Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Regulation (EU) 2018/196 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 February 2018 on additional customs duties on imports of certain products originating in the United States of America
Date: 2025-02-03
Institutions: Directorate-General for Trade and Economic Security, European Commission
Subjects: United States, anti-dumping duty, countervailing charge, customs duties, import (EU), originating product, suspension of customs duties, tariff preference

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 3.2.2025  COM(2025) 27 final 2025/0012 (COD)  Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Regulation (EU) 2018/196 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 February 2018 on additional customs duties on imports of certain products originating in the United States of America   
 
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 

1. 

• 

CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL 

Reasons for and objectives of the proposal 

This proposal seeks to amend Regulation (EU) 2018/196 by including a de minimis threshold 
for the imposition of retaliation applied in relation to the WTO dispute on the United States’ 
Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000 (‘CDSOA’, or the Byrd Amendment). It 
also seeks to  align the  regulation  to  what  is  provided in  the  Interinstitutional  Agreement on 
Better Law-Making. 

The CDSOA mandates the yearly distribution of the anti-dumping and countervailing duties 
collected  during  the  previous  fiscal  year  to  US  companies.  The  CDSOA  was  found 
incompatible with the United States' WTO obligations in January 2003. 

Given that the United States failed to bring itself in compliance with its obligations under the 
WTO agreements, the Union was authorised to impose an additional import duty above bound 
customs duties on a list of US products covering on a yearly basis a total value of trade not 
exceeding the amount of 72 % of the CDSOA disbursement from duties collected on imports 
from the Union for the most recent year for which data are available. Since 1 May 2005, the 
Union  applies  an  ad  valorem  additional  customs  duty  on  imports  of  certain  products 
originating  in  the  United  States1  on  a  yearly  basis,  adjusting  the  level  of  retaliation 
proportionately to the amount disbursed from duties collected on Union products in the most 
recent distribution. 

Given  the  large  number  of  modifications  of  the  initial  legal  basis  (i.e.,  Council  Regulation 
(EC)  No  673/2005)  via  delegated  acts,  a  codification  exercise  was  undertaken  in  February 
2018.  A  codified  version  of  the  legal  basis,  Regulation  (EU)  2018/196,  was  adopted  by  the 
European Parliament and the Council on 7 February 2018. 

By  applying  the  mandated  formula  to  the  latest  CDSOA  distribution  of  anti-dumping  and 
anti-subsidy  duties  collected  during  the  Fiscal  Year  2023  (1  October  2022  –  30  September 
2023), the resulting level of retaliation to apply as from 1 May 2024 amounted to USD 34,98. 
That level of retaliation of USD 34,98 represented a significant decrease as compared to the 
previous  level  of  retaliation  and  was  economically  negligible.  It  would  have  resulted  in 
subjecting sweet corn, frames and mountings for spectacles, crane lorries, and certain items of 
women’s or girls’ apparel in denim that originate in the US to an ad valorem additional rate of 
duty of 0,00002% as from 1 May 2024. As applying such a low duty would have had no trade 
impact  and  would  have  imposed  a  disproportionate  administrative  cost  to  the  Union,  with 
Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2024/1239 the additional rate of duty as from 1 May 
2024 was set at 0 %. In order to set the duty to 0 % and respect the obligations imposed by the 
basic Regulation on the Commission, a Delegated Regulation had to enter into force. 

The Byrd Amendment was repealed in 2006, but the US created a transitional period whereby 
disbursements  would  continue  as  long  as  they  concerned  duties  collected  before  1  October 
2007. Given that the mandated formula is based on the amount of disbursements made in one 
fiscal year and that the last remaining imports subject to the CDSOA have been liquidated in 
Fiscal  Year  2023,  it  is  expected  that  in  the  future  the  authorised  level  of  retaliation  will 
continue  to  remain  low  and  will  go  towards  exhaustion.  However,  it  is  not  possible  to 
determine  when  the  distribution  process  will  end,  as  disbursements  connected  to  these  final 
imports and amounts held pending litigation are still expected to be made.  

1 

Regulation (EU) 2018/196 (the "Byrd Regulation") establishing additional customs duties of 4,3 % on 
imports of certain products originating in the United States of America (OJ L 44, 16.2.2018, p. 1). 

EN 

1 

  EN 

 
Having  to  adopt  a  Commission  Delegated  Regulation  each  year,  even  when  retaliation  is 
negligible,  is  not  an  efficient  use  of  resources.  Thus,  in  order  to  promote  efficiency  and 
proportionality,  a  de  minimis  threshold  below  which  additional  import  duties  should  not  be 
imposed should be added to Regulation (EU) 2018/196. This threshold should be set at USD 
30 000 of CDSOA disbursements made by US authorities in relation to Union imports in one 
fiscal year (which would correspond to an authorised level of retaliation of USD 21 600). 

Disbursement amounting to USD 30 000, keeping the current list of goods in Annex I, would 
result in an additional rate of duty of about 0,01 %. Additional custom duties equal or below 
0,01  %  that  would  apply  in  the  absence  of  a  de  minimis  provision  on  the  few  tariff  lines 
currently included in Annex I do not appear to justify the administrative costs that would be 
incurred by the Union if these duties were imposed. Below this threshold the duties have no 
trade impact and are thus economically negligible. 

• 

Consistency with existing policy provisions in the policy area 

The proposal is consistent with existing Union trade policy insofar as it preserves the Union’s 
rights under WTO law while ensuring an efficient use of the Union’s resources. 

• 

Consistency with other Union policies 

The  proposal  is  consistent  with  the  Union  policies  that  strive  for  a  more  efficient  use  of 
human and administrative resources. 

2. 

• 

LEGAL BASIS, SUBSIDIARITY AND PROPORTIONALITY 

Legal basis 

The  legal  basis  for  this  Regulation  Amendment  is  Article  207(2)  of  the  Treaty  on  the 
Functioning of the European Union. 

• 

Subsidiarity (for non-exclusive competence)  

The common commercial  policy, in  accordance  with  Article 3(1), point  (e) of the  TFEU, is 
defined  as  an  exclusive  Union  competence.  Therefore,  the  subsidiarity  principle  does  not 
apply. 

• 

Proportionality 

This  proposal  is  proportionate  as  it  is  necessary  in  order  to  ensure  an  efficient  use  of  the 
Union’s resources. Having to adopt  a Commission Delegated Regulation when retaliation is 
negligible is not an efficient use of resources. 

• 

Choice of the instrument 

This  proposal  is  in  accordance  with  Article  207(2)  TFEU,  which  envisages  common 
commercial policy measures.  

3. 

• 

RESULTS 
CONSULTATIONS AND IMPACT ASSESSMENTS 

EX-POST 

EVALUATIONS, 

OF 

STAKEHOLDER 

Ex-post evaluations/fitness checks of existing legislation 

Not applicable. 

• 

Stakeholder consultations 

Not applicable. 

EN 

2 

  EN 

• 

Collection and use of expertise 

Not applicable. 

• 

Impact assessment 

The  legislative  proposal  is  not  supported  by  an  impact  assessment.  This  is  in  line  with  the 
better regulation toolbox, which provides that an impact assessment may not be necessary for 
‘policy  initiatives  that  propose  limited  changes  based  on  a  thorough  evaluation,  which  has 
clearly  identified  the  necessary  amendments  to  a  policy  or  legislation’.  The  Commission 
considers that the proposed regulation fulfils these criteria. 

• 

Regulatory fitness and simplification 

The measure does not increase the regulatory burden of companies.  

• 

Fundamental rights 

The proposal has no consequences for the protection of fundamental rights. 

4. 

BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS 

Whenever  the  de  minimis  would  apply,  the  European  Union  would  see  a  loss  of  maximum 
USD  21 600  (which  is  the  authorised  level  of  retaliation  corresponding  to  USD  30 000  of 
CDSOA related disbursements) of customs revenue in one fiscal year. On the other hand, the 
human  and  administrative  resources  necessary  to  adjust  and  impose  the  additional  customs 
duty would not be used. Therefore, the impact on Union’s own resources will be very limited. 

5. 

• 

OTHER ELEMENTS 

Implementation plans and monitoring, evaluation and reporting arrangements 

Not envisaged. 

• 

Explanatory documents (for directives) 

Not applicable. 

• 

Detailed explanation of the specific provisions of the proposal 

This proposal introduces a de minimis threshold below which additional import duties should 
not be imposed. This threshold should be set at USD 30 000 of relevant disbursements made 
by  US  authorities  in  one  fiscal  year.  Disbursement  amounting  to  USD  30 000,  keeping  the 
current list of goods in Annex I, would result in an additional rate of duty of about 0,01 %. 
Additional  custom  duties  equal  or  below  0,01  %  that  would  apply  in  the  absence  of  a  de 
minimis provision on the few tariff lines currently included in Annex I do not appear to justify 
the  administrative  costs  that  would  be  incurred  by  the  Union  if  these  duties  were  imposed. 
Below this threshold the duties have no trade impact and are thus economically negligible. 

Moreover, this proposal adjusts the language of Article 3(3) of Regulation (EU) 2018/196 in 
order to align it to the standard clauses contained in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better 
Law-Making. 

EN 

3 

  EN 

2025/0012 (COD) 

Proposal for a 

REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL 

amending Regulation (EU) 2018/196 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 
February 2018 on additional customs duties on imports of certain products originating 
in the United States of America  

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, 

Having  regard  to  the  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the  European  Union,  and  in  particular 
Article 207(2) thereof, 

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission, 

After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national parliaments, 

Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, 

Whereas: 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

On  27  January  2003,  the  Dispute  Settlement  Body  (‘DSB’)  of  the  World  Trade 
Organization  (‘WTO’)  adopted  the  Appellate  Body  report1  and  the  Panel  report2,  as 
upheld  by  the  Appellate  Body  report,  finding  that  the  Continued  Dumping  and 
Subsidy Offset  Act  (‘CDSOA’) was  incompatible with  the United States' obligations 
under the WTO agreements. 

Since  the  United  States  failed  to  bring  its  legislation  into  conformity  with  the  WTO 
agreements,  the  European  Community  (‘Community’)  requested  authorisation  from 
the  DSB  to  suspend  the  application  of  its  tariff  concessions  and  related  obligations 
under  the  General  Agreement  on  Tariffs  and  Trade  (‘GATT’)  1994  to  the  United 
States3. The United States objected to the level of suspension of tariff concessions and 
related obligations, and the matter was referred to arbitration. 

On  31  August  2004,  the  Arbitrator  determined  that  the  level  of  nullification  or 
impairment caused every year to the Community was equal to 72 % of the amount of 
CDSOA  disbursements  relating  to  anti-dumping  or  countervailing  duties  paid  on 
imports from the Community for the most recent year for which data were available at 
that time, as published by the United States' authorities. The Arbitrator concluded that 
the suspension by the Community of concessions or other obligations, in the form of 
the  imposition  of  an  additional  import  duty  above  bound  custom  duties,  on  a  list  of 
products originating in the United States covering, on a yearly basis, a total value of 
trade  not  exceeding  the  amount  of  nullification  or  impairment  would  be  consistent 
with WTO rules. On 26 November 2004, the DSB granted the authorisation to suspend 

1 

2 

3 

United  States  —  Offset  Act  (Byrd  Amendment),  Appellate  Body  report  (WT/DS217/AB/R, 
WT/DS234/AB/R, 16 January 2003). 
United  States  —  Offset  Act  (Byrd  Amendment),  Panel  report  (WT/DS217/R,  WT/DS234/R,  16 September 
2002). 
United States — Offset Act (Byrd Amendment), Recourse by the European Communities to Article 22(2) of 
the DSU (WT/DS217/22, 16 January 2004). 

EN 

4 

  EN 

 
(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

(7) 

(8) 

the application to the United States of tariff concessions and related obligations under 
GATT 1994 in accordance with the decision of the Arbitrator. 

As  a  result  of  the  United  States’  failure  to  bring  the  CDSOA  in  compliance  with  its 
obligations under the WTO agreements, pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2018/196 of the 
European Parliament and of the Council4 a 4,3 % ad valorem additional customs duty 
was  imposed  on  imports  of  certain  products  originating  in  the  United  States.  In 
conformity  with  the WTO authorisation to  suspend the application of concessions to 
the United States, the Commission is to adjust the level of suspension annually to the 
level of nullification or impairment caused by the CDSOA to the Union at that time.  

In  recent  years,  the  level  of  nullification  or  impairment  caused  to  the  Union  on  the 
basis of the data published by the United States'  Customs  and Border Protection has 
decreased. For example, in 2024, it was calculated at USD 34,98 resulting in a rate of 
additional import duty of 0,00002 %. As collecting this additional import duty would 
have no trade effect but result in a disproportionate administrative cost for the Union, 
the rate of additional import duty was set at 0 % by Commission Delegated Regulation 
(EU) 2024/12395 , which amended Regulation (EU) 2018/196 accordingly.  

Given that the CDSOA was effectively repealed on 1 October 2007, it is expected that 
the level  of nullification or impairment  and,  consequently,  of suspension will  stay at 
this significantly decreased and economically negligible level.  

To  ensure  efficient  processes  and  avoid  disproportionate  administrative  costs  for  the 
Union,  Regulation  (EU)  2018/196  should  be  amended  by  including  a  de  minimis 
threshold below which no additional import duty should be imposed.  

The  de  minimis  threshold  should  be  set  at  USD  30 000  of  disbursements  under  the 
CDSOA relating to anti-dumping and countervailing duties paid on imports from the 
Union for the most recent year for which data are available at that time, as published 
by  the  United  States'  authorities  (U.S.  Customs  and  Border  Protection).  Below  such 
threshold, the  additional import duty, as resulting from  the formula mandated by the 
WTO  authorisation,  would  have  no  trade  impact  and  would  thus  be  economically 
negligible. It would also cause disproportionate administrative costs for the Union. 

(9) 

Additionally,  Article  3(3)  of  Regulation  (EU)  2018/196  should  be  amended  and 
aligned to the standard clauses contained in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better 
Law-Making6.  

(10)  Regulation (EU) 2018/196 should therefore be amended accordingly, 

4 

5 

6 

Regulation  (EU)  2018/196  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  7  February  2018  on 
additional  customs  duties  on  imports  of  certain  products  originating  in  the  United  States  of  America 
(codification) (OJ L 44, 16.2.2018, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2018/196/oj). 
Commission  Delegated  Regulation  (EU)  2024/1239  of  22  February  2024  amending  Regulation  (EU) 
2018/196  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  on  additional  customs  duties  on  imports  of 
certain  products  originating  in  the  United  States  of  America  (OJ  L,  2024/1239,  29.4.2024,  ELI: 
http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2024/1239/oj). 
Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and 
the  European  Commission  on  Better  Law-Making 
(OJ  L  123,  12.5.2016,  p.  1,  ELI: 
http://data.europa.eu/eli/agree_interinstit/2016/512/oj). 

EN 

5 

  EN 

 
HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 

Article 1 

Amendments to Regulation (EU) 2018/196 

Article 3 of the Regulation (EU) 2018/196 is amended as follows: 

(1) 

The following paragraph is added: 

4. Notwithstanding paragraph 1 of this Article, the application of the additional duty 
shall be suspended if the amount of disbursements under the CDSOA relating to anti-
dumping  and  countervailing  duties  paid  on  imports  from  the  Union  for  the  most 
recent  year  for  which  data  are  available  at  that  time,  as  published  by  the  United 
States' authorities, is USD 30 000 or less. 

(2) 

The first sentence of paragraph 3 is replaced by the following: 

The Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 4 to make the 
adjustments and amendments referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article. 

Article 2 

Entry into force 

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the  Official Journal of 
the European Union.  

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. 

Done at Brussels, 

For the European Parliament 
The President 

For the Council 
The President 

EN 

6 

  EN 

LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENT ‘REVENUE’- FOR PROPOSALS 
HAVING BUDGETARY IMPACT ON THE REVENUE SIDE OF THE BUDGET 

1. 

NAME OF THE PROPOSAL: 

Proposal  for  a  REGULATION  OF  THE  EUROPEAN  PARLIAMENT  AND  OF 
THE  COUNCIL  amending  Regulation  (EU)  2018/196  of  the  European  Parliament 
and  of  the  Council  of  7  February  2018  on  additional  customs  duties  on  imports  of 
certain products originating in the United States of America 

2. 

BUDGET LINES: 

Revenue line (Chapter/Article/Item): Chapter 12, Article 120 

Amount budgeted for 2025: EUR 21 082 004 566 

(only in case of assigned revenues):  

revenues  will  be 

The 
(Chapter/Article/Item): n/a 

assigned 

to 

the 

following 

expenditure 

line 

3. 

FINANCIAL IMPACT 

X 

Proposal has no financial implications 

Proposal has no financial impact on expenditure but has a financial impact on 

 
revenue 

 

Proposal has a financial impact on assigned revenue 

The effect is as follows:  

EN 

7 

  EN 

Revenue line 

Impact on revenue12  XX months period starting 
dd/mm/yyyy (if applicable) 

Year N 

Chapter 12/Article 120 

n/a 

n/a 

Situation following action 

Revenue line 

2026 

2027 

2029 

2029 

2030 

Chapter 12/Article 120  n/a 

n/a 

n/a 

n/a 

n/a 

(Only  in  case  of  assigned  revenues,  under  the  condition  that  the  budget  line  is 
already known): 

Expenditure line3 

Year N 

Year N+1 

Chapter/Article/Item 
… 

Chapter/Article/Item 
… 

Expenditure line 

[N+2] 

[N+3] 

[N+4] 

[N+5] 

Chapter/Article/Item 
… 

Chapter/Article/Item 
… 

4. 

ANTI-FRAUD MEASURES 

n/a 

5. 

OTHER REMARKS 

The method used for the estimation of impact on revenue was the following: 

a. 

The legislative proposal introduces a de minimis of USD 30 000 of US relevant 
disbursements. 

1 

2 

3 

The amounts per year need to be an estimation based on the formula or method defined under section 5. 
For the starting year, the yearly amount is normally paid without a reduction or prorata. 
In the case of traditional own resources (customs duties, sugar levies), the amounts indicated must be 
net amounts, i.e. gross amounts after deduction of 25 % for collection costs. 
To be used only if necessary. 

EN 

8 

  EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
b.  USD 30 000 of US relevant disbursements correspond to an authorised level of 

additional duties of USD 21 600. 

c. 

d. 

e. 

Thus,  if  the  threshold  of  the  de  minimis,  were  not  to  be  met,  the  highest 
possible loss of revenue in one fiscal year would be USD 21 599. 

To this amount (that would have otherwise been collected as customs duty) 25 
% was deducted for collection costs, resulting in USD 16 199,25. 

The  resulting  amount  was  then  converted  into  euro  (conversion  rate  of 
26/12/2024), resulting in EUR 15.586,69. 

Given  that  the  maximum  possible  impact  of  revenue  (i.e.,  EUR  15.586,69)  is 
negligible, the proposal is considered to have no financial impact. 

EN 

9 

  EN