EBMA files an anti dumping complaint on chinese e-bikes.

[Wisper Bikes]

Some great, news from our group's solicitors.

"EBMA hereby withdraws its request for registration of imports of e-bikes from China.

All the best, David

 

[Woosh]

The first victory........

I take my hat off to you Sir!

 

[flecc]

Brilliant news David, first reward for your part in this fight.
.

 

[Wisper Bikes]

Thanks chaps! Nowhere near a complete victory but a small battle won. It basically means that imports before 20th of July should not now attract ADT. The EU still needs to ratify.

 

[Wisper Bikes]

EBMA Requests Cancellation of E-Bike Import Registration
Laws & Regulations

BRUSSELS, Belgium – In a letter, dated 8 October, the European Bicycle Manufacturers’ Association (EBMA) has informed the European Commission that they wish to withdraw their request for registration of imports. This was reported by the Collective of European Importers of Electric Bicycles.
To officially end the registration, the Commission must publish a new Regulation in the Official Journal of the European Union. – Photo Bike Europe
The European Commission published the registration last 2 May 2018. It created the possibility for retroactive collection of duties between 4 May and 19 July 2018. The reason for this decision by the Commission was that, “the Commission has sufficient evidence at its disposal that imports of the product concerned from the PRC are being dumped,” as Bike Europe reported.

The implementation of the retroactive collection of duties caused many problems for importers who had containers already being shipped to Europe.

No publication of the new regulation yet
Why EMBA has asked for the withdrawal of registration of imported e-bikes remains unclear at the moment. When asked, Moreno Fioravanti, Secretary General of EBMA, “did not have any comments to make with regards to registration and or the retroactive collection of duties.” To officially end the registration, the Commission must publish a new Regulation in the Official Journal of the European Union.

The Collective of European Importers of Electric Bicycles also reports that “the EBMA letter comes shortly after the third hearing they had with the Commission.” In that hearing, they presented the Collective’s calculations on the injury to importers, directly resulting from the proceeding itself. According to the Collective’s estimates, “that injury amounts to an average of € 605,000 per company. Based on a very conservative assumption of around 150 importing companies in Europe, that would mean that the total injury caused by the proceedings alone already amounts to more than € 90 million. This amount does not include provisional duties or potential retroactive collection.”

 

[mike killay]

Exactly what does this mean please?
Did the EMBA shoot itself in the foot, or is it something else.

 

[Wisper Bikes]

Hi Mike, we are not sure either, however the damage done to many hard working ebike businesses in Europe is accurately calculable and huge. Those within the group will be pushing for compensation.

We think and hope that is change of position is the EBMA taking a more sensible approach, not wishing to cause further damage within the European industry. Maybe this is the first move in cancelling the whole ADT fiasco.

All that’s been achieved by the EBMA thus far is financial damage to small and medium European bicycle businesses, whilst prices have been forced up by at least 10% to the consumer. We have also seen shortages with the industry.

Next year everything will be back to normal, most manufacturers have spent this year moving thier bike building facilities to other countries within Asia. The long term affect will be higher priced bikes as double import duties take effect.

It’s all complete waste of everyone’s time and money.

Let’s hope this is the first move in the EBMA seeing sense, putting and end to causing damage to the European bike industry. Fingers crossed that they will simply drop the whole thing. Unfortunately I doubt it.

 

[anotherkiwi]

https://www.bike-eu.com/laws-regulations/nieuws/2018/10/e-bike-imports-from-china-still-booming-despite-dumping-proceedings-10134710

Imports are up not down...

 

[Woosh]

https://www.bike-eu.com/laws-regulations/nieuws/2018/10/e-bike-imports-from-china-still-booming-despite-dumping-proceedings-10134710

Imports are up not down...

that article reports on import figures for the first 6 months of 2018, before anti-dumping kicked in.

 

[anotherkiwi]

Last ditch imports before the date? I have noticed less bikes on display at Leclerc and Norauto in the recent weeks.

 

[Wisper Bikes]

The net effect is simply to move the bike builders out of China to other countries in Asia. The first Taiwan built Wisper bikes will be arriving in a few weeks. The cost is a little higher but there are several advantages, one of them being we can now fit Schwalbe tyres for a few pence more than Kenda. In my opinion they are no better but it seems the market loves Schwalbe?

Anyway, this seems to confirm my reasoning...

All the best, David

Vietnam and Taiwan coming up strong

What Eurostat’s import figures also prove is that Vietnam and Taiwan are coming up strong as e-bike export nations. In particular Vietnam as from this country 101,000 e-bikes were imported in the first half of this year which is very close to the total for the whole of 2017 from the country which stood at 105,000 units.

 

[anotherkiwi]

one of them being we can now fit Schwalbe tyres for a few pence more than Kenda. In my opinion they are no better but it seems the market loves Schwalbe?

One word: "balloon" tyres.

High volume commuter tyres are very comfortable and have heaps of grip. Kenda does those too but not in the sizes I need. I am running Big Ben Plus tyres in 20" and Big Ben in 26" and 28".

Subjectively the rubber formula seems more sticky to the touch.

 

[Wisper Bikes]

Hi Kiwi,

We find that the rubber formula varies with the tyre model, i.e. Magic Mary tyres are "stickier" and more expensive than Nobby Nicks.

Maybe you could give me a little advise? We are just putting the finishing touches to our Wayfarer range (Summer 2019). We have decided to run 27.5" on both the step through and crossbar versions. However we are are still discussing whether to go for Big Ben at 2.00 or go a little mad and use Super Moto X at 2.4. Do you think the 2.4 is an overkill?

All the best, David

 

[anotherkiwi]

I haven't ridden a Super Moto X (yet) - the tread looks just like the Big Ben's and from what I have read they have thicker sidewalls are more of a moped tyre and s-pedelec approved. They won't fit on either of my bikes! I like the 27.5" idea, lots of s-pedelecs are using them so I would say go for it. They really look the job and if they handle like the Big Ben they will give rock solid road holding. Don't forget the wide rims!

When I arrive at work there is a slippery gravel drive way and I am amazed every time I brake that I haven't come off. I am always willing to try a new tyre but the Big Ben as a daily ride has my vote for now.

 

[Wisper Bikes]

Thanks Kiwi, I’ll try both.

All the best, David

 

[GLJoe]

go for Big Ben at 2.00 or go a little mad and use Super Moto X at 2.4. Do you think the 2.4 is an overkill?

I'm going to say that you should try the Super MotoX for certain.
I think they are fantastic tyres. Great grip in a wide variety of conditions (seem much better on slippery stuff than big apples of a similar size, yet they are just as comfy) and IMHO, the wide profile just looks 'good' on a lot of bikes.

 

[Wisper Bikes]

Thanks Joe, I think the Moto is currently favourite, it depends on costs now.

All the best David

 

[Wisper Bikes]

Call on Importers To Protect Themselves Against Potential Retroactive Collection of Dumping Duties
Laws & Regulations

BRUSSELS, Belgium – On behalf of the Collective of European Importers of Electric Bicycles, the European branch of the Light Electric Vehicle Association (LEVA-EU) warns for the potential retroactive collection of dumping duties on e-bikes imported from China. This despite the fact that the European Bicycle Manufacturers’ Association (EBMA) has withdrawn its request for registration of e-bike imports from China.

Threat of retroactive collection continues for all companies having imported electric bicycles from China between 4 May and 18 July, 2018. – Photo Bike Europe

Today LEVA-EU has issued this warning saying “The European Commission still has the competence to apply retroactive collection of duties. The Commission must annul the registration by a separate measure to stop the process. However, the Commission plans only to consider the request “in the final assessment of this case“. This means that the threat of retroactive collection continues for all companies having imported electric bicycles from China between 4 May and 18 July, 2018.” LEVA-EU calls on importers under threat to protect themselves by joining the lawsuit against the Commission.

Lawsuit against the European Commission
This lawsuit against the European Commission’s decision on registration has been initiated by two members of the Collective of European Importers of Electric Bicycles. The lawsuit has been officially published in the European Official Journal of 24 September. LEVA-EU says “The Collective is continuing this court application against registration, since it is the only solution to offer importers the best possible protection from retroactive collection. Should the court case prove to be necessary and successful, only those companies that have come forward as intervenors will be able to obtain exemption from the retroactive collection of duties. That is why the Collective is giving importers, who may get hit by registration and are not part of the Collective, the opportunity to join the legal initiative by coming forward as intervenors.”


Come forward as intervenor in lawsuit

LEVA-EU strongly recommends all companies, having electric bicycles imported from China between 4 May and 18 July, to come forward as an intervenor in the lawsuit against the Commission. Companies who wish to join this initiative should contact LEVA-EU Manager, Annick Roetynck at leva-eu@telenet.be. They will need to provide some documents by 28 October.

 

[Wisper Bikes]

“Eventually, all European citizens will pay the bill and what for? For the benefit of a handful of EU companies who are abusing a trade defence instrument to disturb the market and upset competition“

Thursday 6 December 2018
Press release for immediate publication

Final phase of case against import e-bikes China:
measures will be for the few, not the many


The case against imports of e-bikes from China is in its final phase. In November, the Commission has published their General Disclosure Documents, through which they propose up to 79.3% duties on electric bicycles. These proposals have to be approved by Trade Commissioner Malmström and by the Trade Defence Instruments Committee, which brings together representatives from the 28 member states. The final decision is expected somewhere in January. The Collective of European Importers of Electric Bicycles, assisted by LEVA-EU is currently still talking to various parties about the inconsistencies and the injustice of this case.

This is not a case of Europe against China but a case of a small group of so-called EU producers (the Commission identified 31 companies) against an estimated 150 importers. It is still unknown who these 31 companies are, just as it is unknown which companies have filed the complaint. The Commission has now agreed to communicate their identities. In any case, both “manufacturers” and “importers” buy components from the same suppliers in the same countries, very often China. The only difference is that “manufacturers” assemble these components in Europe, whilst “importers” assemble in China. The price of assembly, irrespective whether in Europe or in China, is around € 25 to € 35. It is preposterous for the EBMA to claim that pushing this assembly from China to Europe will immediately create 4,600 new jobs. It is all the more preposterous because EBMA ignores the jobs in Europe that will be destroyed as a result of potential measures.

No injury

This is not a case of dumping because the Commission has totally failed to establish injury to the EU producers, whilst injury is one of the three essential conditions to impose duties. The EU producers are fit and healthy as is proven by the economic performance indicators established by the Commission:

- Sales volume: + 21%
- Production volume: + 29%
- Production capacity: + 35%
- Employment: + 40%
- Labour costs: -10%
- Profitability: + 25%
- Investments: + 77%
- Return on investment: + 103%

The only extremely weak argument for the Commission to claim injury is the fact that the industry profitability was 3.4% in the investigation period (Sept. ’16 – Sept. ’17), whilst the Commission feels it should be 4.3% as in 2015.



Injury to importers

Thus, to crank up the profitability of a small group of EU “manufacturers” with 0.9%, the Commission believes it is necessary to hit an estimated 150 European SME’s with up to 79.3%. They describe this measure as a measure “that could have an adverse effect on small importers”. This statement is baffling since the Commission’s proceedings alone have already damaged these 150 European SME’s with an estimated € 90 to € 100 million.
In May, the Commission accepted EBMA’s request for registration and put forward an estimated injury level of 189%! At that moment, the Commission already had information from the proceeding at their disposal to know that 189% was a gross exaggeration. Registration opened the door for potential retroactive collection. Since this happened right in the middle of the e-bike season, virtually all companies had containers on the water. Should these imports have been hit with 189% retroactive collection most of the importers, if not all, would have gone bankrupt. This forced the SME’s to turn their supply chain upside down overnight. Moving assembly out of China and setting it up elsewhere, moving the component supplies, losing customers, annulling contracts, dismissing staff, increasing prices, … Based on the importers’ injury reports, LEVA-EU calculated total costs involved in all this at € 90 to € 100 million. In October, EBMA withdrew its registration request without any further explanation and in the General Disclosure Documents the Commission announced the end of registration, thus no retro-active collection, again without any further explanation. Many importers experienced this as being held in contempt.

All EU citizens to pay

The Commission has consistently ignored the importers and their argumentation and on several occasions breached their right to defence. The announcement in the Dumping Disclosure Document that the proposed measures “could have an adverse effect on small importers” is an understatement beyond compare. The proceedings have had a huge adverse effect on all importers, an effect beyond repair. The provisional duties, if collected, will have a further damaging impact on these same importers. Final duties will have an immensely negative effect on the whole European e-bike sector. The offer and competition will shrink, innovation will be hampered, prices will go up and the net result will be a product that is a lot less attractive to the consumer. Instead of switching from unsustainable means of transport to electric bicycles, they will continue to use ICE vehicles. What’s worse however is that dumping duties risk to almost automatically lead to anti-circumvention duties, which will be catastrophic for the whole business.
So ultimately, dumping duties will counteract many other EU policies in the field of sustainable transport, mitigation of climate change, greening the economy, green job creation, public health, … Eventually, all European citizens will pay the bill and what for? For the benefit of a handful of EU companies who are abusing a trade defence instrument to disturb the market and upset competition just because they need a bit more time to get their house in order.

Letter to Commissioner Malmström

The Collective’s last protest action in this case is an appeal to all companies who are affected and/or opposed to this case, to sign a letter to Commissioner Malmström. Dozens of companies have already responded to the appeal. Companies that still want to sign should do so here, https://bit.ly/2r61mxl, before Tuesday 11 December.




About LEVA-EU:

Established in 2017, LEVA-EU is the only trade association in Europe to work exclusively for Light Electric Vehicles (LEVs). It aims at raising awareness and promoting the European LEV-sector vis-à-vis the European Institutions. LEVA-EU has currently almost 40 members in 8 EU member states, Korea, Norway, Switzerland and China. LEVA-EU manages the Collective of European Importers of Electric Bicycles, because the potential imposition of dumping duties on electric bicycles from China will cause injury to thwww.leva-eu.com.


Press contact:

Annick Roetynck, tel. +32 9 233 60 05, email leva-eu@telenet.be


LEVA-EU vzw – Guinardstraat 32 – B-9000 Gent

Tel. +32 9 233 60 05 – Email leva-eu@telenet.be – www.leva-eu.com

 

[Wisper Bikes]

Thursday 13 December, 2018
Press release for immediate publication

60 European SMEs request Commissioner Malmström to act against unsubstantiated dumping allegations

No less than 60 European SMEs from 13 different EU member states have sent a motivated request to Trade Commissioner Malmström. In the letter, the importing companies explain why the Commissioner should review the Commission’s intention to impose up to 79.3% duties on import of electric bicycles from China. The 60 companies label this plan as “an extremely severe punishment for unsubstantiated dumping allegations”.
The request of the 60 SMEs is being supported by another 27 European companies that are active in the E-bike sector but don’t import electric bicycles from China. They are European producers of components, accessories, LEVs other than e-bikes, but also distributors, dealers, service providers, … All 87 European signatories together employ 1,419 people. The letter has received further support from non-European companies active in the e-bike sector as well as from Chinese e-bike assemblers. The signatories’ list holds a total of 176 names but is confidential.
Unsubstantiated dumping allegations
Dumping measures must always be founded upon three pillars: dumping on the EU market, injury to the EU producers and a causal link between the two. The most important argument for this request to Commissioner Malmström is the fact that the Commission has been unable to establish injury. On the contrary, the Commission itself has established economic performance indicators, which show that the EU producers are fit and healthy:
-
- Sales volume: + 21%
- Production volume: + 29%
- Production capacity: + 35%
- Employment: + 40%
- Labour costs: -10%
- Profitability: + 25%
- Investments: + 77%
- Return on investment: + 103%

The only extremely weak argument for the Commission to claim injury is the fact that the industry profitability was 3.4% in the investigation period (Sept. ’16 – Sept. ’17), whilst the Commission feels it should be 4.3% as it was in 2015.
Abuse of TDI
The 60 importers conclude that the Commission intends to impose duties up to 79.3% in order to allow the EU industry (31 companies according to the Commission) to increase its profits by a meagre 0.9% (percentage of sales turnover) at the expense of an estimated 150 European SMEs. According to the letter writers, this calls into question the whole economic efficacy of imposing such duties, resulting in extremely high costs and a huge impact on both Union importers and consumers, whilst the benefit to the Union Industry is outright marginal.

The group warns the Commissioner that final duties will have an immensely negative effect on the whole European e-bikesector. Therefore, they call upon her to reconsider the proposed measures, which will only be for the benefit of a handful of EU companies “who are abusing a trade defence instrument to disturb the market and upset competition”.
Final judgment
On 18 December, the EU member state representatives in the Trade Defence Instruments Committee will meet to give their final judgment on the Commission’s proposal. The 60 SMEs have sent the same request to their respective representativesin the TDI Committee. The decision of the Committee on final measures comes under the examination procedure. This means that the committee’s opinion is delivered by a qualifiedmajority (55% of member states representing at least 65% of EU population). All aspects of this Committee’s meetings are confidential.
This letter marks the final effort of the Collective of European Importers of Electric Bicycles supported by LEVA-EU to fight the Commission’s proposal for the imposition of dumping duties. The Collective will now await the Commission’s final decision, announced for January 2019,upon which they will confer on potential further actions.

***END***

The Light Electric Vehicle Association in Europe (LEVA-EU) represents the strategic interests of light electric vehicle retailers, dealers, distributors, manufacturers and suppliers to promote the development, sale, and use of LEVs in the EU.LEVA-EU is the only trade association in Europe that works exclusively for light electric vehicles.
For further details, please contact LEV-EU Manager, AnnickRoetynck,
tel. +32 9 233 60 05, email leva-eu@telenet.be
https://leva-eu.com/ - twitter @levaeurope