Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1309 of 2 July 2025 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain tube and pipe fittings originating in the Republic of Korea, Malaysia and the Russian Federation following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of the Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council

• (143) The Commission performed a price analysis without anti-dumping measures based on export prices to third countries to establish how the imports from the three countries concerned would affect Union industry should the measures be terminated. This showed that import prices from Korea, Malaysia and Russia would likely undercut Union industry prices by 10,0 %, 56,7 % and 44,3 % respectively.

5.3.   Trade restrictions by other countries

• (144) As indicated in recital 64, anti-dumping measures on TPF imports in the United States had been extended to Malaysia since July 2018. This implies that the access to one of the largest export markets for TPF (the United States) has been restricted. Considering the attractiveness of the Union market and in the case of Russian exporters the proximity of the Union market under normal circumstances, as described in sections 3.2.2.3, 3.3.2.3, and 3.4.2.3, there is a strong likelihood that these exporting producers will redirect their exports of TPF to the Union market if measures were to lapse.

• (145) In addition, current geopolitical uncertainties and sweeping reciprocal trade restrictions on the world market, especially related to steel such as those imposed by the United States in March 2025 ³² will most likely lead to a redirection of trade flows by countries under measures to those with lower or no restrictive trade measures in place. At this time the impact of these actions cannot be predicted, but it is likely that at least part of these world exports will be redirected towards the Union.

5.4.   Impact on the Union industry

• (146) In light of the large overcapacities in all three countries concerned, the low average import prices from those countries and the attractiveness of the Union market, the Union industry would be under significant price pressure from Korea, Malaysia and Russia should the measures be repealed. A potentially large influx of dumped imports would aggravate the Union’s already fragile economic situation. This could lead to financial losses and potentially the demise of the Union industry, which already operates at very low production and sales levels, and which has managed to achieve only a marginal positive profit level in a situation without these dumped imports.

• (147) On this basis, the Commission concluded that the absence of measures would in all likelihood result in a significant increase of dumped imports from Korea, Malaysia and Russia at injurious prices and material injury would be likely to recur.

6. UNION INTEREST

• (148) In accordance with Article 21 of the basic Regulation, the Commission examined whether maintaining the existing anti-dumping measures would be against the interest of the Union as whole. The determination of the Union interest was based on an appreciation of all the various interests involved, including those of the Union industry, importers, and users.

6.1.   Interest of the Union industry

• (149) As concluded in recital 136, the Union industry suffered material injury during the review investigation period, as confirmed by the negative trends of most injury indicators. It was also concluded in recital 147 that if the anti-dumping measures were allowed to lapse, injury would recur.

• (150) Overall, despite the injurious situation of the Union industry in the Union market, the Commission considered that the industry remains viable. This was based on the fact that not only did the industry manage to return to a profitable situation after years of losses, but also the export performance of the Union industry remains consistently strong, with export sales accounting for a significant share of the total sales volume. However, the Union industry still shows very low levels of capacity utilization with decreasing production levels and decreasing productivity, while the profit levels remain very low and have yet to reach the profit levels which could be achieved under normal circumstances.

• (151) If measures were allowed to lapse, it is likely that the influx of dumped imports from the three countries concerned will have a devastating effect on the Union industry, again lowering their profit levels with the risk of a further decrease in production or even the closure of production sites in the Union. Therefore, it can be concluded that the continuation of measures against Korea, Malaysia and Russia would be in the interest of the Union industry.

6.2.   Interest of unrelated importers, traders and users

• (152) Thirty-five importers and users were contacted at the initiation of the investigation and invited to cooperate. However, none of them cooperated in the current investigation or submitted any information, with the exception of one importer who expressed its support for the existing anti-dumping measures. It is also recalled that in the previous investigations on TPF, it was found that the imposition of measures was not likely to have a serious negative effect in the situation of importers and users in the Union.

• (153) Users did not submit any information showing that there have been difficulties in sourcing TPF, nor did the investigation determine otherwise. In fact, recitals 102 to 106 showed that the market share of imports from third countries other than the countries concerned exceeds that of the Union industry, meaning that users and importers are sourcing their TPF mostly from those third countries.

• (154) It was shown in the previous investigations, that the importers and users were able to transfer the price increase caused by the anti-dumping measures. There were no elements found during this investigation to contradict this conclusion. This is also due to the fact that TPF functions as connectors of pipes and tubes used in the petrochemical and construction sector. As such, TPF accounts for only a minor part of the overall cost in these sectors, as compared with the much more sizeable impact of the cost of the pipes and tubes themselves.

• (155) On this basis, and in line with the conclusions drawn in previous investigations, it is expected that the continuation of the measures will not have a significant negative impact on users or importers.

6.3.   Conclusion on Union interest

• (156) On the basis of the above, the Commission concluded that there were no compelling reasons of the Union interest against the maintenance of the existing measures on imports of TPF originating in Korea, Malaysia and Russia.

7. ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES

• (157) On the basis of the conclusions reached by the Commission on continuation of dumping, recurrence of injury and Union interest, the anti-dumping measures on imports of TPF originating in Korea, Malaysia and Russia should be maintained.

• (158) To minimize the risks of circumvention due to the difference in duty rates, special measures are needed to ensure the application of the individual anti-dumping duties. The application of individual anti-dumping duties is only applicable upon presentation of a valid commercial invoice to the customs authorities of the Member States. The invoice must conform to the requirements set out in Article 1(3) of this regulation. Until such invoice is presented, imports should be subject to the anti-dumping duty applicable to ‘all other companies’.

• (159) While presentation of this invoice is necessary for the customs authorities of the Member States to apply the individual rates of anti-dumping duty and exemptions to imports, it is not the only element to be taken into account by the customs authorities. Indeed, even if presented with an invoice meeting all the requirements set out in Article 1(3) of this Regulation, the customs authorities of Member States must carry out their usual checks and may, like in all other cases, require additional documents (shipping documents, etc.) for the purpose of verifying the accuracy of the particulars contained in the declaration and ensure that the subsequent application of the lower rate of duty is justified, in compliance with customs law.

• (160) Should the exports by one of the companies benefiting from lower individual duty rates increase significantly in volume after the imposition of the measures concerned, such an increase in volume could be considered as constituting in itself a change in the pattern of trade due to the imposition of measures within the meaning of Article 13(1) of the basic Regulation. In such circumstances and provided the conditions are met an anti-circumvention investigation may be initiated. This investigation may, inter alia, examine the need for the removal of individual duty rate(s) and the consequent imposition of a country-wide duty.

• (161) The individual company anti-dumping duty rates specified in this Regulation are exclusively applicable to imports of the product under review originating in the countries concerned and produced by the named legal entities. Imports of the product under review produced by any other company not specifically mentioned in the operative part of this Regulation, including entities related to those specifically mentioned, should be subject to the duty rate applicable to ‘all other companies’. They should not be subject to any of the individual anti-dumping duty rates.

• (162) A company may request the application of these individual anti-dumping duty rates if it subsequently changes the name of its entity. The request must be addressed to the Commission ³³. The request must contain all the relevant information enabling to demonstrate that the change does not affect the right of the company to benefit from the duty rate which applies to it. If the change of name of the company does not affect its right to benefit from the duty rate which applies to it, a regulation about the change of name will be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.

• (163) All interested parties were informed of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of which it was intended to recommend that the existing measures be maintained. They were also granted a period to make representations subsequent to this disclosure.

• (164) An exporter or producer that did not export the product concerned to the Union during the period that was used to set the level of the duty currently applicable to its exports may request the Commission to be made subject to the anti-dumping duty rate for cooperating companies not included in the sample. The Commission should grant such request, provided that three conditions are met. The new exporting producer would have to demonstrate that: (i) it did not export the product concerned to the Union during the period that was used to set the level of the duty applicable to its exports; (ii) it is not related to a company that did so and thus is subject to the anti-dumping duties; and (iii) has exported the product concerned thereafter or has entered into an irrevocable contractual obligation to do so in substantial quantities.

• (165) In view of Article 109 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council ³⁴ when an amount is to be reimbursed following a judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union, the interest to be paid should be the rate applied by the European Central Bank to its principal refinancing operations, as published in the C series of the Official Journal of the European Union on the first calendar day of each month.

• (166) The measures provided for in this regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee established by Article 15(1) Regulation (EU) 2016/1036,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

• (a) it did not export the goods described in Article 1(1) originating in the Republic of Korea, Malaysia and the Russian Federation during the period between 1 April 2000 to 31 March 2001 (‘original investigation period’);

• (b) it is not related to an exporter or producer subject to the measures imposed by this Regulation, and which have or could have cooperated in the investigation that led to the duty; and

• (c) it has either actually exported the product under review originating in the Republic of Korea, Malaysia and the Russian Federation or has entered into an irrevocable contractual obligation to export a significant quantity to the Union after the end of the original investigation period.

Article 2

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

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

Done at Brussels, 2 July 2025.

For the Commission

The President

Ursula VON DER LEYEN

• — Energy Commission - Gas Prices and Tariffs

• — SPAN Water and Sewerage Handbook 2023 published by the National Water Services Commission (SPAN) of Malaysia-- https://www.scribd.com/document/824193558/SPAN-Water-and-Sewerage-Hand-Book.

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Labour_cost_index_-_recent_trends#Overview.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/04/regulating-imports-with-a-reciprocal-tariff-to-rectify-trade-practices-that-contribute-to-large-and-persistent-annual-united-states-goods-trade-deficits/.

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1309/oj

ISSN 1977-0677 (electronic edition)