Tag Archive: dumping

  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 Shift from Trade Defense to Strengthened Market Surveillance and Removal of Duties on Bike Components

    Comments Off on LEVA-EU Calls for Shift from Trade Defense to Strengthened Market Surveillance and Removal of Duties on Bike Components

    The European Commission has completed its expiry review of the anti-dumping and countervailing measures against imports of electric bicycles from China. As widely expected, the Commission proposes to extend the measures for another five years. Their investigation concluded that “the repeal of the measures would in all likelihood result in a significant increase of dumped imports from the PRC at injurious price levels.” However, LEVA-EU is convinced that these trade defense measures encourage the import of extremely cheap electric bicycles from China that do not comply with technical regulations. These substandard products have already caused several accidents, including at least one fatality.

    According to the Commission’s investigation, the Union Industry experienced a significant recovery between 2020 and 2022, with all macro- and microeconomic indicators trending positively during that period. However, during the review investigation period from January 1 to December 31, 2023, the situation suddenly deteriorated again. The Commission acknowledges this was due to overstocking during COVID-19 and to the sudden economic shift with high energy costs and inflation. The Commission believes that the Union Industry in these circumstances needs further protection, given the likelihood of recurrence of injury from Chinese imports. They therefore propose to extend the measures for another five years.

    The Commission also underscores China’s substantial production capacity and the EU market’s attractiveness. They state: “The Chinese exporting producers exported to their main third markets at prices significantly below the average sales prices of the Union producers on the Union market during the review investigation period. Therefore, exporting to the Union is potentially much more attractive for Chinese exporters. Consequently, it can be reasonably expected that, should the measures be repealed, Chinese exporting producers would start to export high volumes of the product under review to the Union.” This raises the question of which other main third markets these might be and at what prices Chinese e-bikes are sold there. E-bikes imported from China into the EU during the review investigation period were already reportedly offered at remarkably low prices, ranging between €210 and €650, according to the Commission.

    This finding puts the finger on the wound. The trade defense measures have driven serious Chinese companies with long-term ambitions for the European market, out of China and toward Europe and Taiwan. Those still producing electric bicycles in China for the European market can only target the lowest price segment. With trade defense measures adding up to almost 80% to import prices, competing in the mid and high segments in Europe is unfeasible.

    This raises further questions about how electric bicycles priced between €210 and €650 can meet Europe’s technical regulations. How can an electric bicycle be placed on the market at that price carrying a CE label, proving compliance with Machinery, EMC, and RoHS directives? How can a company for such low-cost products afford EN 15194- and EMC-testing, an authorised representative in the EU, keeping a technical file, or organising the collection of end-of-life batteries and vehicles? How can it prepare for the upcoming implementation of the highly challenging Battery Regulation?

    While it might barely be possible for bicycles priced at €650, it is undoubtedly impossible for those priced below €650. It might work for very large-scale production, but even that is questionable, as only 220,914 electric bicycles were imported from China in 2023, representing a 4.4% market share.

    This situation supports the view that the trade defense measures are not designed to stop cheap Chinese imports but rather to prevent Chinese manufacturers from entering the mid- and high-end segments. This approach has worked effectively for conventional bicycles for the past 31 years.

    Moreover, the measures have nearly eliminated the possibility of importing acceptable-quality electric bicycles from China. How many of the 220,914 bicycles imported in 2023 complied with European technical regulations remains a pressing question. This issue became particularly urgent this year with the so-called fat bike problem in the Netherlands. Public opinion was inflamed by the large number of “fat” e-bikes that assisted at speeds exceeding 25 km/h.

    It took considerable time before the Dutch government acted, inspecting e-bikes from suppliers for compliance with European technical regulations. This resulted in the confiscation of thousands of e-bikes, but unfortunately, this measure came too late to prevent at least one traffic fatality. The issue is not confined to the Netherlands; similar illegal electric bicycles can be found in all other EU member states, often sold in large quantities via online platforms.

    Aside from the question of compliance with European technical regulations, there is also the issue of potential circumvention of the trade defense measures. Under HS code 8711 60 90 90, several million vehicles are imported into the EU annually. How many of these are intentionally misclassified electric bicycles to evade the measures? Meanwhile, customs authorities seem much more focused on inspecting and penalising European assemblers for potential violations of the rules on bicycle components.

    LEVA-EU urges the Commission to shift its focus from Trade Defense Measures (TDM) to strengthening market surveillance mechanisms. Currently, excessive resources and efforts are allocated to TDM, while there is a significant shortfall in effective market surveillance regarding European technical legislation. Robust market surveillance is the only way to address the growing influx of low-quality products that often fail to comply with legal obligations.

    The Commission is also still reviewing dumping duties on conventional bicycles from China. These rights have been extended to some essential bicycle parts. Although these components are exempt from dumping duties when used in e-bike assembly, the exemption process is overly complex, causing major difficulties for assemblers. In addition, customs accuses numerous companies that import parts for electric bicycles of circumventing the measures against electric bicycles from China. Moreover, European production of these parts is far from sufficient to meet demand.

    Because of all these major problems, LEVA-EU calls on the Commission to take the parts into account in the review of the measures against conventional bicycles and, after 27 years, to finally put an end to the duties on those parts from China. This will remove major obstacles for many electric bicycle assemblers in Europe, and enable them to expand their business, thus fostering growth in the sector.

    LEVA-EU is currently carrying out a survey on the dumping duties on bicycle components. If your company assembles e-bikes in the EU, we would very much appreciate you participation in this survey, which is here: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/LEVA-EU-Dumping-Survey

  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. 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

  6. LEVA-EU calls on EU assemblers for support to end dumping duties on bicycle parts

    Comments Off on LEVA-EU calls on EU assemblers for support to end dumping duties on bicycle parts

    The anti-dumping measures on conventional bicycles from China are to expire on the 30th August 2024. The measures are now in their 31st year. In 1997, they were extended to essential bicycle components based on alleged circumvention. Those measures are now in their 27th year.

    There is no doubt that EBMA has already or will very soon request the Commission to review the measures against conventional bikes with a view to continuing them for another 5 years. To gather the necessary support for their request, they visit bike assemblers up and down the continent, inviting them to co-sign the request for the review. In doing so, they will undoubtedly explain how it is necessary to continue the measures to avoid Europe being flooded with cheap Chinese bicycles, which would undoubtedly destroy European assemblers. They will add that the measures will allow production to be brought back to Europe and will create jobs.

    The other half of the story

    However, that is only half the story. LEVA-EU hereby invites all European assemblers to think carefully before explicitly expressing their support for EBMA’s request. After all, the other half of the story goes like this.

    The anti-dumping measures against bicycles from China were expanded in 1997 to include essential bicycle parts. Anyone who assembles in Europe must be able to prove that no more than 59% of the value of their components comes from China or that at least 25% value is added in the assembly. Anyone who can prove this will receive an exemption from the European Commission, meaning that 48.5% duties will not be levied on bicycle frames, forks, gears, sprockets, brakes, wheels and handlebars from China.

    When ADD and ASD were levied on electric bicycles in 2018, this had a major impact on the duties on essential bicycle parts. European assemblers who use essential bicycle parts for electric bicycles could also receive an exemption if they proved that they used the parts for electric and not for regular bicycles. Please note that the Commission has not (yet) extended the rights to essential bicycle parts for the European assembly of electric bicycles. Many European assemblers make electric bicycles of which the value of the components amounts to more than 59%. In some cases, the electric bicycles even consist of 100% Chinese components. The European assembly sector cannot do without these Chinese components because the availability of parts outside China is too limited to meet full demand.

    To circumvent or not to circumvent, that is the question.

    The EBMA’s request to the Commission to extend the duties on bikes to essential bicycle components, came almost immediately after the imposition of the duties on bikes, alleging massive circumvention by China. In the case of electric bicycles however, EBMA misses no opportunity to assure European assemblers that they can use as many Chinese parts as they want. And so, companies are happily assembling in a way that, according to the law, can very easily give rise to anti-circumvention measures.

    It is bizarre, to say the least, that while the European Commission responded to EBMA’s request without hesitation for conventional bicycles, the same Commission now simply ignores the situation, even though they could initiate an investigation at their own initiative. After all, why would the Chinese, accused of massive circumvention for conventional bikes, not resort to the same solution for electric bicycles.

    LEVA-EU calls on all assemblers in the EU to treat the EBMA reassurances with utmost caution. In reality, not everyone who assembles in Europe appears to be safe, as EBMA pretends. While the Commission is not currently interested in possible circumvention, some assemblers have indeed been attacked, more specifically by customs services. They determine that insufficient value is added in the assembly, upon which they categorize the import of parts as the import of a complete electric bicycle to which anti-dumping and anti-circumvention duties apply. With this alleged circumvention, the company is committing a criminal offense for which not only arrears are charged, but also extremely heavy fines and possible prison sentences. It will take 5 to 10 years to reach a conclusion in the case. During that period, given the extremely serious threat, it is impossible for the company to grow even if it is ultimately acquitted.

    Pushing businesses straight into the abyss

    So, when you sign certain EBMA requests to the Commission, which are allegedly intended against China and for Europe, keep in mind that this will not necessarily protect you from customs actions that may push your business straight into the abyss. As mentioned, LEVA-EU has no position on the dumping measures against conventional bicycles. As for the extension of the measures to essential bicycle parts, we say loud and clear: in the interests of European assemblers, these measures must be terminated as quickly as possible. No European company benefits from a legal restriction on the use of Chinese parts, nor from a very complex and expensive administration to enforce that restriction.

    LEVA-EU strongly hopes that European assemblers will consider this call and will no longer support EBMA requests that result in the continuation of the additional measures on essential bicycle parts from China.

    There is another important reason to terminate the duties on essential bicycle parts. That legislation makes it virtually impossible for new electric bicycle assemblers to enter the market. To obtain a Commission exemption or end-use approval, they must first pay 48.5% anti-dumping duties on essential bicycle parts from China. This is completely unacceptable because legally there are no anti-dumping duties on essential bicycle parts for electric bicycles.

    Which start-up can afford to include an additional cost of 48.5%, that serves no purpose and even has no legal basis, in their business plan? And to get rid of that 48.5%, which is not reimbursed in the case of end-use authorizations, they must provide significant guarantees!

    This makes EBMA’s claim that anti-dumping measures against electric bicycles from China are necessary to reshore production and to create jobs an outright lie. You may think that it is a good thing for your company if it is difficult for new companies to enter the market. Restriction of competition inevitably results in a reduced, thus less attractive offer and higher prices that ultimately leads consumers to quit. That response will eventually affect all remaining companies, including yours.

    LEVA-EU acknowledges that this is a complex matter and remain therefore at the disposal of anyone seeking further clarification: annick@leva-eu.com, tel. +32 475 500 588.

    Photo by Lance Grandahl on Unsplash

  7. 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.

  8. 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

  9. LEVA-EU Gears Up to Counter European Commission’s Review of Trade Defence Measures against Electric Cycles from China

    Comments Off on LEVA-EU Gears Up to Counter European Commission’s Review of Trade Defence Measures against Electric Cycles from China

    In a widely anticipated move, the European Commission has officially granted EBMA’s request to review the trade defence measures against electric cycles from China, with a view to an extension of 5 years. The basis for this request is, entirely as expected, the fact that the expiry of the measures would be likely to result in continuation of dumping and recurrence of injury to the Union Industry. LEVA-EU is gearing to respond. The organization warns for the potential impact of 5 more years of measures on European companies and is mobilizing efforts to address the serious concerns arising from the potential extension.

    The European Bicycle Manufacturers Association’s (EBMA) request for an extension comes from only one faction of the so-called Union Industry. Another segment of that Industry, along with numerous European companies assembling electric cycles outside both Europe and China, are already experiencing significant adverse effects from the existing measures. Some businesses have already effectively succumbed to these measures, which demonstrates the tangible and widespread damage inflicted upon the industry.

    In response, LEVA-EU plans to establish an ad hoc group for companies that are assembling their electric cycles within the EU or outside the EU and China, and are suffering substantial harm from the measures. 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.