EU Extends Anti-Dumping Duties on Chinese Bike Parts Despite Severe Impact on European E-Bike Assemblers

A Decision That Freezes an Outdated System

The European Commission has decided to continue anti-dumping duties on essential bicycle components* from China for up to five years. These measures were originally designed in the 1990s (!) to protect European manufacturers of conventional bicycles. By extending them unchanged, the Commission has further entrenched a regulatory framework that does not reflect the reality of today’s market—especially for electric bicycles, which now dominate innovation, growth, and consumer demand.

“This decision continues to lock the e-bike sector into a system that was never designed for it,” says Annick Roetynck, Managing Director of LEVA-EU. “Instead of creating a modern regulatory framework that supports innovation and fair competition, the Commission has chosen to preserve legal and economic privileges for a handful of legacy players at the expense of the wider European industry.”

Despite acknowledging that e-bikes are fundamentally different products with distinct components, the Commission has chosen to preserve a system in which many e-bike components remain legally indistinguishable from parts for conventional bicycles. This maintains a structure that advantages a small group of established manufacturers while placing disproportionate burdens on younger specialised e-bike companies.

A System Built for the Past, Not the Future

When the anti-dumping measures were originally extended to essential bicycle components, e-bike manufacturing in Europe was still emerging. The regulatory framework was built on the assumption that producers assembled both conventional and electric bicycles. At that time, this assumption matched industry reality. Today, this is no longer the case.

The modern e-bike industry includes dozens of companies that specialise exclusively in electric bicycles. These companies do not produce conventional bicycles and therefore cannot qualify for the Commission’s historical “exemption” mechanism designed for traditional manufacturers. Instead, they are subjected to complex and costly end-use authorisation procedures administered by national customs authorities—procedures that vary from country to country and often cause significant operational uncertainty.

Meanwhile, legacy manufacturers continue to enjoy exemptions, effectively receiving guaranteed duty-free access to Chinese-made components for both conventional and electric bike assembly.

Regulatory Discrimination Embedded in EU Law

With the recent extension of the measures, the Commission has effectively reaffirmed the division it created in Regulation 2020/1296 between so-called “hybrid assemblers” (those producing both conventional and electric bicycles) and “electric bicycle assemblers” (those producing only electric bicycles).

This distinction has no industrial or economic justification in today’s market. Instead, it has the direct effect of:

• Granting established manufacturers legal certainty and free access to imported parts
• Imposing duties, procedural delays, and financial guarantees on new entrants
• Preventing market expansion by making it nearly impossible for new companies to start, let alone scale assembly in the EU

“The Commission has chosen continuity over competitiveness,” Roetynck adds. “The result is a distorted market where regulatory status determines success, not innovation or efficiency.”

Contradictions with EU Strategic Objectives

The European Union has repeatedly declared e-mobility and cycling as pillars of its climate, industrial, and transport strategies. The European Declaration on Cycling explicitly calls for increasing the production of (electric) bicycles and their components in Europe.

So far, the ambition of “creating conditions to increase European production of a broad range of bicycles (including e-bikes, speed pedelecs, and bicycles for people with disabilities) and their components“, as set out in the Declaration, has proven to be an empty promise, particularly with regard to component production.

Worse still, this extension of anti-dumping duties disregards again the structural dependence of the EU industry on Asian component supply. The availability of e-bike parts outside China remains insufficient to meet demand.

In this context, maintaining punitive duties—while simultaneously suspending conventional tariffs on some of these very same parts to ensure adequate supply—reveals a contradiction at the heart of EU policy. The Commission recognises that European production cannot meet demand, yet it continues to uphold a system that penalises companies for sourcing components where they are available.

Legal Uncertainty and Enforcement Risks

The extension also perpetuates the current climate of legal uncertainty. Across multiple Member States, customs authorities are increasingly targeting companies importing e-bike components, accusing them of circumventing duties based on World Customs Organisation General Rule of Interpretation 2(a). This rule allows customs to classify parts as complete electric bicycles if they are deemed to constitute the “essential character” of a finished product.

There is no official guidance defining when a collection of parts becomes a “complete electric bicycle” under this rule. This ambiguity has led to investigations, court cases, financial penalties, and even criminal charges against EU-based e-bike assemblers—companies which, in many cases, acted in full good faith based on the Commission’s own statements that e-bike parts are not subject to anti-dumping duties.

With the measures now extended, this uncertainty will persist, possibly for five more years.

Market Consequences

The continuation of the anti-dumping regime is expected to produce the following outcomes:

• Reduced competition
• Slower innovation
• Higher manufacturing costs
• Reinforced offshoring trends

A Decision With Long-Term Impact

The extension of the anti-dumping measures on essential bike components does not simply maintain the status quo—it deepens it. By choosing continuity over reform, the Commission has locked the European e-bike industry into a framework designed for a different era and a different product. Rather than supporting the rapid growth of Europe’s most dynamic and sustainable mobility sector, the decision consolidates the position of a limited number of traditional manufacturers while constraining the development of new specialised e-bike companies.

As Roetynck concludes, “The next five years will be shaped not by industrial strategy or technological advancement, but by the preservation of regulatory advantage. The consequences for innovation, competition, and Europe’s long-term position in the global e-bike market are now set in motion.“

The open version of the full LEVA-EU submission to the European Commission on the review of anti-dumping duties on bicycle components from China is here: https://tinyurl.com/2pzmet2d

* The anti-dumping duties on bicycle components imported from China concern the following components:

• painted or anodized or polished and/or lacquered bicycle frames (CN 87149110)
• painted or anodized or polished and/or lacquered bicycle front forks (CN 87149130)
• derailleur gears (CN 87149950)
• crank-gear (CN 87149630)
• free-wheel sprocket-wheels (CN 87149390)
• brakes other than coaster brakes and hub brakes (CN 87149430)
• brake levers (CN 87149490)
• complete wheels with or without tubes, tires and sprockets (CN 87149990)
• handlebars (CN87149910) whether or not presented with a stem, brake and/or gear levers attached