Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1723 of 6 August 2025 imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of certain prepared or preserved sweetcorn in kernels, originating in the People’s Republic of China

• (310) The quantity of imports from other third countries developed over the period considered as follows:

Table 12

Imports from third countries

Country		2021	2022	2023	Investigation period
Thailand	Volume (tonnes)	4 345	4 863	3 293	3 638
	Index	100	112	76	84
	Market share (%)	1,4	1,5	1,1	1,3
	Average price (EUR/ tonne)	1 115	1 392	1 186	1 264
	Index	100	125	106	113
Total of all third countries except the country concerned	Volume (tonnes)	7 654	10 630	7 538	6 339
	Index	100	139	98	83
	Market share (%)	2,4	3,2	2,4	2,2
	Average price (EUR/ ton)	1 206	1 952	1 874	1 498
	Index	100	162	155	124
Source: Eurostat (Comext).	Source: Eurostat (Comext).	Source: Eurostat (Comext).	Source: Eurostat (Comext).	Source: Eurostat (Comext).	Source: Eurostat (Comext).

• (311) Imports from Thailand are subject to anti-dumping measures as mentioned in recital 276. Over the period considered, the level of imports decreased slightly from 4 345 tonnes in 2021 to 3 640 tonnes in the investigation period. Consequently, the market share decreased from 1,4 % to 1,3 % and remained at an overall low level. Although the price levels of imports from Thailand were below the Union industry prices, no additional market share could be gained by Thai imports. Therefore, the impact was considered to be limited, if not negligible, and the Commission therefore concluded that they did not attenuate the causal link between the dumped imports and the material injury suffered by the Union industry.

• (312) The Commission considered that imports from other third countries were at very low levels throughout the period considered. Over the period considered, the market share for all other third countries decreased from 2,4 % in 2021 to 2,2 % in the investigation period. The average price level remained below the price level of the Union industry, although they increased by 24 % over the period considered. While the Commission could not exclude that those imports contributed to the injury of the Union industry, given their low and stable volume, the impact was considered to be limited, and the Commission therefore concluded that they did not attenuate the causal link between the dumped imports and the material injury suffered by the Union industry.

5.2.2.   Low sweetcorn yield in the EU in 2022

• (313) In their comments to the investigation, the CFNA and the unrelated importer Otto Frank considered that the low crop yield of EU sweetcorn in 2022 caused by droughts contributed to the injury suffered by the Union industry.

• (314) Otto Frank considered that the low crop yield of EU sweetcorn in 2022 that was caused by widespread droughts represented the main factor that contributed to the injury of the Union industry. As a result of this bad harvest, the importer explained that the EU maize production, including sweetcorn, decreased by 28,9 % in 2022 compared to the previous year and 24,3 % below the five-year average ¹¹². Consequently, raw material prices were subject to sharp price increases ¹¹³. Otto Frank considered that following increased price estimates and risks of insufficient supplies from the Union industry, some EU retailers decided to change their procurement strategy by purchasing sweetcorn from China rather than from Union producers. The importer claimed that a low crop year will impact also the following year of production, as producers have to serve contracts from the previous season without any surplus left. As a result, retailers hesitated to change back to the supply from Union producers when contracts for the 2023 and 2024 were closed due to uncertainty about the 2023 crop yield, continued high raw material prices and previous supply from China that prevented shortage of supply. However, after a reduction in raw material prices towards the end of 2023 and a recovery of the crop yield in 2023 and 2024, the importer considered that customers purchased again sweetcorn produced in the EU and the increase in Chinese imports was considered by the importer as a temporary shift.

• (315) The CFNA claimed that the abrupt change of imports from China in 2022 was due to a large order placed by Lidl, representing about 60 % of China’s total exports.

• (316) The Commission noted that the CFNA did not further specify this claim or provide any supporting evidence. Therefore, it was rejected.

• (317) The analysis of the production volume in recital 262 showed a drop in the production volume of the sampled Union producers for 2022. However, in the following year, the production volume recovered to a normal level, while Chinese imports continued to enter the Union at dumped prices. While it cannot be excluded that the low sweetcorn yield contributed to the injury of the Union industry, considering that it was limited to only one year of the period considered, it was considered that it did not attenuate the causal link to the extent of making it not genuine or not substantial.

5.2.3.   Floods in Thailand

• (318) The CFNA claimed that a shortage of supply caused by floods in Thailand represented another cause of injury.

• (319) The Commission noted that the CFNA did not further specify this claim or provide any additional supporting evidence.

• (320) While indeed Thailand experienced serious floods in 2022 with a negative impact on the agricultural sector and the production of rice in particular ¹¹⁴, the import statistics described in Table 12 with the level of sweetcorn imports originating in third countries, showed that the level of sweetcorn imports from Thailand was not negatively impacted. To the contrary, the imports from Thailand increased between 2021 and 2022 from 4 345 tonnes to 4 863 tonnes, representing an increase of 12 %. The Commission therefore did not consider the floods in Thailand as a cause of injury to the Union industry.

5.2.4.   Decrease in consumption

• (321) As described in recital 243, the Union consumption increased by 3 % between 2021 and 2022, followed by a significant drop of 9 % in the investigation period compared to 2021. At the same time, Chinese imports increased significantly from 6 % in 2022 to 16 % in 2023, while the Union industry market share dropped from 91 % to 82 %.

• (322) Although the decline in consumption could have contributed to a reduction in production and sales due to the decreased demand, the Commission observed that the decrease in market share of the Union industry coincided with the market share gained by the Chinese exports. Hence, in the Commission’s view, the decrease in consumption did not attenuate the causal link between the dumped Chinese imports and the material injury to the extent of making it not genuine or not substantial.

5.2.5.   Raw material and energy costs

• (323) CFNA considered that the war in the Ukraine may have provided challenges to Union producers in the form of increased energy costs and challenges in security of supply.

• (324) As mentioned in recital 280, the average unit cost of cost of goods sold increased by more than 30 % in 2022 and an additional 5 % in 2023, driven mainly by price increases of the main raw materials such as energy, cans, and sweetcorn. However, due to the price pressure of the Chinese imports, the Union industry was not able to increase its prices in line with the increase in its costs and to remain viable.

• (325) While it could not be excluded that the increases in raw material prices contributed to the injury of the Union industry, the Commission considered that it did not attenuate the causal link to the extent of making it not genuine or not substantial.

5.3.   Export performance of the Union industry

• (326) The volume of exports of the sampled Union producers developed over the period considered as follows:

Table 13

Export performance of the sampled Union producers

	2021	2022	2023	Investigation period
Export volume (tonnes)	[51 698 - 80 502 ]	[46 673 - 72 677 ]	[36 129 - 56 260 ]	[35 794 - 55 738 ]
Index	100	90	70	69
Average price (EUR/ ton)	[1 285 - 2 003 ]	[1 466 - 2 285 ]	[1 671 - 2 603 ]	[1 786 - 2 782 ]
Index	100	114	130	139
Source: Sampled Union producers.	Source: Sampled Union producers.	Source: Sampled Union producers.	Source: Sampled Union producers.	Source: Sampled Union producers.

• (327) The export volume of the Union industry decreased by 31 % over the period considered. The sales prices of these exports increased by 39 % over the same period.

• (328) Bearing in mind that the export volumes represent only around 10 % of Union sales and that the trend of sales volumes and prices was similar to the trend observed for Union industry sales in the Union, it is evident that the export performance of the Union industry is not a key element in the overall assessment in the economic situation of the Union industry.

• (329) Therefore, the Commission concluded that the export performance of the Union industry did not cause material injury to the Union industry or was able to attenuate the causal link with respect to Chinese imports.

5.4.   Conclusion on causation

• (330) The Commission established a causal link between the material injury suffered by the Union industry and the dumped imports from China. The increase of the Chinese imports in 2023 and the investigation period coincided with the deterioration of the Union industry’s situation. The sharp increase in Chinese market share resulted in a significant drop of sales by Union producers in 2023 and the investigation period, and a decline in production volumes in the investigation period. At the same time, stock levels increased dramatically, and the ratio of successful tenders decreased. The trend of these volume indicators showed a clear volume injury. Chinese imports were made at prices significantly undercutting the Union industry’s sales prices. While the profitability remained positive, it remained below the target profit.

• (331) Other factors examined were imports from other third countries, the export performance of the Union industry, floods in Thailand, decreased Union consumption, and a bad sweetcorn harvest in 2022.

• (332) Therefore, the Commission distinguished and separated the effects of all known factors on the situation of the Union industry from the injurious effects of the dumped imports. None of the factors, collectively or separately, were found to have a bearing on the situation of the Union industry sufficient to call into question the conclusion that the Chinese imports were causing material injury.

• (333) On the basis of the above, the Commission concluded at this stage that the dumped imports from the country concerned caused material injury to the Union industry and that the other factors, considered individually or collectively, did not attenuate the causal link between the dumped imports and the material injury. The injury consists mainly of lost volumes related to sales and production volumes, capacity utilisation, and increased stock levels. At the same time, the Union industry suffered from low import prices that were undercutting the Union sales prices and reducing the level of profitability, which remained consistently below target profit.

6. LEVEL OF MEASURES

• (334) To determine the level of the measures, the Commission examined whether a duty lower than the margin of dumping would be sufficient to remove the injury caused by dumped imports to the Union industry.

• (335) In the present case, the complainants claimed the existence of raw material distortions within the meaning of Article 7(2a) of the basic Regulation. At this stage of the investigation, the Commission has not taken any decision regarding the raw material distortions which will be taken at the definitive stage of the investigation.

6.1.   Underselling margin

• (336) The injury would be removed if the Union industry were able to obtain a target price in the sense of Articles 7(2c) and 7(2d) of the basic Regulation.

• (337) In accordance with Article 7(2c) of the basic Regulation, for establishing the target profit, the Commission took into account the following factors: the level of profitability before the increase of imports from the country concerned, the level of profitability needed to cover full costs and investments, research and development (R&D) and innovation, and the level of profitability to be expected under normal conditions of competition. Such profit margin should not be lower than 6 %.

• (338) As a first step, the Commission established a basic profit covering full costs under normal conditions of competition. This basic profit was established based on the profitability of the Union industry that was considered to be achieved in the absence of the dumped Chinese imports. Such profit margin was established at 14 %. This level of profitability was already confirmed in the previous anti-dumping investigation considering imports from Thailand ¹¹⁵.

• (339) On this basis, the Commission calculated a non-injurious price for the like product of the Union industry by applying the above-mentioned target profit margin to the cost of production of the sampled Union producers during the investigation period.

• (340) The Commission then determined the underselling margin level on the basis of a comparison of the weighted average import price of the sampled cooperating exporting producers in the country concerned, as established for the price undercutting calculations, with the weighted average non-injurious price of the like product sold by the sampled Union producers on the Union market during the investigation period. Any difference resulting from this comparison was expressed as a percentage of the weighted average import CIF value.

• (341) The adjustments made to the export price as described at section 3.4.2 above also apply to the CIF prices used in the underselling calculations.

• (342) The underselling level for ‘other cooperating companies’ and for ‘all other imports originating in China’ is defined in the same manner as the dumping margin for these companies and imports (see recital 234).

Country	Company	Dumping margin (%)	Injury margin (%)
China	Sunflower Group: — Sun Flower Food Industry (Xinfeng) Co., Ltd, Ganzhou City, China — Sunny Food Industry Co., Ltd, Ganzhou City, China	42,4	37,5
	Zhangzhou Tongfa Foods Industry Co., Ltd, Zhangzhou, China	54,3	81,8
	Other cooperating companies	48,1	61,2
	All other imports originating in country concerned	54,3	81,8

6.2.   Examination of the margin adequate to remove the injury to the Union industry

• (343) As explained in the Notice of Initiation, the complainant has provided sufficient evidence in the complaint that there are raw material distortions within the meaning of Article 7(2a) of the basic Regulation in the country concerned with regard to the product concerned. According to the evidence in the complaint, steel cans, accounting for at least 17 % of the cost of production of the product concerned, is subject to export VAT in the country concerned.

• (344) The Commission will continue to investigate the alleged distortions to conduct the assessment on the appropriate level of measures in accordance with Article 7(2a) of the basic Regulation at the definitive stage of the investigation. Therefore, the Commission concluded to, at this stage, determine the amount of provisional duties in accordance with Article 7(2) of the basic Regulation.

• (345) With regards to the Sunflower Group, the provisional anti-dumping duty is therefore set at the level of the underselling margin.

• (346) With regards to the Tongfa Group, the provisional anti-dumping duty is therefore set at the level of the dumping margin.

6.3.   Conclusion on the level of measures

• (347) Following the above assessment, provisional anti-dumping duties should be set as below in accordance with Article 7(2) or of the basic Regulation:

Country	Company	Provisional anti-dumping duty
China	Sunflower Group: — Sun Flower Food Industry (Xinfeng) Co., Ltd, Ganzhou City, China — Sunny Food Industry Co., Ltd, Ganzhou City, China	37,5  %
	Zhangzhou Tongfa Foods Industry Co., Ltd, Zhangzhou, China	54,3  %
	Other cooperating companies	48,1  %
	All other imports originating in country concerned	54,3  %

7. UNION INTEREST

• (348) Having decided to apply Article 7(2) of the basic Regulation at this stage, the Commission examined whether it could clearly conclude that it was not in the Union interest to adopt measures in this case, despite the determination of injurious dumping, in accordance with Article 21 of the basic Regulation. The determination of the Union interest was based on an appreciation of all the various interests involved, including those of the Union industry, importers, wholesalers, retailers, users, consumers, and farmers.

7.1.   Interest of the Union industry

• (349) The Union industry is composed of 11 producers or groups of producers, employing about 3 460 people (FTE). The producers are spread throughout the Union with several producers located in Hungary and France.

• (350) Given the findings of the material injury to the Union industry, imposing measures would allow the Union industry to increase its sales prices and improve its profitability in line with the cost increases and maintain a competitive level in their market. The Union industry would be also able to regain lost market share by increasing production and sales quantities on the Union market. Due to the increased Chinese imports, Union producers were not able to sell their production volume and acquired a high level of stocks in 2023 and the investigation period. Imposing measures would allow the Union industry to sell of their existing stock levels to decrease the fixed costs.

• (351) The absence of measures is likely to have further significant negative effects on the Union industry in terms of lower sales and production volumes, as well as further increasing stock levels. Further price suppression leading to further financial deterioration of its economic situation in terms of profitability and future investment, jeopardizing its future and employment.

• (352) It is therefore concluded that provisional measures are in the interest of the Union industry.

7.2.   Interest of unrelated importers and traders

• (353) On the date of initiation, 20 unrelated importers, traders, and retailers were contacted. As described in recital 32, six unrelated importers and traders provided the requested information. A sample of two unrelated importers was selected out of which one unrelated importer provided a questionnaire reply that was verified. The cooperating importer represented about [17 - 27] % of the sweetcorn imports during the investigation period. A hearing took place with the importer associations FRUCOM and Waren-Verein.

• (354) The cooperating importer considered that sweetcorn retail products from the PRC will disappear from the market in case measures will be imposed. The importer argued that in short term, importers will lose competitiveness related to sales of non-EU sweetcorn and due to the lack of alternative sources of supply from other third country markets. As a result, turnover and profits will be reduced with a potential impact on the level of employment.

• (355) Considering that sweetcorn represented a relatively small share of the cooperating importer’s turnover and taking into account that the number of FTEs directly related to sweetcorn is relatively small, it is considered that importers would not be disproportionately affected by the imposition of measures. Moreover, the Commission considered that for future sales contracts, the importer will be able to pass on at least partially the price increases to their customers.

• (356) The coopering importer stressed the potentially existential threat of the retroactive collection of antidumping duties.

• (357) As described in recital 387, no decision of the retroactive collection of duties can be taken at this stage of the investigation.

• (358) In case no measures will be imposed, importers will continue their business of importing sweetcorn from the PRC and sell it to retailers, the catering industry or other users.

7.3.   Interest of retailers and consumers

• (359) On the date of the investigation, the Commission contacted several retailers of sweetcorn. No cooperation was obtained. Given the specification of the sweetcorn market, private consumers and other users of sweetcorn, such as catering firms are also impacted by the measures.

• (360) In case measures will be imposed, retailers and other users will face higher purchasing costs of sweetcorn due to the measures.

• (361) The cooperating importer criticised that the average purchase prices charged by retailers will lead to price increases of private consumers. The importer further considered that the catering sector will also be negatively affected by price increases due to the price pressure caused by increased costs and food prices and the lower willingness of customers to spend for out-of-home food. Considering that catering size canned sweetcorn is produced only in small volumes in the EU, the main supply will remain from the PRC at increased prices.

• (362) In case no measures will be imposed, retailers, private consumers and other users will likely benefit from lower prices.

• (363) The Commission considered that sweetcorn represented a very small share of the consumer shopping basket. Any impact from the imposition of anti-dumping duties on the financial situation of an average consumer is likely to be negligible.

• (364) In light of the non-cooperation of retailers and other users and considered that sweetcorn represents only a marginal percentage of their sales and limited shelf space in retail stores, it is provisionally concluded that they will not be substantially affected by the proposed measures.

7.4.   Interest of suppliers

• (365) As mentioned in recital 280, the main raw materials of sweetcorn are the raw sweetcorn and cans. Following the initiation of the investigation, one can producer association came forward. In addition, the complaint was supported by farmer associations.

• (366) In case measures will be imposed, sweetcorn suppliers will be able to maintain their business.

• (367) In the absence of measures, suppliers are likely to be impacted in case Union sweetcorn producers will have to reduce their production volume. Considering that farmers and can producers are closely linked to the sweetcorn business, a reduced sweetcorn production in the Union is very likely to affect also the business of the suppliers.

• (368) The cooperating importer criticised that in case measures will be imposed, there will be no guarantee that especially the main market players will forward their additional profit.

• (369) The Commission considered that suppliers will be more significantly impacted in case no measures will be imposed, as they would lose a certain share of their business. The claim was therefore rejected.

• (370) Considering the above, it is provisionally concluded that the imposition of measures will unlikely affect suppliers in a negative way.

7.5.   Reduction of competition on the Union market and risk of supply shortages

• (371) The cooperating importer Otto Frank criticised in its questionnaire reply the limited competition in case measures will be imposed due to the low number of EU producers, warning of an oligopoly market situation. The importer warned also that in case of future low crop yields, the availability of sweetcorn in the Union cannot be guaranteed.

• (372) The cooperating importer considered further that besides China, no other third country is able to meet the quality standard and price competitiveness that is required by the European market.

• (373) The Commission considered that the imposition of measures will not prevent access into the Union for imports on which measures were imposed, but rather the purpose of the measures is to eliminate the impact of distorted market conditions arising from the presence of dumped imports.

• (374) During the investigation period, the Union industry consisted of 11 producers or groups of producers. As shown in recital 262, the Union industry operated during the investigation period well below full capacity. It is therefore considered that the Union industry will be able to increase its production volume before reaching any capacity constraints. Furthermore, Union producers acquired a substantial level of sweetcorn stocks due to the imports from China that are also available for sale.

• (375) The cooperating importer considered that besides China, no other third country is able to meet the quality standard and price competitiveness that is required by the European market.

• (376) Given the above considerations, market shares and number of independent suppliers of the product concerned, the above claims concerning the issues on competition are rejected.

7.6.   Conclusion on Union interest

• (377) On the basis of the above, the Commission concluded that there were no compelling reasons that it was not in the Union interest to impose measures on imports of sweetcorn originating in the PRC at this stage of the investigation.

8. PROVISIONAL ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES

• (378) On the basis of the conclusions reached by the Commission on dumping, injury, causation, level of measures and Union interest, provisional measures should be imposed to prevent further injury being caused to the Union industry by the dumped imports.

• (379) Provisional anti-dumping measures should be imposed on imports of sweetcorn originating in China, in accordance with the lesser duty rule in Article 7(2) of the basic Regulation. The Commission compared the injury margins and the dumping margins in recital 342 above. The amount of the duties was set at the level of the lower of the dumping and the injury margins.

• (380) On the basis of the above, the provisional anti-dumping duty rates, expressed on the CIF Union border price, customs duty unpaid, should be as follows:

Country	Company	Provisional anti-dumping duty
China	Sunflower Group: — Sun Flower Food Industry (Xinfeng) Co., Ltd, Ganzhou City, China — Sunny Food Industry Co., Ltd, Ganzhou City, China	37,5  %
	Zhangzhou Tongfa Foods Industry Co., Ltd, Zhangzhou, China	54,3  %
	Other cooperating companies	48,1  %
	All other imports originating in country concerned	54,3  %

• (381) The individual company anti-dumping duty rates specified in this regulation were established on the basis of the findings of this investigation. Therefore, they reflect the situation found during this investigation with respect to these companies. These duty rates are exclusively applicable to imports of the product concerned originating in the country concerned and produced by the named legal entities. Imports of the product concerned 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 imports originating in country concerned’. They should not be subject to any of the individual anti-dumping duty rates.

• (382) To minimise 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 imports originating in country concerned’.

• (383) While presentation of this invoice is necessary for the customs authorities of the Member States to apply the individual rates of anti-dumping duty 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.

• (384) 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.

9. REGISTRATION

• (385) As mentioned in recital 3, the Commission made imports of the product concerned subject to registration. Registration took place with a view to possibly collecting duties retroactively under Article 10(4) of the basic Regulation.

• (386) In view of the findings at provisional stage, the registration of imports should be discontinued.

• (387) No decision on a possible retroactive application of anti-dumping measures can be taken at this stage of the proceeding.

10. INFORMATION AT PROVISIONAL STAGE

• (388) In accordance with Article 19a of the basic Regulation, the Commission informed interested parties about the planned imposition of provisional duties. This information was also made available to the general public via DG TRADE’s website. Interested parties were given three working days to provide comments on the accuracy of the calculations specifically disclosed to them.

• (389) Both the Sunflower group and the Tongfa group provided comments. Following comments from the Sunflower group regarding the accuracy of calculations for consumables and domestic transport costs for the determination of normal value, the Commission revised its dumping calculations for both groups. Other comments from both groups concerned the methodology used for the dumping calculations and will therefore be addressed, where appropriate, in the definitive stage of the investigation.

11. FINAL PROVISIONS

• (390) In the interests of sound administration, the Commission will invite the interested parties to submit written comments and/or to request a hearing with the Commission and/or the Hearing Officer in trade proceedings within a fixed deadline.

• (391) The findings concerning the imposition of provisional duties are provisional and may be amended at the definitive stage of the investigation,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Country of origin	Company	Provisional anti-dumping duty	TARIC additional code
People’s Republic of China	Sunflower Group: — Sun Flower Food Industry (Xinfeng) Co., Ltd, Ganzhou City, China — Sunny Food Industry Co., Ltd, Ganzhou City, China	37,5  %	89SJ
	Zhangzhou Tongfa Foods Industry Co., Ltd, Zhangzhou, China	54,3  %	89SK
	Other cooperating companies listed in the Annex	48,1  %
	All other imports originating in the People’s Republic of China	54,3  %	8999

Article 2

Article 3

Article 4

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, 6 August 2025.

For the Commission

The President

Ursula VON DER LEYEN

13 May 2021.

13 February 2023.

7 September 2021.

25 February 2024.

https://doi.org/10.1787/eco_surveys-chn-2019-en (accessed on 12 June 2025).

ANNEX

People’s Republic of China cooperating exporting producers not sampled

Country	Name	TARIC additional code
PRC	Anshan N&M Foods Co., Ltd.	89SL
PRC	Fujian Golden Promise Food Technology Co., Ltd.	89SM
PRC	Fujian Haishan Foods Co., Ltd.	89SN
PRC	Fujian Lucheng Food Co., Ltd.	89SO
PRC	Fujian Xingguang Foods Co., Ltd.	89SP
PRC	Fujian Yuxing Fruit & Vegetable Foodstuff Development Co., Ltd.	89SQ
PRC	Guangdong Zhicheng Food Co., Ltd	89SR
PRC	Guilin Risheng Foods Co., Ltd	89SS
PRC	HEBEI PENGDA FOOD CO., LTD	89ST
PRC	Hebei Shuangsheng Agricultural Technology Co., Ltd.	89SU
PRC	HEZE SANQING FOOD CO., LTD.	89SV
PRC	Jieyang Chengfeng Industrial Co., Ltd.	89SW
PRC	Jieyang Yuxiu Industrial Co., Ltd.	89SX
PRC	Nanjing County Xingguang Canned Food Co., Ltd.	89SY
PRC	SHANDONG SANGONGJU FOOD CO., LTD.	89SZ
PRC	XINFENG RUNFENG FOODS CO., LTD.	89TA
PRC	Zhangzhou Gangchang Canned Foods Co., Ltd.	89TB
PRC	Zhangzhou Jiawei Foods Co., Ltd.	89TC
PRC	Zhangzhou Tianbaolong Food Co., Ltd.	89TD
PRC	Zhangzhou Xiangcheng Shunxing Canned Food Co., Ltd.	89TE

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1723/oj

ISSN 1977-0677 (electronic edition)