EBMA files an anti dumping complaint on chinese e-bikes.
- Thread starter Kudoscycles
- Start date
Overload, stresses bearings.
Trapping the cat or one of the kids inside, dents the drum.
Absent-mindedly fill the washing powder receptacle from the Polyfilla pack, seizes up everything.
.
Hi Col, I could be mistaken. It's what I have understood from Bafang, they are very much behind the movement to stop this current case of protectionism. They have also said that they are already considering opening a factory in Europe if the protectionism measures prevail, why would they do that if motors are not to be effected?
I understand that it may be that only mid drive motors will be effected and hub motors will be OK. Re batteries I agree, it would be tricky to stop ebike specific units coming in.
However, if with a green licence we can import 41% of parts from China, the battery would certainly tip the balance so we would need to source in Europe.
Last edited:
David, this is something you said earlier:
If your EU contacts can supply at near China prices then they don't worry too much about circumvention, do they?
Only if ADT is applied to parts as they are in the ordinary cycle trade. Which we all agree is a distinct likelihood.
parts don't have AD levy, they are charged at 15% duty across many countries, whole bikes are charged AD levy.
Are saying that we don't need to worry about parts being effected by the anti dumping tariffs to stop circumvention?
That would be excellent news, I must have been mistaken. It's just that LEVA believe they will be.
Only time will tell, but I have to say I am a little more pessimistic than you guys about the outcome, hence our joining the fight with a lot of other UK importers. I truly hope that you are right.
That would be excellent news, I must have been mistaken. It's just that LEVA believe they will be.
Only time will tell, but I have to say I am a little more pessimistic than you guys about the outcome, hence our joining the fight with a lot of other UK importers. I truly hope that you are right.
Latest from our collective...
We may be getting somewhere?
Tuesday 5 December 2017
Press release for immediate publication
The Collective of European Importers of Electric Bicycles regrets
new EU anti-dumping legislation comes late
The Collective welcomes the approval by the European Council of the new anti-dumping legislation but sincerely regrets that these new rules, aimed at amending the EU breach of WTO rules, have come too late. It has not prevented EBMA from filing a complaint against imports of electric bikes from China based on the “old” unlawful rules. What’s worse, it has not prevented the European Commission from accepting the complaint and initiating a proceeding, which is just as well based on these unlawful rules.
The new legislation no longer allows the use of an analogue country, eliminates the distinction between market and non-market economies and reverses the burden of proof. The Commission will have to prove the existence of market distortions allowing for the application of the alternative method, i.e. the use of a constructed value.
Similar economic development
In other words, it will be up to the Commission to prove the existence of a "significant market distortion" between a product's sale price and its production cost. On that basis, it will be allowed to set a price for the product by referring for example to the price of the good in a country with a similar level of economic development or to relevant undistorted international costs and prices.
Completely contrary to all the above, the Commission has provisionally chosen, in accord with EBMA, Switzerland as the most suitable analogue country. To the Collective, this comparison appears neither appropriate, nor convincing to prove China is dumping electric bicycles in Europe through undercutting and underselling.
In their submission to the European Commission, the Collective had already argued that the importers found it unacceptable that this complaint had been accepted and was being treated, not only in accordance with European legislation in breach of WTO rules, but also along lines which go diametrically against the spirit and the objectives of the new rules aimed at amending this breach of WTO-rules.
Totally unrealistic
Using Switzerland as an analogue country, is no less than comparing apples and oranges. Average monthly wages in China in 2016 were € 730, in Switzerland € 5,730. EBMA states explicitly that the case focusses mainly on EPACs, but chooses an analogue country with the relatively highest sales of speed EPACs in the world. In 2016, 22% of all electric bicycles sold in Switzerland were speed EPACs. The much more stringent technical rules for these vehicles than for EPACs are only one element in much higher price levels than for 25 km/h EPACs. But supplying the lower end of the market does not automatically mean dumping. EBMA ignores this world of difference between Chinese and Swiss EPAC production, which allows for the calculation of triple digit dumping margins (from 193% to 430%) based on normal values of in between € 1,782 and € 2,544. This is totally unrealistic.
The new Regulation will apply to all decisions on the initiation of proceedings, and to all proceedings, including original investigations and review investigations, initiated on or after the date on which this Regulation enters into force. The Regulation will enter into force the day after its publication in the Official Journal. That date is announced to be the 20th December, precisely two months after publication of the initiation of the proceeding.
*
* *
All the best, David
We may be getting somewhere?
Tuesday 5 December 2017
Press release for immediate publication
The Collective of European Importers of Electric Bicycles regrets
new EU anti-dumping legislation comes late
The Collective welcomes the approval by the European Council of the new anti-dumping legislation but sincerely regrets that these new rules, aimed at amending the EU breach of WTO rules, have come too late. It has not prevented EBMA from filing a complaint against imports of electric bikes from China based on the “old” unlawful rules. What’s worse, it has not prevented the European Commission from accepting the complaint and initiating a proceeding, which is just as well based on these unlawful rules.
The new legislation no longer allows the use of an analogue country, eliminates the distinction between market and non-market economies and reverses the burden of proof. The Commission will have to prove the existence of market distortions allowing for the application of the alternative method, i.e. the use of a constructed value.
Similar economic development
In other words, it will be up to the Commission to prove the existence of a "significant market distortion" between a product's sale price and its production cost. On that basis, it will be allowed to set a price for the product by referring for example to the price of the good in a country with a similar level of economic development or to relevant undistorted international costs and prices.
Completely contrary to all the above, the Commission has provisionally chosen, in accord with EBMA, Switzerland as the most suitable analogue country. To the Collective, this comparison appears neither appropriate, nor convincing to prove China is dumping electric bicycles in Europe through undercutting and underselling.
In their submission to the European Commission, the Collective had already argued that the importers found it unacceptable that this complaint had been accepted and was being treated, not only in accordance with European legislation in breach of WTO rules, but also along lines which go diametrically against the spirit and the objectives of the new rules aimed at amending this breach of WTO-rules.
Totally unrealistic
Using Switzerland as an analogue country, is no less than comparing apples and oranges. Average monthly wages in China in 2016 were € 730, in Switzerland € 5,730. EBMA states explicitly that the case focusses mainly on EPACs, but chooses an analogue country with the relatively highest sales of speed EPACs in the world. In 2016, 22% of all electric bicycles sold in Switzerland were speed EPACs. The much more stringent technical rules for these vehicles than for EPACs are only one element in much higher price levels than for 25 km/h EPACs. But supplying the lower end of the market does not automatically mean dumping. EBMA ignores this world of difference between Chinese and Swiss EPAC production, which allows for the calculation of triple digit dumping margins (from 193% to 430%) based on normal values of in between € 1,782 and € 2,544. This is totally unrealistic.
The new Regulation will apply to all decisions on the initiation of proceedings, and to all proceedings, including original investigations and review investigations, initiated on or after the date on which this Regulation enters into force. The Regulation will enter into force the day after its publication in the Official Journal. That date is announced to be the 20th December, precisely two months after publication of the initiation of the proceeding.
*
* *
All the best, David
Thanks Nemesis. This unfounded attack on Bafang is one of the reasons it is evident that Bosch are in some way behind or at least backing the ADT move by the EBMA.
D
Deleted member 4366
Guest
Where does 200% come from? The way I read it is that any European producer can compare the price of his product with that of one that is being dumped at a subsidised price. He has to make a complaint against that specific product. The commission investigates and fixes a fair price to the subsidised one, if they find that it's unfairly subsidised. I don't read it as any general sweeping tax on Chinese Ebike stuff. Am I wrong?
the Commission can impose provisional anti dumping duty on a category of products such as Chinese stainless steels (up to 28.5%, depending on the specifics) to protect EU jobs and consumers interest.
In the case of EBMA against Chinese e-bikes, as it's is not likely in the EU consumers' interest, it has to do with protecting EU jobs. I guess if the Commission imposes ADD, it would be small, just enough to bring the shop price of Chinese e-bikes to the level of similar EU made ones. That's about 10%-15%.
Dave...the 200% came from a report on Bike Europe.
I have often quoted 54%,only because that is the current anti-dumping duty on normal bikes,it would be logical to have the same duty on all bikes,but it is a guess.
The EU have been clever to not state the level of duty and the implement date....this effectively stops all Chinese e-bike imports....in a 40 foot container it is possible to carry 100,000 dollars of e-bikes,normally when landed the customs demand 26 % vat and duty....26000 dollars. The anti dumping duty could be levied on any shipment that is currently en-ship,imagine a small trader being faced with a demand for 74% vat and duty....74000 dollars or less or more. That is the problem not knowing what you could have to pay after you have placed the order.
Subsidies have only been accused at Bafang to my knowledge.
KudosDave
You really think if we removed the "preotection" of the EU from eveything currently protected that would be a good thing? Many industries, many companies that this country take pride in would be wiped out over night. Do you think Brompton could compete with Chinese folding bikes without the EU's protection?
I agree with your sentiments Col, but the Brompton could just as easily be made in Tunisia or Romania for the same price if not lower than in China. It's widely agreed that the 48.5% ADT on push bikes out of China hasn't made a blind bit of difference to the numbers of bikes coming in to Europe from Asia and Tunisia.
Long term, and even medium term, I am sure the same will be said of ebikes. The current effort being put into protectionism by the EBMA is simply putting the industry through a few months of uncertainty and causing some of us a lot of work and expense in planning to move production.
Maybe all the EBMA actually want to achieve is to destabilise the market for a year or so?
Long term, and even medium term, I am sure the same will be said of ebikes. The current effort being put into protectionism by the EBMA is simply putting the industry through a few months of uncertainty and causing some of us a lot of work and expense in planning to move production.
Maybe all the EBMA actually want to achieve is to destabilise the market for a year or so?
No I think they just want a level playing field, and to encourage you to build the bikes in the EU. It doesn't seem that complicated is it?
Related Articles
-
MTF Enterprises announces acquisition of EMU Electric Bikes- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Wisper 806T folding bike wins Which? ‘Best Buy’- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Sustrans calls for protected cycle lanes- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Amazon launch their first UK e-cargo micromobility hub- Started by: Pedelecs
