Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1890 of 18 September 2025 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of threaded tube or pipe cast fittings, of malleable cast iron and spheroidal graphite cast iron originating in the People’s Republic of China and Thailand following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council

	2021	2022	2023	Review Investigation period
Number of employees	1 226	1 217	1 133	1 039
Index	100	99	92	85
Productivity (tonnes/employee)	24	21	20	20
Index	100	86	81	83
Source: questionnaire replies of the sampled Union producers	Source: questionnaire replies of the sampled Union producers	Source: questionnaire replies of the sampled Union producers	Source: questionnaire replies of the sampled Union producers	Source: questionnaire replies of the sampled Union producers

• (185) Regarding employment, there is a clear declining trend in employment numbers from 2021 to the end of the RIP., with a total reduction of approximately 15 % from 2021. From 1 226 employees in 2021, the workforce was reduced to 1 039 employees in the review investigation period.

• (186) Moreover, the data indicated that productivity measured in tonnes per employee saw a noticeable decline during the period considered; overall falling by 17 %. In particular, from 24 tonnes per employee in 2021 the productivity dropped to 20 tonnes per employee in the review investigation period.

5.5.2.5.   Magnitude of the dumping margin and recovery from past dumping

• (187) Both the Chinese and Thai dumping margins were significantly above the de minimis level. The effect of the magnitude of the actual margins of dumping on the Union industry was substantial, given the volume and prices of imports from China and Thailand.

• (188) Continuous unfair pricing by exporters from China and Thailand made it also impossible for the Union industry to recover from the past dumping practices.

5.5.3.   Microeconomic indicators

5.5.3.1.   Prices and factors affecting prices

• (189) The weighted average unit sales prices of the sampled Union producers to unrelated customers in the Union developed over the period considered as follows:

Table 9

Sales prices and cost of production in the Union (EUR/tonne)

	2021	2022	2023	Review Investigation period
Average unit sales price in the Union on the total market	[4 100 – 4 300 ]	[5 100 - 5 300 ]	[5 600 - 5 800 ]	[5 600 - 5 800 ]
Index	100	122	135	136
Unit cost of production	[4 300 - 4 500 ]	[5 500 – 5 700 ]	[5 750 - 5 950 ]	[5 800 - 6 000 ]
Index	100	128	134	135
Source: questionnaire replies of the sampled Union producers	Source: questionnaire replies of the sampled Union producers	Source: questionnaire replies of the sampled Union producers	Source: questionnaire replies of the sampled Union producers	Source: questionnaire replies of the sampled Union producers

• (190) The evolution of average unit sales prices in the Union from 2021 to the end of the RIP. showed a clear upward trend. Starting at [EUR 4 100 – EUR 4 300] in 2021, prices rose substantially in 2022 to [EUR 5 100 - EUR 5 300] and continued increasing in 2023 to [EUR 5 600 - EUR 5 800], with a slight further rise during the review investigation period. Overall, the average unit sales prices rose by 36 % during the period considered.

• (191) In line with the trend of Union sales prices, the unit cost of production also experienced a significant rise over the same period. The costs increased by 28 % in 2022, by a further 6 percentage points in 2023, and marginally increasing further during the review investigation period. Overall, the production costs increased by 35 % during the period considered.

5.5.3.2.   Labour costs

• (192) The average labour costs of the sampled Union producers developed over the period considered as follows:

Table 10

Average labour costs per employee

	2021	2022	2023	Review Investigation period
Average labour costs per employee (EUR)	[36 000 – 37 000 ]	[38 000 – 39 000 ]	[43 000 – 44 000 ]	[47 000 – 48 000 ]
Index	100	106	119	131
Source: questionnaire reply of the sampled Union producers	Source: questionnaire reply of the sampled Union producers	Source: questionnaire reply of the sampled Union producers	Source: questionnaire reply of the sampled Union producers	Source: questionnaire reply of the sampled Union producers

• (193) Regarding the labour costs, the data indicated a consistent upward trend in average labour costs per employee over the period from 2021 to the end of the RIP.. Starting at [EUR 36 000 - EUR 37 000] in 2021, the costs increased by 6 % in 2022, followed by a significant rise by 13 percentage points in 2023, and finally reaching [EUR 47 000 - EUR 48 000] during the review period. During the period considered the labour costs increased by 31 %.

5.5.3.3.   Stocks

• (194) Stock levels of the sampled Union producers developed over the period considered as follows:

Table 11

Stocks

	2021	2022	2023	Review Investigation period
Closing stocks (tonnes)	[2 500 -2 800 ]	[3 300 – 3 600 ]	[3 000 – 3 300 ]	[3 100 – 3 400 ]
Index	100	130	119	123
Source: verified questionnaire reply of the sampled Union producers	Source: verified questionnaire reply of the sampled Union producers	Source: verified questionnaire reply of the sampled Union producers	Source: verified questionnaire reply of the sampled Union producers	Source: verified questionnaire reply of the sampled Union producers

• (195) Regarding the closing stocks data, the data indicated a fluctuating trend in closing stock levels over the period from 2021 to the end of the RIP.. In 2022, there was an increase in closing stocks, rising by 30 % in relation to 2021. However, 2023 saw a reduction by 11 percentage points with a recovery by 4 percentage points in the review investigation period.

5.5.3.4.   Profitability, cash flow, investments, return on investments and ability to raise capital

• (196) Profitability, cash flow, investments and return on investments of the sampled Union producers developed over the period considered as follows:

Table 12

Profitability, cash flow, investments and return on investments

	2021	2022	2023	Review Investigation period
Profitability of sales in the Union to unrelated customers (% of sales turnover)	[-1  %-1  %]	[-4  %- -2 %]	[-4  %- -2 %]	[-3  %- -1 %]
Index	100	-3 313	-3 525	-3 088
Cash flow (EUR)	[4 700 000 – 5 000 000 ]	[-4 350 000 - -4 050 000 ]	[6 600 000 – 6 900 000 ]	[5 000 000 – 5 300 000 ]
Index	100	-87	139	106
Investments (EUR)	[3 750 000 – 3 850 000 ]	[3 750 000 – 3 850 000 ]	[3 700 000 – 3 800 000 ]	[4 100 000 – 4 200 000 ]
Index	100	100	98	109
Return on investments	[14  %-18  %]	[14  %-18  %]	[-4  %- -2 %]	[-3  %-1  %]
Index	100	99	-13	-4
Source: verified questionnaire reply of the sampled Union producers	Source: verified questionnaire reply of the sampled Union producers	Source: verified questionnaire reply of the sampled Union producers	Source: verified questionnaire reply of the sampled Union producers	Source: verified questionnaire reply of the sampled Union producers

• (197) The Commission established the profitability of the sampled Union producers by expressing the pre-tax net profit of the sales of the like product to unrelated customers in the Union as a percentage of the turnover of those sales.

• (198) The data illustrates challenging trends in profitability, cash flow, investments, and return on investments from 2021 to the end of the RIP.. Profitability started around breakeven in 2021 but worsened in 2022 to [-4 % - -2 %] and stayed at the same level in 2023, before slightly improving during the review investigation period to a still lossmaking level of [-3 % - -1 %]. The negative indices associated with profitability indicate deteriorating performance compared to 2021.

• (199) The net cash flow is the ability of the Union producers to self-finance their activities. The trend in net cash flow fluctuated significantly during the period considered: it plunged to a negative amount in in 2022 of [EUR -4 350 000 - EUR -4 050 000], reflecting significant cash outflows in relation to 2021. However, in 2023, the net cash flow recovered substantially to [EUR 6 600 000 – EUR 6 900 000], before stabilizing during the review investigation period to [EUR 5 000 000 - EUR 5 300 000].

• (200) Investment amounts remained relatively stable across the years, at [EUR 3 750 000 - EUR 3 850 000] in 2021 and experiencing slight fluctuations, ending at increasing to [EUR 4 100 000 - EUR 4 200 000] during the review investigation period, i.e. suggesting a moderate increase by 9 % in investment activity during the period considered. These investments were found to be mainly related to compliance with labour and environmental legislation.

• (201) The return on investments is the profit in percentage of the net book value of investments. It started positively in 2021 at [14 % - 18 %]; held steady in 2022; then dramatically fell in 2023 to [-4 % - -2 %] and stabilised in the review investigation period to [-3 % - 1 %], reflecting sharply reduced investment returns despite consistent investment levels. Overall, the data pointed out to financial instability, with prolonged periods of unprofitability, fluctuating cash flow, steady investments, and declining returns on investments, suggesting the Union producers faced significant operational challenges throughout the period considered.

5.6.   Conclusion on injury

• (202) Most injury indicators showed a negative trend during the period considered.

• (203) The production of the Union industry declined over the period considered. This decline was attributable to a reduction in sales on the Union market. Overall, production declined by 29 %, while sales decreased by 30 % over the period considered. This decline was reflected in a loss of market share, which fell from 72 % in 2021 to 64 % in the review investigation period, representing a total decrease of 8 percentage points. This loss in market share benefited imports from China and Thailand over the period considered.

• (204) The Union industry was unable to compensate for the lost sales volumes in the Union market through increased exports, as exports declined by 20 % in the period considered.

• (205) Production capacity of the Union industry remained stable over the period considered. Production capacity utilisation declined by 29 % in the period considered in line with an equivalent decrease in production.

• (206) Employment decreased by 15 % over the period considered. Productivity developed in line with the changes in production and employment, i.e. it decreased by 17 % over the period considered.

• (207) The average cost of production increased significantly in 2022 (by 28 % from 2021) and peaked in the review investigation period (by 35 % from 2021).

• (208) The average price of Union producers increased by 36 % over the period considered, to match the increase in production costs.

• (209) The profitability of the Union industry declined over the period considered, decreasing significantly in 2022 and 2023 and slightly improving in the review investigation period, with negative indices indicating a decline in performance compared to 2021.

• (210) On the basis of the above, the Commission concluded that the Union industry suffered material injury within the meaning of Article 3(5) of the basic Regulation during the review investigation period despite the anti-dumping measures in place.

6. CAUSATION

• (211) In accordance with Article 3(6) of the basic Regulation, the Commission examined whether the dumped imports from the countries concerned caused material injury to the Union industry. In accordance with Article 3(7) of the basic Regulation, the Commission also examined whether other known factors could at the same time have injured the Union industry. The Commission ensured that any possible injury caused by factors other than the dumped imports from the countries concerned was not attributed to the dumped imports. These factors are: the imports from countries other than China and Thailand, the export performance of the Union industry, consumption decline and increase in cost.

6.1.   Effects of the dumped imports

• (212) The Commission examined whether there was a causal link between the dumped imports and the injury suffered by the Union industry. During the period considered the imports of the dumped like product from China and Thailand increased their market share. China’s market share was 19 % in the review investigation period in comparison to 18 % in 2021; while Thailand’s market share was 4 % in the review investigation period in comparison to 3 % in 2021. This increase occurred despite the anti-dumping measures in place and the significantly declined consumption in the Union by 22 %.

• (213) The absolute quantity of the Chinese imports was reduced by 15 %, i.e. at a lower level in comparison to the decreasing Union consumption. The absolute quantity of the Thai imports was increased by 10 %. At the same time, the quantity of sales of the Union producers was reduced by 30 % despite the anti-dumping measures in place.

• (214) The import prices from China increased by 17 % during the period considered, while the import prices from Thailand experienced a decrease by 1 % in the same period. In contrast, the Union industry’s sales prices increased by 36 % during the period considered.

6.2.   Effects of other factors

• (215) The injury analysis showed that Chinese and Thai imports into the Union increased their market share despite existing anti-dumping measures and declining Union consumption. This coincided in time with the deterioration of the Union industry’s financial performance indicators, like a decrease in profitability, resulting in significant losses during the period considered. The increase in market share of the Chinese and Thai imports was at the expense of the Union industry, which lost sales volume and market share.

• (216) 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.

• (217) The Union market contracted by 22 % during the period considered, attributed to slower economic growth and high energy prices. However, the Union producers' market share decreased disproportionally compared to gains by Chinese, Thai, and other imports.

• (218) Additionally, the Union producers faced a significant 35 % increase in production costs. Even though they managed to raise their sales prices proportionately they were not able to cover costs throughout most of the period considered.

• (219) Aside from having increased imports from China and Thailand, this was mainly caused by imports from other third countries, notably from Indonesia, which increased significantly during the period considered (from 3,9 % to 7,2 % market share) at undercutting price levels.

• (220) Moreover, the Union producers' export performance showed a 20 % decline over the period considered. Since the export sales accounted for only 9 % of their total sales, there was a negative but limited impact on the industry's injury from reduced exports.

• (221) For this reason, the Commission concluded that the dumped imports from China and Thailand contributed to the material injury to the Union industry during the review investigation period; however, other factors, in particular imports from Indonesia and a deteriorating export performance of the Union industry, might have had also an effect on the injurious situation of the Union industry. Therefore, the Commission decided to further assess whether injury caused by the dumped imports from China and Thailand would likely continue if measures were allowed to lapse.

7. LIKELIHOOD OF CONTINUATION OF INJURY

• (222) The Commission concluded in recital (210) that the Union industry suffered material injury during the review investigation period. Therefore, the Commission assessed in accordance with Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation whether there would be a likelihood of continuation or recurrence of injury caused by the dumped imports from China and Thailand if the measures were allowed to lapse.

• (223) In this respect the following elements were analysed by the Commission:

• — the production capacity and spare capacity in China and Thailand; and

• — the attractiveness of the Union market.

7.1.   Production capacity and spare capacity in China and Thailand

• (224) As shown in sections 4.1.1 and 4.2.1 above, the Commission relied on information from the request and the previous expiry review and found that both China and Thailand had significant production capacities that could be directed to the Union market in even larger quantities at dumped prices if anti-dumping measures ceased.

7.2.   Attractiveness of the Union market

• (225) As shown in sections 4.1.2 and 4.2.2 above, the Commission concluded that due to the persistent presence of dumped imports from China and Thailand and their increased market share in the Union market during the period considered, the Union market remains attractive to producers from China and Thailand.

7.3.   Undercutting

• (226) The average import prices into the Union from China and Thailand during the review investigation period were significantly lower than the average sales price of the Union industry. As set out in recital (166), during the review investigation period Chinese and Thai prices undercut the Union industry’s prices with 26 % and 48 %, respectively, with the anti-dumping duties paid.

• (227) If measures were allowed to lapse, the level of undercutting would increase to 47 % for Chinese imports and 55 % for Thai imports.

7.4.   Conclusion

• (228) In view of the above, the Commission concluded that the repeal of the measures would in all likelihood result in a significant increase of dumped imports from China and Thailand at injurious price levels, and therefore further aggravating the injury suffered by the Union industry. As a consequence, the viability of the Union industry would be at serious risk.

8. UNION INTEREST

• (229) 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.

8.1.   Interest of the Union industry

• (230) The investigation showed that should the measures expire; this would likely have a significant negative effect on the Union industry. The Union industry's situation would quickly deteriorate in terms of lower sales volumes and sales prices resulting in a strong decrease in profitability. The continuation of measures would allow the Union industry to fully exploit its potential on the Union market that is a level-playing field.

• (231) Therefore, maintaining the anti-dumping measures in force is in the interest of the Union industry.

8.2.   Interest of unrelated importers

• (232) The Commission contacted all known unrelated importers and invited them to cooperate in this investigation. No importer cooperated.

• (233) In the original investigation it was found that, given the importers' profits and sources of supply, any negative impact of the imposition of measures on importers, if any, would not be disproportionate.

• (234) In the current investigation, as it was the case in the previous expiry review, there is no evidence available to the Commission suggesting the opposite, and it can thus accordingly be confirmed that the measures currently in force had no substantial negative effect on the financial situation of importers and that the continuation of the measures would not unduly affect them.

8.3.   Interest of users

• (235) The Commission contacted all known users in this investigation and invited to cooperate. No user cooperated.

• (236) In the current investigation there is no evidence on file suggesting that the measures in force affected users in any negative way. The share of the product under review on the total costs of the new construction or installation is limited.

• (237) On that basis it is confirmed that the measures currently in force had no substantial negative effect on the financial situation of users and that the continuation of the measures would not unduly affect them.

8.4.   Conclusion on Union interest

• (238) On the basis of the above, the Commission concluded that there were no compelling reasons under Article 21 of the basic Regulation that it would not be in the interest of the Union to maintain the existing measures on imports of threaded tube or pipe cast fittings, of malleable cast iron and spheroidal graphite cast iron originating in China and Thailand.

9. ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES

• (239) On the basis of the conclusions reached by the Commission on continuation of dumping, continuation of injury and Union interest, the anti-dumping measures on threaded tube or pipe cast fittings, of malleable cast iron and spheroidal graphite cast iron originating in China and Thailand should be maintained.

• (240) 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 and exemptions from extensions of the measures after anti-circumvention investigations.

• (241) The application of individual anti-dumping duties or exemptions 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’.

• (242) 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.

• (243) 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 or exemption is justified, in compliance with customs law.

• (244) Should the exports by one of the companies benefiting from lower individual duty rates increase significantly in quantity after the imposition of the measures concerned, such an increase in quantity 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 examine the need for the removal of individual duty rate(s) and the consequent imposition of a country-wide duty.

• (245) The individual company anti-dumping duty rates specified in this Regulation are exclusively applicable to imports of the product under review originating in China and Thailand 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 imports’. They should not be subject to any of the individual anti-dumping duty rates.

• (246) A company may request the application of these individual anti-dumping duty rates if it changes subsequently the name of its entity. The request must be addressed to the Commission ³⁹. 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.

• (247) 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. No comments were received.

• (248) 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.

• (249) In view of Article 109 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council ⁴⁰ 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.

• (250) 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

Country	Company	Anti-dumping duty	TARIC additional code
China	Hebei Jianzhi Casting Group Ltd	57,8  %	B335
	Jinan Meide Casting Co., Ltd	36,0  %	B336
	Qingdao Madison Industrial Co., Ltd	24,6  %	B337
	Other cooperating companies listed in Annex	41,1  %
	All other imports originating in China	57,8  %	B999
Thailand	BIS Pipe Fitting Industry Co. Ltd	15,5  %	B347
	Siam Fittings Co., Ltd	14,9  %	B348
	All other imports originating in Thailand	15,5  %	B999

• (a) it did not export the goods described in Article 1(1) originating in China or Thailand during the period between 1 January and 31 December 2011 (‘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 China or Thailand 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, 18 September 2025.

For the Commission

The President

Ursula VON DER LEYEN

ANNEX

Chinese cooperating exporting producers not sampled

Company Name	TARIC additional code
Hebei XinJia Casting Co., Ltd	B338
Shijiazhuang Donghuan Malleable Iron Castings Co., Ltd	B339
Linyi Oriental Pipe Fittings Co., Ltd	B340
China Shanxi Taigu County Jingu Cast Co., Ltd	B341
Yutian Yongli Casting Factory Co., Ltd	B342
Langfang Pannext Pipe Fitting Co., Ltd	B343
Tangshan Daocheng Casting Co., Ltd	B344
Tangshan Fangyuan Malleable Steel Co., Ltd	B345
Taigu Tongde Casting Co., Ltd	B346

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1890/oj

ISSN 1977-0677 (electronic edition)