Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2146 of 22 October 2025 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of bicycles originating in the People’s Republic of China as extended to imports of bicycles consigned from Indonesia, Malaysia, Sri Lanka, Tunisia, Cambodia, Pakistan and the Philippines, whether declared as originating in these countries or not, following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council

• (157) Therefore, continuous unfair pricing by exporters from China made it also impossible for the Union industry to recover from the past dumping practices.

6.5.3.   Microeconomic indicators

6.5.3.1.   Prices and factors affecting prices

• (158) 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/piece)

	2021	2022	2023	Review Investigation period
Average unit sales price in the Union	307	368	554	537
Index	100	120	180	175
Unit cost of production	153	193	274	268
Index	100	127	179	176
Source: Questionnaire replies from the sampled Union producers.	Source: Questionnaire replies from the sampled Union producers.	Source: Questionnaire replies from the sampled Union producers.	Source: Questionnaire replies from the sampled Union producers.	Source: Questionnaire replies from the sampled Union producers.

• (159) The sampled Union producers have a large product range that changes from season to season, and so comparisons between the years in terms of prices were difficult. However, the data showed that sales prices per year remained higher than the unit cost of production in the same year. It should be noted that the unit cost of production provided is for all sampled Union producers, including the tollers, while the unit sales price has been only given for the sampled Union producers that have direct unrelated sales.

6.5.3.2.   Labour costs

• (160) 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)	22 160	19 120	21 309	20 551
Index	100	86	96	93
Source: Questionnaire replies from the sampled Union producers.	Source: Questionnaire replies from the sampled Union producers.	Source: Questionnaire replies from the sampled Union producers.	Source: Questionnaire replies from the sampled Union producers.	Source: Questionnaire replies from the sampled Union producers.

• (161) Labour costs remained stable and even slightly decreased for the sampled Union producers during the period considered.

6.5.3.3.   Stocks

• (162) 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 (pieces)	113 888	165 442	213 805	137 905
Index	100	145	188	121
Closing stocks as a percentage of production	4 %	6 %	11 %	8 %
Index	100	169	309	211
Source: Questionnaire replies from the sampled Union producers.	Source: Questionnaire replies from the sampled Union producers.	Source: Questionnaire replies from the sampled Union producers.	Source: Questionnaire replies from the sampled Union producers.	Source: Questionnaire replies from the sampled Union producers.

• (163) Stocks of finished bicycles from the sampled Union producers was not considered as a reliable indicator, as some operators producing under a tolling agreement do not hold stocks themselves. The indicator therefore reflects those companies who sell under their own name only. However, the level of closing stocks as a percentage of production has doubled over the period considered, showing an increase in stock levels.

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

• (164) 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)	4 %	3 %	3 %	2 %
Index	100	95	80	53
Cash flow (EUR)	-18 446 738	-19 355 298	1 643 383	19 482 385
Index	- 100	- 105	9	106
Investments (EUR)	7 355 498	7 729 029	3 043 340	2 317 929
Index	100	105	41	32
Return on investments	45 %	43 %	38 %	26 %
Index	100	96	84	57
Source: questionnaire replies from the sampled Union producers.	Source: questionnaire replies from the sampled Union producers.	Source: questionnaire replies from the sampled Union producers.	Source: questionnaire replies from the sampled Union producers.	Source: questionnaire replies from the sampled Union producers.

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

• (166) However, the indicator only reflected two of the four sampled Union producers who had sales to unrelated parties. Those sampled producers who produce under tolling agreement had no sales to unrelated parties and the first unrelated sale would be the retail sale of each bicycle to the final customer.

• (167) The profitability halved over the period considered, from 4 % to 2 %. This showed that the Union industry was not able to make a healthy profit during the period considered, aggravated by the drop in consumption and sales throughout this period.

• (168) The net cash flow is the ability of the Union producers to self-finance their activities. The trend in net cash flow developed positively during the period considered from a very low point in 2021.

• (169) Although initially the sampled producers were able to make investments, including brand new production facilities for the assembly of all types of bicycles, the level of investments showed a drastic drop after 2022.

• (170) The return on investments shows the profit that has been generated by the sampled Union producers as a ratio of the net book value of their investments. Return remained positive throughout the period considered but followed the negative trend in profitability and sales quantities.

6.6.   Conclusion on injury

• (171) Although imports from China went down by 44 % in a decreasing market consumption context, its market share remained stable over the period considered and was significant with 6,5 % during the review investigation period, while imports from all other third countries decreased more significantly, resulting in a decrease in their market share of 7 percentage points over the period considered.

• (172) Imports from China were significantly undercutting the prices of the Union industry, thereby causing price pressure on the Union market.

• (173) This caused most injury indicators to show a negative trend during the period considered.

• (174) The production of the Union industry declined over the period considered. This decline was attributable to a reduction in consumption on the Union market by 42 %. Overall, production declined by 38 %, while sales decreased by 35 % over the period considered.

• (175) Since the decrease in consumption was larger than the loss in sales of the Union industry, the Union industry has been able to increase its market share by 8 percentage points over the period considered to 70 % in the review investigation period.

• (176) However, the indicators also showed that profit remained low, between 2 % and 4 %, as price increases were matched by cost increases. Return on investment also fell dramatically as did productivity. Additionally, employment followed the negative trend with a loss of 14 %.

• (177) On the basis of the above, the Commission concluded that the Union industry did suffer material injury within the meaning of Article 3(5) of the basic Regulation during the review investigation period.

7. CAUSATION

• (178) In accordance with Article 3(6) of the basic Regulation, the Commission examined whether the dumped imports from China caused material injury to the Union industry.

• (179) 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 China was not attributed to the dumped imports. These factors include the drop in demand during the period considered and imports from other countries.

7.1.   Effects of the imports from China

• (180) The Commission examined whether there was a causal link between the dumped imports and the injury suffered by the Union industry.

• (181) During the period considered the market share of dumped imports from China remained stable at around 3 %, despite the anti-dumping measures in place and Union consumption declining by a significant 42 %.

• (182) Import prices of dumped bicycles from China increased from 2021 to 2022 by 48 % before dropping down to their 2021 level during the period considered, while prices of the Union industry increased by 75 %. However, this has to be set against the cost increase of 76 % of the Union industry. This showed that Chinese imports could remain even more competitive than before.

• (183) Chinese dumped prices remained extremely low and were able to massively undercut the Union industry’s prices. Price undercutting was present for both Chinese imports on which a dumping duty was paid and imports that were subject to a 0 % duty or which were excluded from the measures, therefore causing price pressure on the Union market.

7.2.   Effects of other factors

• (184) The injury analysis showed that dumped Chinese imports and those subject to no duty or a 0 % duty into the Union kept their market share despite existing anti-dumping measures and declining Union consumption at heavily undercutting price levels. This coincided in time with the deterioration of the Union industry’s financial performance indicators, like a decrease in profitability and a decrease in return on investments.

• (185) 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.

7.2.1.   Imports from third countries

• (186) The quantity of imports from all other third countries was significant but showed a significant decrease over the period considered by 7 percentage points, as shown in recital 138.

• (187) These imports were partially made at prices undercutting the Union industry, especially with regard prices from Bangladesh which followed the price level of the Chinese imports.

• (188) Therefore, even if these imports decreasing over the period considered might have contributed to the injurious situation of the Union industry, they did not attenuate the causal link between the injury and the Chinese exports.

7.2.2.   Export performance of the Union industry

• (189) The quantity 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	Review Investigation period
Export quantity to unrelated parties (pieces)	18 772	19 222	19 409	16 228
Index	100	103	104	87
Average price (EUR/piece)	613	692	969	1 130
Index	100	113	158	184
Source: questionnaire replies from the sampled Union producers.	Source: questionnaire replies from the sampled Union producers.	Source: questionnaire replies from the sampled Union producers.	Source: questionnaire replies from the sampled Union producers.	Source: questionnaire replies from the sampled Union producers.

• (190) While the Union industry’s export performance remained stable until 2023, a significant drop of 17 percentage points is shown from 2023 to the review investigation period. Like the sales on the Union market, the average price of the export sales increased in line with the increase in cost of production.

• (191) However, the quantities sold for export by the sampled Union producers are limited and represent around 2 % of their sales on the Union market and could therefore not have had a significant effect on the economic situation of the Union industry.

7.2.3.   Union demand for bicycles

• (192) The Union demand for bicycles, shown in recital 125, gave a clear and sharp downward trend. This downward trend was caused by an increased interest in electric bikes on the one hand, and a fall in demand after the end of the pandemic period. However, the Union market remained one of the biggest markets worldwide.

• (193) The Commission considered that the reduction in demand contributed to the injury to the Union industry, even though the Union industry was able to gain some market share in this declining market. Therefore, the reduction in demand did not attenuate the causal link between the Chinese exports to the Union and the injury suffered by the Union industry.

7.3.   Conclusion on causation

• (194) On the basis of the above, the Commission concluded that the dumped imports from China caused material injury to the Union industry. However, other factors, in particular the decreased consumption and imports from other third countries, might also have had 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 would likely continue if measures were allowed to lapse.

8. LIKELIHOOD OF CONTINUATION OF INJURY

• (195) The Commission concluded in recital 194 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 of injury caused by the dumped imports from China if the measures against were allowed to lapse. The Commission examined the likely price levels of imports from China in the absence of anti-dumping measures and their impact on the Union industry, attractiveness of the Union market, production capacity and spare capacity in China and circumvention practices.

8.1.   Price level of imports without anti-dumping measures

• (196) The average import prices into the Union from China during the review investigation period were significantly lower than the average sales price of the Union industry. As set out in recital 135, during the review investigation period Chinese prices undercut the Union industry’s prices with 50 %, with the anti-dumping duties paid.

• (197) If measures were allowed to lapse, the level of undercutting would increase to 65 %.

• (198) Prices would likely even be lower considering that competition would increase between Chinese imports that are currently subject to an anti-dumping duty and those that currently pay no duty.

• (199) Therefore, the Commission concluded that prices on the Union market would be likely to fall without anti-dumping measures in force, thereby causing injury to the Union industry.

8.2.   Attractiveness of the Union market

• (200) As set out in recitals 115 to 119 above the Union market remained attractive to Chinese exporters, which would suggest that in the absence of duties exports to the Union would increase, causing further injury to the Union industry.

8.3.   Production capacity and spare capacity

• (201) As set out in recitals 109 to 114 above all the evidence on file showed that the Chinese have the capacity to supply the Union market and spare capacity to put to use to increase their supply to the Union, at dumped prices that would cause injury.

8.4.   Circumvention

• (202) Ever since the imposition of measures in 1993 the Commission has conducted anti-circumvention investigations on consignment of bicycles to the Union, and extended measures as follows to:

• — bicycle parts imported from China

• — bicycles consigned from Indonesia, Malaysia, Sri Lanka and Tunisia

• — bicycles consigned from Cambodia, Pakistan and the Philippines ⁶⁹.

• (203) Such recurring circumvention from different third countries clearly showed the interest of Chinese companies to supply the Union market.

8.5.   Conclusion

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

9. UNION INTEREST

• (205) 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, wholesalers, retailers, and consumers.

• (206) Measures have been in force since 1993 and in every expiry review the Commission found that extension of the measures have not been against the interest of the Union.

9.1.   Interest of the Union industry

• (207) EBMA represented more around half of the Union industry. The investigation showed that the Union industry is still in a fragile situation. Should the measures expire, the situation of the Union industry would quickly deteriorate resulting again in losses in the short term and the gradual elimination of the whole industry in the long term.

• (208) A significant part of Union production is sub-contracted to tollers, who made significant investments in the product under review during the period considered. Considering that the tollers are heavily dependent on the level of activity of their business partners, if measures were repealed their economic situation would also quickly deteriorate.

• (209) On this basis, it was concluded that the continuation of the measures on imports from China was in the interest of the Union industry as it would allow them to stabilise their position in the market and secure their employment.

9.2.   Interest of unrelated importers

• (210) The Commission invited all unrelated importers to participate in the investigation and contacted all known importers. As in the last review investigation, none of them came forward or cooperated in any way in the investigation.

• (211) The purpose of anti-dumping measures is not to prevent imports, but to restore fair trade and ensure that imports are not made at dumped and injurious prices.

• (212) The investigation found that imports accounting for over 14 % market share in the review investigation period came from countries that were not subject to anti-dumping measures.

• (213) Statistics from Eurostat and data submitted to the Commission under Article 14(6) of the basic Regulation also show that imports are entering the Union through companies with exemptions from the extension of measures, giving importers access to imports from these countries as follows:

Table 14

Imports from companies with exemptions

Country	Market share	Imports from companies with exemption
Indonesia	1 %	97 %
Sri Lanka	1 %	99 %
Tunisia	1 %	86 %
Cambodia	8 %	100 %
The Philippines	< 1 %	98 %

• (214) As a consequence, the Commission considered that importers could still source bicycles from a wide range of countries.

9.3.   Interest of users

• (215) The Commission asked all users of the product under review to come forward and make their views known. No users or consumer associations came forward or cooperated with the investigation.

• (216) In the current investigation there is no evidence on file suggesting that the measures in force affected users in any negative way.

• (217) 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.

9.4.   Conclusion on Union interest

• (218) 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 bicycles originating in China.

10. ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES

• (219) 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 bicycles from China should be maintained.

• (220) 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.

• (221) 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(6) of this regulation. Until such invoice is presented, imports should be subject to the anti-dumping duty applicable to ‘all other imports originating in China’.

• (222) 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(6) 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.

• (223) 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.

• (224) 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 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 originating in China’. They should not be subject to any of the individual anti-dumping duty rates.

• (225) 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 ⁷⁰. 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.

• (226) 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.

• (227) 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.

• (228) 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.

• (229) In view of Article 109 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council ⁷¹ 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.

• (230) 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

Company	Anti-dumping duty	TARIC additional code
Zhejiang Baoguilai Vehicle Co. Ltd	19,2 %	B772
Oyama Technology (Nantong) Co. Ltd	0 %	B773
Ideal (Dongguan) Bike Co., Ltd	0 %	B774
All other imports originating in the People’s Republic of China, except Giant (China) Co. Ltd. - TARIC additional code C329	48,5 %	B999

Country	Company	TARIC additional code
Indonesia	P.T. Insera Sena	B765
	PT Wijaya Indonesia Makmur Bicycle Industries (Wim Cycle)	B766
	P.T. Terang Dunia Internusa (United Bike)	B767
Sri Lanka	Asiabike Industrial Limited	B768
	BSH Ventures (Private) Limited	B769
	Samson Bikes (Pvt) Ltd	B770
Tunisia	Euro Cycles SA	B771
	Look Design System SA	C206

Country	Company	TARIC additional code
Cambodia	A and J (Cambodia) Co., Ltd	C035
	Smart Tech (Cambodia) Co., Ltd	C036
	Speedtech Industrial Co. Ltd	C037
	Bestway Industrial Co. Ltd	C037
The Philippines	Procycle Industrial Inc	C038

The definitive anti-dumping duty referred to in Article 2(1) of Regulation (EC) No 71/97 shall be the ‘all other companies’ anti-dumping duty imposed by Article 1(2) above.

• (a) it did not export the goods described in Article 1(1) originating in the People’s Republic of China during the period between 1 October 1990 to 30 September 1991 (‘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 People’s Republic of China 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

‘Oyama Technology (Jiangsu) Co., Ltd	B773’

is replaced by:

‘Oyama Technology (Nantong) Co., Ltd	B773’

Article 3

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, 22 October 2025.

For the Commission

The President

Ursula VON DER LEYEN

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/product/page/nrg_pc_205__custom_15374727.

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/2146/oj

ISSN 1977-0677 (electronic edition)