glass fibre fabrics 
from China to Morocco and Türkiye where these inputs were processed into glass fibre fabrics, 
and  subsequently  exported  to  the  Union.  The  investigations  confirmed  the  allegations  of 
circumvention  and,  as  a  result,  the  Commission  extended  both  the  anti-dumping  and 
countervailing  measures  to  Morocco  and  to  Türkiye.  These  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 Commission also concluded an anti-absorption investigation in 2022 on the measures on 
glass  fibres  from  Egypt.  It  found  that  the  Egyptian  exporting  producers  had  decreased  their 
prices to undermine the effectiveness of the anti-dumping duties imposed in 2020. Following 
the  anti-absorption  investigation,  the  Commission  recalculated  the  dumping  margins 
accordingly, which resulted in an increase of 13,1% in the measures imposed. These actions 
show  the  Commission’s  determination  to  tackle  all  forms  of  unfair  trade,  including 
circumvention and absorption of trade defence measures. 

In 2022, the Commission reviewed more than 10 price undertakings in force on Citric Acid 
from  China  and  Polyethylene  terephthalate  from  India/Indonesia,  to  ensure  that  the  duty 
suspensions granted to the exporters were indeed justified. There were no irregularities found 
to cause the undertakings to be withdrawn. 

5 

 
 
 
 
 
 
2.2. 

Protecting European small and medium sized enterprises  

Small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) face greater challenges than larger companies do 
to avail of the trade defence instruments.  Considering the important role that these companies 
play  in  the  economy  and  their  increased  vulnerability  when  facing  unfair  competition  from 
imports, it is a priority for the Commission that they can avail of the rights and benefits of trade 
defence, if warranted.  As a result, the Commission has continually supported such companies 
by providing guidance through its SME helpdesk, reducing the amount of information required 
in questionnaires and, aligning, where possible, investigation periods with their financial year.   

In 2022, the Commission made available its on-line information package, which previously was 
available only in English, in all other EU languages.  These were downloaded 250 times in 2022 
while the SME TDI webpage was consulted almost 800 times.  The Commission also explored 
with industry representatives how to further improve access to the trade defence instruments 
for SMEs.    

Despite SMEs having resource limitations, it did not prevent them from being involved in trade 
defence  activities  in  2022.    Notably,  in  the  new  investigations  initiated  on  steel  bulb  flat 
originating in China and Türkiye, the Union industry is comprised exclusively of SMEs.  Steel 
bulb  flat  is  a  key  component  in  the  shipbuilding  industry.    Also  in  the  refillable  kegs’ 
investigation,  the  complainants  included  several  SMEs.    Furthermore  during  2022,  the 
Commission  continued  the  anti-dumping  investigations  on  imports  of  ceramic  tiles  from 
Türkiye  and  India.  This  sector,  despite  being  comprised  of  SMEs,  is  well  organised  which 
enables ceramic producing companies address unfair competition from dumped imports.   

2.3. 

Social and environmental standards in TDI 

Changes made to the basic anti-dumping regulation in December 2017 saw the introduction of 
social  and  environmental  standards  being  considered  in  anti-dumping  investigations. 
Specifically, in the EU, for investigations concerning imports from countries with significant 
market  distortions,  the  Commission  must  select  an  appropriate  representative  country  to 
construct  a  non-distorted  normal  value.  The  differing  levels  of  social  and  environmental 
standards may become a decisive element where there is more than one possible representative 
country with suitable data available.   However, in the four investigations where this could have 
been an issue in 2022, it was not a consideration given that, in each case, only one representative 
country with suitable data pertinent to the specific product was available.  Hence there was no 
need to evaluate the level of social and environmental standards in that context.   

Further changes to the basic anti-dumping legislation in June 2018, following the modernisation 
of  the  trade  defence  instruments,  again  showed  the  EU’s  commitment  to  high  social  and 
environmental standards.   One of the changes introduced, at the time, meant that the calculation 
of  the  target  profit  price  can  now  reflect  the  cost  of  compliance  with  the  social  and 
environmental  standards  within  the  EU.  In  investigations,  the  cost  of  production  of  Union 
producers  may  also  include  costs  incurred  when  complying  with  multilateral  environmental 
agreements and with important  International Labour Organisation conventions. Not only the 
actual costs incurred but also future costs, during the lifetime of the measures resulting from 
compliance with these standards, are taken into account.   In such cases where measures are 
imposed at the level of injury margins, the inclusion of these costs results in higher protection.  
In three of the eight anti-dumping investigations where definitive measures were imposed in 
2022, there were no claims made for costs relating to social and environmental standards (iron 

6 

 
 
 
 
 
and steel fasteners from China, calcium silicon from China and superabsorbent polymers from 
the Republic of Korea).   In the remaining five cases, various amounts were added to the costs 
of  production  thereby  increasing  the  target  profit  level.  The  cases  concerned  were  graphite 
electrode  systems  from  China,  corrosion  resistant  steels  from  Russia  and  Türkiye  and 
electrolytic chromium coated steel from China and Brazil. Except for the corrosion resistant 
steels  case  from  Russia,  the  measures  were  all  based  on  dumping  margins  and  hence  the 
adjustments to the target price could have no impact on the final level of measures imposed. 
However, in the Russian case, for two exporting producers and the ‘all others’, the measures 
were based on the injury margin as the lesser duty rule was applicable resulting in a higher level 
of protection had the costs not been taken into account.       

Finally,  social  and  environmental  standards  can  be  considered  in  decisions  on  undertaking 
offers. However, this did not arise in any cases in 2022.  

2.4. 

Judicial review by EU Courts (Annex S)  

In 2022, the General Court (GC) and the Court of Justice (CJ) rendered 44 judgments and orders 
in TDI cases. The GC handed down 35 rulings whereas the CJ decided on nine appeals.  16 new 
TDI cases were lodged in 2022 - 9 before the GC and 5 appeals and 2 requests for a preliminary 
ruling before the CJ.  

The jurisprudence in 2022 provides interesting insights into several aspects of the price effects 
analysis, in particular undercutting, as well as the underselling; the admissibility of legal actions 
against TDI measures, particularly into the question of standing and ability of importers and 
their  associations  to  launch  court  proceedings  in  such  cases;  implementation  of  court 
judgments, interpretation of the basic anti-subsidy regulation9 and procedural rules applicable 
to the initiation of anti-circumvention investigations. 

3. 

ACTIVITIES OF THE HEARING OFFICER  

In 2022, the Hearing Officer received 25 intervention requests and held 8 hearings related to 
the TDI activities.  

The Hearing Officer continued the established practice that the interested parties should first 
address their concerns to the Commission services responsible for the investigation. Especially, 
in cases when interested parties had submitted their request for an intervention simultaneously 
both  to  the  Commission  services  and  the  Hearing  Officer,  the  Hearing  Officer  would  only 
intervene  when  a  mutually  acceptable  solution  could  not  be  reached.  In  most  such  cases, 
interested parties resolved the issues directly with the investigation teams.  

The main issues raised at the hearings concerned requests for additional disclosure or objections 
to  the  facts  and  findings.  On  one  occasion,  the  Hearing  Officer  extended  the  deadline  for 
comments upon request of the party concerned. In all cases, agreement was reached with the 
services to review the issues at hand and/or provide further clarifications. All hearings were 
held in remote mode due to the continuing COVID-19 context that proved efficient and simpler 
with the elimination of travel. 

9 

Regulation (EU) 2016/1037 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on protection 
against subsidised imports from countries not members of the European Union OJ L 176, 30.6.2016, p. 
55) 

7 

 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
4. 

THE  IMPACT  OF  RUSSIA’S  WAR  OF  AGGRESSION  AGAINST  UKRAINE  ON  TRADE 
DEFENCE PRACTICE AND POLICY 

Following, Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified military aggression against Ukraine, the EU 
decided, in June 2022, to suspend for one year the import duties on all Ukrainian exports to the 
EU as well as the collection of all EU trade defence measures in force with respect to imports 
of goods  from  Ukraine.  The extension was  approved by another year on [05/06/2023]. This 
suspension is an important measure to support Ukraine’s exporting producers and its economy 
and  help  the  country  maintain  its  trade  position with  the  EU.  With  respect  to  trade  defence 
measures,  the  suspension  concerns  anti-dumping  duties  on  two  products:  hot-rolled  flat 
products of iron, non-alloy or other alloy steel and certain seamless pipes and tubes, of iron or 
steel.    The  EU’s  safeguard  measure  on  steel  was  also  suspended  as  regards  imports  from 
Ukraine.  

The  suspension  impacts  the  collection  of  anti-dumping  duties  but  the  measures  remain 
technically  in  force  in  accordance  with  the  basic  anti-dumping  regulation.  This  aspect  was 
relevant in the context of the expiry review of the measures on hot-rolled flat products of iron, 
non-alloy or other alloy steel where, subsequent to the initiation of the expiry review, Eurofer, 
the  applicant,  withdrew  the  request  as  regards  Ukraine.  Eurofer  considered  that,  given  the 
overall  geopolitical  context  and  developments  that  had  taken  place  since  they  lodged  the 
original  expiry  review  request,  namely  the  destruction  of  a  major  part  of  hot  rolled  flat 
capacities in Ukraine as well as the Ukrainian energy infrastructure, it was no longer appropriate 
to  pursue  an  expiry  review  against  Ukraine.  Furthermore,  Eurofer  considered  that  the 
consequences of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine would be of a lasting nature and 
that steel  capacities in  Ukraine are not  expected to return to  normal  operations in the short-
medium term.  On this basis, the Commission terminated the expiry review on the measures on 
Ukraine in February 2023. As a result, the anti-dumping measures in place on those products 
from  Ukraine  expired.  The  other  anti-dumping  measures  concerning  Ukraine  on  imports  of 
seamless pipes and tubes, of iron or steel are normally due to expire in October 2023.  

As regards anti-dumping measures on imports from Russia and Belarus subject to restrictive 
measures (sanctions), the Commission duly considered, in the context of ongoing investigations 
and  reviews,  whether  these  measures  should  remain  in  place  regardless  of  the  impact  the 
sanctions have on trade. The Commission concluded that they should remain in place. Indeed, 
while sanctions that restrict or prohibit imports affect the import volumes of the products in 
question, this aspect alone does not impact findings in investigations which demonstrated the 
existence of injurious unfair trading practices.  

As regards safeguards, mentioned under Section 1.3, the quotas previously assigned to Russia 
and Belarus under the steel safeguard measure were redistributed to other exporting countries 
proportional to their share of overall imports in 2021. This redistribution meant that EU steel 
quotas could be used to the maximum, thus ensuring that the needs of EU steel users are secured.  

5. 

DEALING WITH TRADE DEFENCE ACTIVITY AGAINST THE EU  

In cases where EU exports become subject to a TDI proceeding in a third country, the Commission’s 
TDI  services  provide  support.  In  such  cases,  the  Commission  services,  in  cooperation  with  the 
industry and often the Member States concerned, devise a strategy of defence and intervene in the 
framework of third country TDI proceedings.  

8 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The  objective  of  such  interventions  is  to  avoid  the  imposition  of  unwarranted  and  unfair  trade 
defence measures. While all WTO members have the right to conduct trade defence investigations 
and impose measures, it is of the utmost importance that such investigations and measures conform 
to the relevant multilateral and bilateral rules. Trade defence investigations that breach these rules 
create undue obstacles to trade and, in certain cases, annul any benefits from preferences granted 
under Trade Agreements.  

On average, the Commission services intervene in around 40 to 50 third country cases each year. 
Depending on the economic and systemic importance of a case, written or oral interventions may 
be made at technical and political levels in the framework the proceedings. The Commission also 
raises  important  investigations  during  various  trade  committee  meetings  or  other  high-level 
discussions, when appropriate.  

Particularly resource intensive and systemically important are anti-subsidy proceedings that target 
EU  subsidy  programs,  where  the  Commission,  as  interested  party,  actively  participates  to  the 
investigations. In 2022, there were cases by the US on olives and pasta, by Canada on refined sugar 
and by China on potato starch.  

When  the  Commission  considers  that  measures  imposed  are  incompatible  with  multilateral  or 
bilateral obligations, it may resort to challenging such cases at the WTO or in a bilateral dispute 
settlement (under an FTA). These proceedings can be challenging not only in terms of investment 
of resources but also in view of the possible consequences of an unfavourable result. 

In  2022,  the  Commission  continued  to  participate  in  the  WTO  dispute  settlement  proceeding 
regarding the AD measures on frozen fries by Colombia, which started in January 2020 with WTO 
consultations.  The outcome, in December 2022, was largely in favour of the EU. The Commission 
is now engaging with Colombia regarding the implementation of the ruling.  

In the WTO case on the US Anti-dumping and countervailing duties on ripe olives from Spain, the 
WTO Dispute Settlement Body adopted in December 2021 the final panel report declaring these 
duties inconsistent with WTO rules. Despite the favourable panel report, measures remain in place. 
In July 2022, the US started a procedure to implement the WTO Panel ruling. The agreed period 
for this implementation expired on 14 January 2023. 

On the bilateral front, in the dispute settlement proceeding concerning safeguard measures by South 
Africa on EU exports of frozen chicken (originally imposed in 2018), the Panel issued its report in 
summer 2022, which upheld most of the EU’s claims. Although the measures had expired before 
the report was issued, the victory is of systemic importance and sets a strong precedent for future 
safeguards. The panel found that the safeguard measure was not proportionate, going beyond what 
was needed to remedy or prevent any serious injury. Moreover, the Panel found the delay between 
the investigation and the adoption of the safeguard measure was excessive and not in line with the 
EU-South  African  Development  Community  (SADC)  Economic  Partnership  Agreement  (EPA). 
While  safeguard  measures  can  legally  be  adopted  in  exceptional  circumstances  to  temporarily 
counter  surging  imports  that  threaten  domestic  industry,  they  must  comply  with  the  legal 
requirements set out in the agreement. 

Various trade defence cases were discussed in regular or ad hoc trade committee meetings e.g., the 
Gulf Cooperation Council, Korea, as well as in the WTO AD, AS and SFG Committees – see section 
5.  

Interventions  by  the  Commission  in  third  country  TDI  proceedings,  highlighting  legal 
inconsistencies and systemic flaws have played an important part in preventing the imposition, or 

9 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
reducing the negative impact of measures. In 2022, some of the Commission's successful efforts are 
highlighted here with more cases described in the accompanying SWD: 

• 

• 

• 

In March 2022, Canada informed interested parties about its intention to initiate an expiry review 
of measures on imports of fabricated industrial steel components (FISC) from, inter alia, Spain. 
The  Commission  successfully argued  against the initiation  of  this  expiry  review  highlighting 
that  Spanish  imports  were  very  low  and  had  no  correlation  with  the  alleged  injury  of  the 
Canadian  industry.  As  a  result,  in  May  2022,  the  measures  expired  as  scheduled.  The  EU 
economic interest was around EUR 150 million. 

In April 2021, the Golf Cooperation Council initiated an AD investigation against imports of 
electric  accumulators  (vehicle  batteries),  inter  alia,  from  Spain.  Following  the  Commission’s 
interventions,  in  August  2022,  Spanish  imports  were  excluded  from  the  scope  of  the 
investigation due to a de-minimis dumping margin. The EU economic interest was around EUR 
40 million. 

In  July  2022,  the  US  International  Trade  Commission  terminated  the  AD  investigation 
concerning imports of acrylonitrile-butadiene (AB) rubber from, inter alia, France following a 
determination that imports of AB rubber from these countries did not injure the US industry. No 
measures were imposed on the EU exports with the EU economic interest of EUR 37 million. 

At the end of 2022, there were 170 trade defence measures in force affecting EU exports, which is 
8 less than in 2021. The total number of measures in force has declined for the first time since 2012. 
The AD instrument remains the most frequently used trade remedy tool. At the end of last year, 126 
AD duties were affecting the EU or certain Member States’ exports (129 in 2021), followed by 37 
SFG measures (compared to 39 in 2021). While the 2022 trends confirm a decline of AD and SFG 
measures in force, the number of AS duties affecting EU exports remain the same as in 2021 (7). 

As regards new investigations opened against the EU/Member States, there was a notable drop in 
in 2022, as only 7 new investigations were initiated comprised of 3 AD and 4 SFG proceedings, 
compared to 26 in 2021. This is also one of the lowest numbers of new investigations opened in the 
last decade. This decreasing trend was also evident in new measures imposed by third countries. In 
2022, 12 new measures were imposed, a sharp decrease compared to 30 in 2021. Out of 12 newly 
imposed duties, 10 were AD (18 in 2021), and 2 were safeguards (11 in 2021). 

The  most  frequent  user  of  the  trade  defence  instruments  against  EU  exports  is  the  US  with  38 
measures in force. This is followed by China, and Türkiye with 18 each, then Brazil with 11, as 
well as Canada and Indonesia with 9 measures in force. Completing the list of regular users of trade 
defence instruments are Australia, India, and South Africa, as each had 7 measures in place affecting 
EU exports in 2022. 

6. 

ACTIVITIES IN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE WTO  

Every year, the WTO holds meetings of the Subsidies and Countervailing, Anti-dumping and 
Safeguards Committees in spring and autumn. In addition, in the context of the Anti-dumping 
Committee, there are  also  meetings of the Working Group on  Implementation.  Though the 
meetings were in hybrid format in April and October, most delegates attended in person.  

The  work  of  these  Committees  is  important  in  reviewing  the  functioning  of  the  various 
Agreements allowing WTO members to exchange views and information of a general nature, 
as well as highlighting individual trade defence cases of concern. 

10 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
In the WTO Safeguards Committees, the EU was very active defending its safeguard measures 
against  criticisms  from  Brazil,  Japan,  China,  Türkiye,  Japan,  Switzerland,  India,  Korea  and 
Russia.   Many claimed that the measures should have been terminated after the Panel report in 
the dispute; European Union — Safeguard Measures on Certain Steel Products was issued.   The 
EU also raised concerns about the safeguard practices of other Members including Indonesian 
investigations on cigarette paper and apparel and clothing, Morocco’s investigation on coated 
wood panels, Türkiye’s investigations on yarn of nylon and Grinding balls and similar articles 
for mills and US investigation on silicon photovoltaic cells.  

In the AD Committee, the EU highlighted concerns about investigations on imports of frozen 
fries  from  Belgium,  Netherlands  and  Germany  and  on  frozen  poultry  from  Poland,  Spain, 
Ireland and Denmark by the South African Customs Union (SACU). The EU also defended its 
investigations into grain oriented electrical steels, fatty acids, aluminium wheels and fasteners 
from criticisms by Japan, Indonesia, Morocco and China respectively.   

In the Special Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing measures, review of the Subsidy 
notifications made in 2021, continued.   The level of notifications remains low with 95 out of 
the  164  WTO  members  not  notifying  under  the  last  exercise  in  2021.  The  EU  encouraged 
greater compliance with transparency obligations under the ASCM crucial to understand the 
impact of subsides in global trade. 

In  the  regular  Committee  on  Subsidies  and  Countervailing  measures,  the  EU  responded  to 
complaints from both China and Indonesia, by explaining the justification for countervailing 
financial support provided by China to companies located in Indonesia. The EU raised concerns 
on China’s potato starch anti-subsidy case against the EU as well as the US’ countervailing 
measures  on  olives  from  Spain,  particularly  the  implementation  of  the  WTO  panel  report. 
Discussions continued on the impact of subsidies creating overcapacities and the IMF, OECD, 
World Bank and WTO presented a report on Subsidies, Trade and International cooperation10.    

The  EU  participated  in  the  Anti-dumping  Working  Group  on  Implementation  where  the 
participants discussed the determination of the viability of domestic sales in dumping margin 
calculations; the treatment of affiliated parties for duty assessment, defining the product under 
investigation  and  like  products;  product  comparisons  in  dumping  margin  calculations  and 
sunset  review  investigations.    These  discussions  help  understand  the  practices  of  other 
investigating authorities.  

The  new  WTO  Agreement  on  Fisheries  Subsidies  was  concluded  at  the  12th  Ministerial 
conference in June 2022 to end unsustainable fisheries subsidies in line with UN Sustainable 
Development Goal 14.611. The WTO negotiations will continue on the outstanding issues to 
achieve  a  comprehensive  agreement.    Also  in  2022,  the  WTO  co-sponsor  members  started 
subsidies  related  work  under  the  Ministerial  Statements  on  Fossil  Fuel  Subsidy  Reform 
initiative12 and on Trade and Environmental Sustainability Structured Discussions 13. 

Trilateral  cooperation  with  US  and  Japan continued  throughout  2022  focussing  on  tackling 
market-distortive policies and practices, including subsidies that currently are not sufficiently 
addressed by WTO rules. While there were limited exchanges on coordination of tools and the 
rule-making  side,  it  was  acknowledged  that  the  current  ASCM  rules  are  not  well  suited  to 
capture all subsidy practices, particularly in China. The partners  concentrated on identifying 

10  
11  
12  

13  

Subsidies-Trade-and-International-Cooperation-April-19-ci.pdf (worldbank.org) 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/rulesneg_e/fish_e/fish_e.htm 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/fossil_fuel_e.htm  
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tessd_e/tessd_e.htm 

11 

 
 
 
 
concrete  examples  and  exchanging  information  on  non-market  behaviour  across  various 
sectors.   

CONCLUSION 

2022 saw a decrease in the number of new investigations opened as a result of the lower number 
of complaints received from industry, in line with a global drop reflecting particular market 
conditions  in  the most recent  period.  At the same time there  was a high  number of reviews 
initiated contributing to a high caseload for the year.  The imposition of measures during 2022 
meant that as many as 177 trade defence measures were in place at the end of the year.  Ensuring 
the  effectiveness  of  these  measures  remained  a  priority  for  the  Commission,  with  much 
attention given to monitoring of high-risk measures and action to address any activity designed 
to undermine the impact of the EU’s trade defence remedies. The Commission also continued 
to successfully intervene in several trade defence cases against the EU or its Member States by 
third countries.      

12