Tag Archive: china

  1. UK Revokes Trade Defence Measures on Chinese E-Bikes

    Comments Off on UK Revokes Trade Defence Measures on Chinese E-Bikes

    The UK Secretary of State for Business and Trade has followed the recommendations of the Trade Remedies Authority (TRA) to revoke the anti-dumping and countervailing duties on electric bicycles from China. Despite finding that dumping and injury to UK industry would likely recur if duties were removed, the TRA ruled that continuing the measure does not meet the UK’s Economic Interest Test (EIT).

    Key Findings:

    • Dumping Likely to Continue: The TRA determined that Chinese e-bike manufacturers have significant production capacity and could resume exporting e-bikes to the UK at unfairly low prices if duties were lifted.
    • Potential Harm to UK Industry: The review found that without trade protections, UK producers—primarily Brompton—could suffer from reduced sales and profitability due to increased price competition from Chinese imports. TRA therefore proposed to maintain the trade defence measures on electric folding bikes only.
    • Economic Interest Test Not Met: Despite the risk of injury to UK manufacturers, the TRA found that the overall economic impact of maintaining the duty—such as higher costs for businesses and consumers—outweighed the benefits of protecting domestic producers.

    Economic Interest Test (EIT): Why It Was Not Met

    The Economic Interest Test (EIT) is a requirement under UK trade remedies law, assessing whether continuing an anti-dumping measure serves the overall economic interest of the UK. It considers the impact on:

    1. UK Producers – Would they suffer significant harm if the measure were removed?
    2. UK Importers and Retailers – Would they face additional costs or restrictions?
    3. Consumers – Would they pay higher prices due to duties?
    4. The Wider UK Economy – Would the measure benefit or hinder economic growth?

    The TRA concluded that:

    • The economic harm to UK businesses and consumers was disproportionate to the benefits of protecting UK producers.
    • Retailers and importers strongly opposed the duties, arguing that they raised costs and restricted supply.
    • Consumers would benefit from lower prices if duties were removed, boosting the UK e-bike market and supporting sustainable transport goals.
    • The UK e-bike industry lacks sufficient domestic production to justify long-term protection, as over 90% of e-bikes are imported.
    • While the UK producer Brompton represents a major share of domestic production, its focus on high-end folding e-bikes meant that broader protection for all e-bikes was not justified.

    On overall welfare costs, TRA concluded: “Overall, extending the existing measure is very likely to lead to a significant overall welfare loss of between £1.7m to £79.0m per year. The average impact across all scenarios is £31.1m per year. The highest benefits for UK producers occur in the scenarios with the highest costs to importers/retailers and consumers, and there are no scenarios in which extending the measure would have a positive impact.“

    TRA also estimated that extending the duties could result in 18,000 fewer e-bikes being purchased per year. This would have a negative impact on switching to walking and cycling for shorter journeys and therefore also on efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

    The EU doesn’t have an economic impact test in its trade defence legislation. It has the so-called community interest test, which focuses primarily on the interest of the so-called EU industry, whilst having little to no consideration for consumers and EU businesses harmed by the measures. As a result, trade defence measures are maintained if they protect EU producers, as happened with the recent renewal of the measures against e-bikes from China in Europe.

    The full impact of this decision on the UK market remains to be seen. However, one key concern may be that the UK has significantly fewer technical regulations to ensure the import of high-quality and safe products. For example, the UK has no counterpart for our Battery Regulation and the problem of fires caused by batteries seems to be more serious there than on the continent. While on the other hand, the EU does have laws to prevent illegal and unsafe imports, enforcement is inadequate. Strengthening enforcement would be a far more effective and efficient solution than relying on perpetual trade defence measures that ultimately harm European businesses.

    Another critical takeaway from this case is that EU trade defence measures are designed solely to protect the so-called “Community Industry“, making them inherently protectionist and self-sustaining. If Europe were to revise its community interest test following the UK example, the approach to trade defence would likely be much more balanced. Current EU trade remedies on conventional bikes, e-bikes, and especially bike components are totally not aligned with the broader interests of society, and this case highlights the need for a more holistic evaluation of their impact.

    In any case, since 7 February 2025 there are no more trade defence measures against e-bikes imported from China in the UK. An exception has been made for electric folding bikes, a concession mainly to Brompton. The measures for electric folding bikes are maintained. Importers of electric bikes that cannot be folded must enter the additional code 8100 on the import declaration.

    It will be interesting to see the outcome of the British review of the measures on bicycles and especially on essential bicycle components from China. It already seems very unlikely that these measures would pass the economic interest test.

  2. LEVA-EU Calls on European Union to Review Community Interest Test in EU Trade Defence Measures

    Comments Off on LEVA-EU Calls on European Union to Review Community Interest Test in EU Trade Defence Measures

    LEVA-EU, the leading trade association advocating for the light electric vehicle (LEV) sector, is calling on the European Commission to review the Community interest test in EU trade defence measures, following the example of the UK’s economic interest test implemented post Brexit.

    This call comes as concerns persist that the Community interest test, in its current form, is overly focused on protecting EU producers, often neglecting the broader impact on importing and other businesses, retailers, and consumers—particularly regarding finished consumer products. These concerns were first recognised by the European Commission in its 2006 communication on trade defence instruments, which was meant to initiate a dialogue on the issue. Unfortunately, that dialogue did not lead to any meaningful reform. LEVA-EU believes it is now time to revive that discussion and reassess the role of the Community interest test in shaping EU trade policy.

    “The European Commission itself raised the need for a broader approach to trade defence measures almost 20 years ago,” said Annick Roetynck, Managing Director at LEVA-EU. “However, no concrete results followed, and the concerns identified in 2006 remain just as relevant today. The introduction of the economic interest test in the UK demonstrates how trade defence measures can be assessed in a more balanced and transparent way. The EU should take this as an opportunity to revisit and improve its own approach.”

    Under the current EU framework, trade defence measures such as anti-dumping and countervailing duties are primarily designed to safeguard domestic manufacturers against unfair competition. However, the Community interest test, which is meant to ensure that such measures also align with the broader interests of the EU economy, is often applied in a way that prioritises the interests of EU producers over those of the wider market.

    The UK’s economic interest test was applied in the review that resulted in the recent decision to revoke measures against e-bike imports from China. The Trade Remedies Authority concluded: “Overall, extending the existing measure is very likely to lead to a significant overall welfare loss of between £1.7m to £79.0m per year. The average impact across all scenarios is £31.1m per year. The highest benefits for UK producers occur in the scenarios with the highest costs to importers/retailers and consumers, and there are no scenarios in which extending the measure would have a positive impact.”

    This economic interest test provides a valuable example of how trade measures can be assessed with greater consideration for their impact on the entire supply chain, including importers, distributors, retailers, and consumers. The outcome of that assessment clearly shows that similar concerns should be addressed in the EU, particularly in relation to trade defence measures affecting bicycles, e-bikes, and especially essential bicycle components from China.

    Annick Roetynck continues: “We urge the European Commission to reassess the Community interest test in light of the UK’s approach and to restart the discussion it initiated in 2006. The EU must ensure that its trade defence instruments are applied in a way that truly reflects the interests of the entire market, rather than disproportionately favouring one group of stakeholders.”

    LEVA-EU will continue to engage with policymakers, industry stakeholders, and trade experts to push for this much-needed review of EU trade defence policy.

  3. LEVA-EU Calls for Strengthened Market Surveillance + Removal of Duties on Bike Components in Response to EU Decision on Chinese E-Bikes

    Comments Off on LEVA-EU Calls for Strengthened Market Surveillance + Removal of Duties on Bike Components in Response to EU Decision on Chinese E-Bikes

    The European Commission has decided to extend the anti-dumping and countervailing measures against imports of electric bicycles from China for another five years. This decision follows an expiry review investigation and aligns with expectations. The remaining imports of electric bicycles from China predominantly consist of extremely low-cost products. For LEVA-EU, this provides strong grounds to call for significantly enhanced market surveillance.

    Three Key Reasons Behind the Decision to Extend Measures
    The European Commission extended the measures based on the following findings:

    1. Continuation of Subsidisation
      The Commission claims that the investigation confirmed that Chinese electric bicycle producers continue to benefit from substantial subsidies, including preferential loans, tax exemptions, and government-supported provision of essential components such as engines and batteries at below-market prices. These subsidies create unfair competition within the EU market.
    2. Likelihood of Recurrence of Injury
      According to the Commission, evidence demonstrated that removing the duties would likely lead to a resurgence of harm to the EU’s electric bicycle industry. The potential influx of low-priced, subsidised imports could jeopardise the sustainability of EU producers and employment in the sector.
    3. Union Interest
      The Commission also believes that retaining the measures aligns with the EU’s broader economic and strategic goals, including advancing the green and digital transitions. Safeguarding the domestic electric bicycle industry allegedly supports innovation and sustainable transportation solutions within the EU.

    Current Trade Measures: A Double-Edged Sword
    While the expiry review concluded that repealing the measures would likely result in a surge of dumped imports, LEVA-EU contends that these measures inadvertently facilitate the entry of extremely low-cost electric bicycles that cannot realistically comply with EU technical regulations. This poses safety risks, as evidenced by several accidents, including a fatality, caused by non-compliant products.

    During the review period, nearly 221,000 Chinese electric bicycles were imported at an average price of €298. For comparison, e-bikes imported from Vietnam averaged €790, while those from Taiwan reached €1,393! LEVA-EU questions how Chinese e-bikes priced so low can adhere to stringent EU requirements, such as testing according to EU standards, maintaining technical files, CE-labeling, appointing authorised representatives and organising end-of-life battery collection.

    Market Surveillance and Compliance Gaps
    LEVA-EU highlights the proliferation of non-compliant electric bicycles, mostly models with motor assistance exceeding 25 km/h. In the Netherlands, inspections led to confiscation of thousands of illegal e-bikes, though not before a fatal accident occurred. Similar problems persist across the EU, often worsened by online sales channels.

    Adding to the complexity is the potential circumvention of trade measures. Millions of vehicles under HS code 8711 60 90 90 are imported annually, raising concerns about the misclassification of electric bicycles to evade duties. There are no duties on products under this code.

    Challenges with Component Duties
    LEVA-EU also underscores the ongoing major difficulties caused by dumping duties on conventional bicycle components. These duties are subject to complex exemption processes, and European production capacity for components remains insufficient to meet demand. Many EU assemblers therefore have no other option but to buy components in China. Meanwhile, customs authorities disproportionately concentrate their efforts on inspecting and frequently taking an overly aggressive stance against EU assemblers. This approach generates significant legal uncertainty, further exacerbating compliance challenges for businesses.

    A Call to Action: Prioritise Market Surveillance and Remove Barriers
    LEVA-EU urges the European Commission to reallocate resources from trade defense measures to implementing robust market surveillance mechanisms. To achieve this, the dumping duties on bicycle components must be abolished without delay. Ensuring the effective enforcement of technical regulations is essential to stop the influx of low-quality, non-compliant products into the EU market. Additionally, LEVA-EU strongly advocates for the removal of duties on bicycle components to reduce obstacles for assemblers, foster growth, and encourage innovation in the European electric cycle sector.

    “Robust market surveillance, not trade defence, is the only sustainable way forward,” says Annick Roetynck, Managing Director of LEVA-EU. “By addressing these critical issues, the EU can support a thriving and competitive electric cycle industry while ensuring safety and compliance for consumers.”

  4. LEVA-EU Invites European E-Bike Assemblers to Share Insights on Anti-Dumping Duties in New Survey

    Comments Off on LEVA-EU Invites European E-Bike Assemblers to Share Insights on Anti-Dumping Duties in New Survey

    LEVA-EU is inviting European e-bike manufacturers and assemblers to participate in a survey designed to assess the impact of European Union (EU) anti-dumping duties on bicycle components imported from China. The survey seeks to gather perspectives directly from companies on how these duties affect their business operations, competitiveness, and the overall European e-bike market.

    The survey is here: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/LEVA-EU-Dumping-Survey

    Background

    The EU introduced anti-dumping duties on conventional bicycles from China in 1993, later extending these duties in 1997 to essential bicycle components, impacting both conventional and e-bike assemblers. The European Commission is currently reviewing these duties, providing an opportunity for industry stakeholders to share their perspectives on how these tariffs influence their operations and growth potential within the European market.

    LEVA-EU has consistently highlighted that these duties impose additional costs and sourcing limitations for e-bike manufacturers and assemblers, particularly affecting small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The organisation advocates for a reassessment of these duties to support sustainable growth in the sector. You can read more about LEVA-EU’s position on this issue here.

    Why Your Input Matters

    The European e-bike market has been growing rapidly, spurred by rising interest in eco-friendly transportation and urban mobility solutions. However, the anti-dumping duties on Chinese components present challenges for many European manufacturers and assemblers. This survey aims to collect feedback on how these duties affect manufacturers and assemblers across various areas, including:

    • Production Costs: Higher tariffs can increase component costs, affecting both profitability and pricing structures.
    • Supply Chain Flexibility: Restrictions on affordable components from China may challenge assemblers, particularly those with fewer supplier options.
    • Competitiveness in the EU Market: With increased competition, maintaining cost-effective and efficient production is critical for e-bike companies of all sizes.

    Survey responses will help LEVA-EU gather data to better understand the needs of European manufacturers and assemblers. The findings will inform LEVA-EU’s ongoing policy discussions with the European Commission in relation to the review of these duties.

    Survey Details

    This survey, which takes around 5–10 minutes to complete, addresses various topics such as company size, sourcing practices, challenges related to anti-dumping duties, and policy perspectives. The survey also includes questions on exemptions or end-use authorizations companies may use to reduce duty-related costs.

    Key areas of feedback include:

    • The impact of anti-dumping duties on business operations
    • Challenges in obtaining exemptions or authorizations
    • Opinions on the potential benefits of adjusting/removing these duties

    How to Participate

    The survey is here: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/LEVA-EU-Dumping-Survey

    Participation in this survey allows e-bike manufacturers and assemblers to provide essential feedback that could shape future trade policies. This effort aims to ensure that the needs of the industry are well-represented in upcoming discussions.

    For questions or more information, please contact LEVA-EU’s Policy Manager, Annick Roetynck, at annick@leva-eu.com.

  5. LEVA-EU urges Commission to end ADD on bicycle components from China

    Comments Off on LEVA-EU urges Commission to end ADD on bicycle components from China

    The European Commission has initiated a review of long-standing anti-dumping duties (ADD) on conventional bicycles from China. This marks 31 years of duties on Chinese bicycles and 27 years on components. In this framework, LEVA-EU is calling for the abolition of duties on bicycle components, arguing that these measures are extremely detrimental to the European electric bicycle industry.

    While the ADD on bicycles, originally imposed in 1993 (!) are reviewed every five years, there is no such requirement for reviewing duties on components. Since the introduction of such duties in 1997, the European Commission has only reviewed them once, in 2008, and decided to maintain them.

    The measures have now turned into a nightmare for the electric bicycle industry in Europe. This is due to the Commission having failed to make a correct and adequate distinction in the regulations between conventional and electric bicycles.

    No CN-code for e-bike components

    Whilst for electric bicycles, a specific CN code was created, separate from conventional bicycles, the same distinction was omitted for electric bicycle components. As a result, the mechanical components used in electric bicycles still come under the same CN code as those for conventional bicycles.

    When the duties on bicycles were extended to components in 1997, the e-bike industry in Europe was in its infancy. The EU companies that produced electric bicycles in those early days were originally conventional bicycle companies. They benefited from a Commission exemption that allowed them to import parts from China without paying anti-dumping duties, as long as they complied with Article 13.2 of the Basic Regulation[i]. They were using the exemption for the import of components for both conventional and electric bicycles.

    However, over time, the production of e-bikes became more widespread, with many new companies focusing exclusively on e-bikes and not conventional bicycles. Nevertheless, e-bike production in the EU remained relatively limited, with much of the component manufacturing concentrated in China. For European companies, it was more efficient to design e-bikes in Europe and have them assembled in China, near component manufacturers.

    This system was disrupted in 2019 when the European Union imposed trade defence measures (TDM) on e-bikes imported from China. These measures forced most European companies, that had previously assembled e-bikes in China, to relocate their assembly operations, either to other Asian countries or within the EU.

    Discrimination Electric Bicycle – vs Hybrid Assemblers

    Some European assemblers who had been producing both conventional and electric bicycles had capacity available. They continued to use their Commission exemptions to import parts for the assembly of both types of bicycles from China without paying anti-dumping duties.

    Companies that assembled electric bicycles only could not apply for an exemption from the Commission. They were required to obtain end-use authorisation from national customs authorities to avoid paying duties on components for e-bikes. In some cases, national customs authorities themselves were not aware of this procedure and thus failed to allow the companies to obtain the necessary authorisation. In other cases, the companies were not aware of the procedure and imported their parts from China without the authorisation, effectively paying dumping duties. This was despite the fact that the Commission consistently stated that parts for electric bicycles were not subject to dumping duties.[ii]

    In 2020, the Commission introduced Regulation 2020/1296 to distinguish between “hybrid assemblers” (producing both conventional and e-bikes) and “electric bicycle assemblers“. With this Regulation, the Commission gave hybrid assemblers a legal carte blanche to effectively use the exemption for parts for conventional and electric bicycles.

    Companies that only assemble e-bikes face much more stringent conditions. They must first import parts and pay ADD for some time before they can apply for end-use authorisation. If they manage to obtain the authorisation, the duties paid are not refunded. They then must provide a considerable guarantee. Moreover, they must maintain costly and complex administrative processes to prove that imported parts are used exclusively for e-bike assembly.

    Discrimination New vs Old Hybrid Assemblers

    With Regulation 2023/611, the Commission further tightened the rules for obtaining exemptions. This regulation imposes stricter conditions that are making it impossible for new companies to start up assembly of conventional and electric bicycles in Europe. Whereas existing companies received a blank check, new companies now also must pay a substantial guarantee. They must keep their records for 5 years instead of 3. If their application is refused, they must wait 3 years instead of 1 to reapply.

    The extension of the ADD to conventional bicycle components resulted from a Commission investigation at the explicit request of European Bicycle Manufacturers’ Association (EBMA). Even though large numbers of companies that assemble electric bicycles in the EU are not in compliance with Article 13.2, and the Commission is well aware of this, no investigation will ever be initiated into the potential circumvention of the TDM against electric bicycles from China. Instead of requesting an investigation, EBMA is reassuring its members that component imports from China that exceed 59% will not be sanctioned!

    This exemption system, therefore, benefits established members of the EBMA, headed by the EU’s 4 largest bike concerns  The system allows them to import parts from China freely, while making it difficult for new companies to enter the market. EBMA’s protectionist approach discourages competition, as evidenced by a sharp decline in exemption requests since the year 2000. In 2021 and 2022, no exemptions were granted, while only four requests were under examination.

    EU Component Supply Largely Insufficient

    Compounding these issues is the lack of sufficient bicycle and e-bike component production within Europe. The EU market for conventional and electric bicycles ranges from 20 to 22 million units per year, yet component production within Europe remains far below the demand. Despite some efforts to increase component production in the EU, dependency on Chinese imports is unlikely to decrease in the short to medium term. As a result, companies assembling e-bikes in Europe are often left with no choice but to source components from China.

    A further problem has emerged with customs authorities in several EU Member States, who are now accusing companies, which import e-bike components from China of circumvention. These authorities are applying the General Rule of Interpretation 2(a), which allows for classifying incomplete or unassembled articles as finished products. In other words, the import of e-bike components from China, not subject to TDM, may be considered as the import of full e-bikes, subject to duties. This has led to legal uncertainties, with companies facing accusations of dumping and risking massive fines that may result in bankruptcy. Company directors are also facing potential prison sentences. Apart from causing enormous individual distress for 5 up to 8 years, these actions are also stifling growth and innovation within the sector.

    Destructive Legal Uncertainty

    There is no way to know with any certainty from which point EU customs will consider parts of an electric bicycle as a complete e-bike. There is no formal guidance about a possible rational basis for the application of GRI2(a) in this case. Furthermore, the Commission has explicitly confirmed to LEVA-EU that the Explanatory Note for the import of parts for conventional bicycles does not apply to the import of parts for electric bicycles Nevertheless, a Belgian judge recently invoked this Explanatory Note as a legal basis in the conviction of an electric bicycle assembler. So, no legal certainty available here either.

    While European companies are burdened with these enormous challenges, Chinese companies continue to flood the EU market with cheap, and often illegal e-bikes, despite the trade defence measures. These imported e-bikes are widely available online, undermining European manufacturers.

    Anti-Dumping Measures Fail to Protect EU Businesses

    LEVA-EU argues that the current anti-dumping measures have failed to protect European businesses and, in fact, are harming them. LEVA-EU calls for effective enforcement of EU technical regulations, which would ensure compliance with safety and environmental requirements, while allowing for fair competition. Market surveillance authorities in each Member State should focus on monitoring Chinese imports to ensure adherence to these regulations, rather than relying on ADD that primarily serve to protect established companies at the expense of new entrants.

    The dumping legislation also requires the Commission to assess whether the measures serve the community interest. LEVA-EU contends that the current measures are not in the broader interest of the EU’s electric bicycle industry or its citizens. The anti-dumping duties are causing harm by limiting competition, stifling innovation, and driving up prices, ultimately discouraging the adoption of e-bikes.

    In conclusion, LEVA-EU argues that the existing measures on bicycle components from China are outdated and harmful to the e-bike industry and the broader EU economy. They urge the Commission to remove the anti-dumping duties on bicycle components to foster a more competitive and innovative market for e-bikes in Europe.

    Annick Roetynck,
    LEVA-EU Manager

    [i] This article considers circumvention of duties if parts from China constitute 60% or more of the total value of the assembled product, unless the value added during assembly exceeds 25% of the manufacturing cost

    [ii] In a letter to LEVA-EU, DG Trade Director, Mrs Sabine Weyand stated that “the bicycle parts for the assembly of electrical bicycles are legally not subject to the extended anti-dumping or countervailing measures”. She also asserts that “the assembly operations of electrical bicycles remain outside the scope of the Exemption Regulation (which logically can only exempt measures which are covered by the antidumping/countervailing measures in the first place.)”

  6. TRA finds scrapping e-bike tariffs could save UK £51m per year

    Comments Off on TRA finds scrapping e-bike tariffs could save UK £51m per year

    Source TRA – The Trade Remedies Authority (TRA) has published its initial findings recommending that anti-dumping and anti-subsidy measures on electric bicycles (e-bikes) from China should be revoked. 

    Following the transition reviews of the measures, the TRA found that keeping them in place would not be in the economic interest of the UK. Revoking the measures could:

    • benefit the UK economy by an average of £51m per year;
    • save consumers an average of £260 per e-bike; and
    • result in an average of 31,000 more e-bikes being bought per year in the UK.

    Sales of e-bikes in the UK reached an estimated £325 million in 2023, compared with £96 million in 2018, and are expected to grow further in the coming years. Although it is likely that dumping and subsidisation of Chinese e-bikes would likely recur if the measures were no longer applied and that the UK production industry would suffer some injury, it was found that this injury did not outweigh the benefits to the UK economy or consumers if the measures were revoked.

    TRA Chief Executive Oliver Griffiths said: “We always assess the impact of a trade remedy measure on the UK economy. Our interim conclusion is that the benefits to UK bicycle producers from continuing the current measures on e-bikes would be significantly outweighed by harm to the rest of the economy. We project that removing the measures could save consumers around £260 per e-bike and could benefit the UK economy by around £51 million annually.“

    Alternative options

    Under the UK’s revised trade remedies regime, if the TRA finds that a measure is not in the economic interest of the UK, it offers the Secretary of State for Business and Trade alternative options to revoking the measures.

    These alternative options included only applying the measures to folding e-bikes as UK producers are more heavily concentrated in this market. A period of consultation is now open for on all of the options presented, after which the TRA will make its final recommendation to the Secretary of State.

    As part of these reviews, for the first time, the TRA conducted a consumer survey as part of its assessment of how measures on these imports would affect the overall UK economy. The survey targeted e-bike customers and helped the TRA assess consumer sensitivity to e-bike prices. 

    Businesses that may be affected by the reviews (such as importers or exporters of the products or UK producers of similar products) can now comment on the initial findings via the TRA’s online case platform. They can also stay up to date with developments in each case, which will be posted on the TRA’s public files.

    Following Article 21 of the Basic Regulation, the EU Commission also has a legal duty to determine whether it’s in the interest of the whole EU Community. “(…) whether the Community interest calls for intervention shall be based on an appreciation of all the various interests as a whole, including the interests of the domestic industry and users and consumers; (…) Measures, as determined on the basis of the dumping and the injury found, may not be applied where the authorities, on the basis of all the information submitted, can clearly conclude that it is not in the Community interest to apply such measures.“

    LEVA-EU has already raised the issue of Community interest with the Commission, given the enormous difficulties and damage caused by trade defense measures to EU companies and the wider implications for sustainable mobility and public health.

    If the Commission would be willing to test the Community interest in this year’s reviews, with the same thoroughness as TRA applied in the Economic Interest Test, there is a very good chance that the measures will also prove to cause much more damage to the EU than the benefits they bring to those few EU manufacturers who continue to defend the measures through thick and thin.

    TRA finds scrapping e-bike tariffs could save UK £51m per year

    . If the Commission would be willing to test the Community interest in this year’s reviews, with the same thoroughness as TRA applied in the Economic Interest Test, there is a very good chance that the measures will also prove to cause much more damage to the EU than the benefits they bring to those few EU manufacturers who continue to defend the measures through thick and thin.

    Photo by James Giddins on Unsplash

  7. China adopts mandatory national Battery Standard for E-Bikes

    Comments Off on China adopts mandatory national Battery Standard for E-Bikes

    Source 强制性国标发布，涉及电动自行车用锂电池安全_河北省文物局 (hebei.gov.cn): On May 6, the “Safety Technical Specifications for Lithium-Ion Batteries for Electric Bicycles” (GB 43854-2024), a mandatory national standard drafted by the Chinese Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, has been approved by the State Administration for Market Regulation and will be officially implemented on November 1, 2024.

    The technical specifications stipulate the safety requirements and test methods for lithium batteries for electric bicycles, both at single cell and battery pack levels. For single cells, six safety requirements have been considered: overcharge, over-discharge, external short circuit, thermal abuse, puncture, and marking. As for battery packs, the requirements mainly pertain to electrical safety, mechanical safety, environmental safety and thermal diffusion. The requirements also deal with data collection and marking.

    The technical specifications only apply to lithium-ion batteries for electric bicycles with a maximum output voltage not exceeding 60V as stipulated in the “Electric Bicycle Safety Technical Specifications” (GB 17761). They do not apply to electric scooters, self-balancing vehicles, motorcycles, etc. Upon the implementation of the standard, all lithium-ion batteries for electric bicycles sold in China must meet these requirements.

    Currently, the number of electric bicycles in China has exceeded 350 million. In 2023, enterprises above a nationwide designated size will produce a total of 42.28 million electric bicycles. Among the new electric bicycle models released by major domestic electric bicycle brands, more than 20% are equipped with lithium-ion batteries.

    According to the Chinese Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, this mandatory national standard for the safety of lithium-ion batteries for electric bicycles and the technical specifications are of great significance to standardizing the design, production and sales of lithium-ion battery products for electric bicycles. They are aimed at improving product quality and safety levels and at promoting the development of the electric bicycle industry in a positive way.

    This new Chinese standard is not relevant for batteries imported from China to the EU. These batteries must comply with EU rules and regulations as for instance ensuing from the new Battery Regulation. Furthermore, the EN-standards for EPACs, e-mountain bikes and for e-cargocycles also have requirements pertaining to the batteries.

    Photo by Joshua Fernandez on Unsplash

  8. Join the Ad Hoc Group in Opposing Extension Measures on E-Bikes from China

    Comments Off on Join the Ad Hoc Group in Opposing Extension Measures on E-Bikes from China

    Is your company involved in any of the following:

    • Importing electric bicycles, electric cargo bikes, or speed pedelecs from China and paying duties?
    • Importing electric bikes, electric cargocycles, or speed pedelecs from a non-EU country OTHER THAN China?
    • Importing components from China for the assembly of electric bikes, electric cargocycles, or speed pedelecs within the EU?

    Is your company facing:

    • Investigation by national customs services and/or OLAF?
    • Accusations of circumventing measures against China?
    • Legal action for circumventing measures against China?
    • Sentencing or acquittal for circumventing measures against China?

    If so, we strongly recommend that you become a part of the Ad Hoc Group established by LEVA-EU to collectively oppose the potential extension of these measures.

    What will the Ad Hoc Group do?

    • Request recognition from the European Commission as an interested party.
    • Submit joint comments on the Commission’s review.
    • Seek a hearing from the European Commission, allowing companies to express their views.
    • Provide assistance from a specialized lawyer.
    • Communicate the group’s activities to the press and on social media.
    • Lobby other influential entities on this matter.

    How to Participate?

    • A modest contribution, based on the number of employees in your company, is required for participation in the Ad Hoc Group.
    • Participation can be kept confidential.
    • LEVA-EU membership is not a prerequisite for joining the Ad Hoc Group.
    • LEVA-EU members receive a discount on the contribution.

    Meeting Details:

    • The Ad Hoc Group will conduct multiple meetings, with the first scheduled for February 15, both in-person in Brussels and online.
    • If the Commission grants a hearing, it will be held in-person in Brussels; all other meetings will be accessible online.

    How to Join?

    Your involvement will make a difference in challenging the extension of the measures affecting the European electric cycle industry.

  9. LEVA-EU Establishes Ad Hoc Group for EU Companies to Counter EU Commission’s Review of Measures against E-Cycles from China

    Comments Off on LEVA-EU Establishes Ad Hoc Group for EU Companies to Counter EU Commission’s Review of Measures against E-Cycles from China

    Last week, the European Commission announced the review of the trade defence measures against electric cycles from China. The review has been requested by EBMA, who wants the measures to be extended for another 5 years. However, over the past 5 years, LEVA-EU has collected numerous testimonies from European companies that have suffered serious damage due to the measures. Some have even gone bankrupt.

    It may be in the interest of a small minority of EU companies to continue the measures, but for the majority it is a constant threat and a major obstacle. In response to this, LEVA-EU is taking decisive action by establishing an ad hoc group to unite with affected companies and jointly challenge the potential extension of the trade defense measures. This collaborative effort aims to represent the interests of the broader industry and address the concerns of companies that have experienced adverse effects of the measures.

    LEVA-EU will apply for the ad hoc group to be granted interested party status, which will allow the group to comment on the requested review and also request a hearing with the Commission. In all this, the group will also be supported by a specialized lawyer. LEVA-EU will further support the companies in the ad hoc group with lobbying and communication on the matter.

    The more companies join the group, the greater the chance that opposition to the measures will be taken into account. LEVA-EU therefore warmly calls on all companies that are damaged in some way by the measures or that oppose the measures, to register for the ad hoc group. A first meeting of the group is planned for Thursday, 15 February, in Brussels. The group is open to all companies, regardless of whether they are members of LEVA-EU. You can register by expressing your interest in a simple email to LEVA-EU manager Annick Roetynck, annick@leva-eu.com. If you wish, you can also call her for further information: +32 475 500 588

    It has long been clear that the focus of the EBMA is less on preventing dumping and injury recurrence, than on fostering protectionism, primarily led by a few large groups within the EU. All this is happening under the guise that the trade defence measures will result in return of production to Europe, which in turn will result in the creation of millions (sic) of jobs. Both EBMA and the Commission are of course wisely silent about the fact that trade defence legislation, by its nature, is not designed with the goal of reshoring industries nor fostering job creation. Let alone that they care at all about the jobs that have already disappeared in the EU due to the measures.

    The current measures disproportionately impact mainly smaller entrepreneurs, who inadvertently fall victim to the immense complexity of the legislation. That complexity is partly due to the interweaving between the measures against the electric cycles with the measures on essential bicycle components. LEVA-EU also raises concerns about EBMA not shying away from providing companies with incorrect legal information, which raises serious questions about integrity.

    A potential 5-year extension of the trade defence measures is predicted to exacerbate the challenges faced by many more European companies, leading to reduced supply, which will in turn lead to significant job losses in the retail sector. It will also lead to increased prices, and a stifling of innovation. LEVA-EU emphasizes that the measures primarily serve the interest of a few large groups, who are merely interested in safeguarding their big cash cow, i.e. the electric bicycle with pedal assistance up to 25 km/h and 250W.

    The consequences extend beyond the financial burden on European citizens, to include countless European companies that are now or will soon come under fire. Moreover, the measures prevent many more European companies to enter the market, since a new company in the EU cannot start up unless it pays anti-dumping duties for an indefinite period, without any prospect of any refund.

    Last year the European Union had the dubious honour of commemorating 30 years (!) of anti-dumping measures against conventional bicycles from China. This “milestone” prompts questions about the effectiveness of European trade defence measures and the resilience of the “Union Industry”. The measures against electric bicycles will never last 30 years, because by then the electric bicycle sector will simply have been wiped off the map, thanks to the so-called “Union Industry” and EBMA. That is precisely why it is important that at least someone tries to provide some resistance. Five more years of trade defence measures on electric cycles from China will never foster an environment conducive to fair competition, innovation and sustainable growth of the sector in Europe.

    Annick Roetynck,
    LEVA-EU Manager

    Below are the links to relevant Commission publications in the Official Journal:
    https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:C_202400802
    https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:C_202400798

Campaign success

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.

Member profile

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.