MEWP anti-subsidy tariffs announced by EU

New tariffs have been set on MEWPs imported to the EU from China following an anti-subsidy investigation by the European Commission, while previously imposed anti-dumping duties have been amended. 

The Berlaymont building - headquaters of the European Commission (Image: Andrzej via AdobeStock - stock.adobe.com)

The latest tariffs come on the back of the anti-dumping duties imposed in January on manufacturers based in China, which have now been ammended in light of the results of the subsidy investigation to prevent ‘double counting’, or overlapping of duties across the two ivestigations. 

Both the anti-subsidy and dumping investigation began following a complaint by industry group Coalition to Restore a Level Playing Field, formed by a consortium of companies based in the EU, wich included French manufacturers Haulotte and Manitou.

Both sets of duties apply to self propelled lifts, including articulated and telescopic booms, scissor lifts and vertical masts, with a maximum working height of 6m or more.

They also apply to pre-assembled or ready-to-assemble sections, including chassis, turrets or turntables, platforms and lifting mechanisms. They exclude individual components when sold separately, and all vehicle mounted aerial lifts.

Alexandre Saubot, CEO of Haulotte has welcomed tariffs and pointed out that desbite having a factory in China none of its output is exported to the EU, therefore duties would not apply. He added, however, that because so many machines were imported into the EU before the new charges were applied, any effects are unlikely to be seen on the market until 2026.

“Then it depends on the behaviour of the competition,” Saubot says. “I never bet on the behaviour of the competition. I try to envisage all of the options and be ready for all of them. They will have to decide if they increase their selling price or if they squeeze their margin to keep where they are. That’s not my call. The worst thing for us is if they squeeze their margins and the tariffs have no effect but they also need to make money one day.”

A number of MEWP manufacturers have announced that they will introduced localalised production initiatives as a result of EU tariffs and similar duties on Chinese MEWPs entering the US, which were applied in 2023. They include JLG, Sinoboom and Zoomlion, which had all previously produced MEWPs in their China-based plants for global export. 

Speaking to Accessbreifing at Bauma, ahead of the anti-subsidy tariff announcement, Mahesh Narang, President of JLG Industries, said he had been surprised that JLG received tariffs under the anti-dumping investigation. 

While the company has not been hit with anti-subsidy duty specifically, the orignal 

We didn't agree witht appraoch takne by the EC, and we will of course wok with thme to appeal it.  It didn;t chnage our decission [for local manufacturing] I think it just accelerated the process. 

"Our pricing is one of the highest in the industry and we were fines because we did not have a single economic entity, they looked at us [the factory in China] as serets eneity and said your dumping. But if you look at us as one entity and look at our price we don't think we were dumping. That said we respect what they do and in the  end they accelerated 

didn't instigate the European. Yeah. Um, situation that yes, indeed in the uh, uh,

We were surprised that we Uh, we didn't agree with the approach taken by the European commission. And we will, of course, work with them to appeal. It, it doesn't change our decision. I think the end decision was we would have done it. Anyway, it accelerated our process to localise manufacturing. What we didn't agree with is.

Our pricing is among the highest in the Industry. And we were fine because we didn't have a single economic entity. Uh, and, uh, they said, we were because we were separate and they, they

looked at us as separate entities, and then they said, you're dumping. But, you know, if you look at us as one entity and look at our price, we don't, we don't think we were dumping. That's, Yeah, again, we respect what they do, and in the end, they accelerated

our journey for localisation and in the, it doesn't matter to us. What the level of tariffs are if we make in Europe. Yeah. So we respect their decision and we'll move on. Yeah, just one more question on the European side of things, you know, how do you see

Subsidy investigation 

The anti-subsidy enquiry analysed the potential way the Chinese state can aid manufacturers in exports specifically to the EU. The Commission noted, “businesses in China operate in a specific environment which – unlike the Western economies where market forces represent the dominant organizing principle – features numerous mechanisms that provide the Government of China (GOC) with substantial degree of control over any aspect of the economic activity in the country.

“This tight control prevents economic operators from acting as rational market operators seeking to maximise profits, and in fact forces them to act as an arm of the government in implementing its policies and plans.”

The Commission added, “China’s financial system remains dominated by the banking sector and the state controls the banking sector through ownership, as well as through personal ties.”

The Commission concluded that China-based producers benefited unfairly, to different degrees, from financing through loans and other financial means. 

‘Financial benefits’

As part of its investigation the Commission looked into the financial situation of a sample group of OEMs in terms of their liquidity and solvency risks compared to the financial support they have received, including, for example, bonds with an interest rate below the level that should have been expected.

“Only investors having motivations other than a financial return on their investment, such as compliance with the legal obligation to provide financing to companies in encouraged industries, would make such an investment.”

The Commission concluded that exporting producers benefited from preferential financing in the form of credit lines, bank acceptance drafts and bonds; “In view of this, the Commission considered these types of preferential financing a countervailable subsidy.”

Double counting

To avoid double counting, the Commission deducted the full subsidy amount from the dumping margin before applying anti-dumping duties.

The China Chamber of Commerce for Import and Export of Machinery and Electronic Products (CCCME) objected, arguing that duties at injury elimination levels already offset subsidies and that the sampling led to distorted averages.

The Commission rejected these claims, stating its approach avoided double counting and was based on accurate sampling and legal principles. The Construction Machinery Association of Europe (CMAE) claimed not all subsidies were captured in the dumping margin and some duties could be cumulated, but the Commission maintained its approach due to late submission of supporting data.

The highest duties from sampled firms were applied to non-cooperating exporters, and duties for non-sampled but cooperating producers were based on the weighted average of sampled firms.

Definitive duties:

1. For non-cooperating companies, the Commission applied the highest duty rate from cooperating sampled firms.
2. For cooperating non-sampled companies, average rates from the sample were used.

Annex I 

• Lingong Heavy Machinery Co
• Terex (Changzhou) Machinery
• XCMG Fire Fighting Safety Equipment
• Haulotte Access Equipment Manufacturing
• Fronteq (Changzhou) Machinery
• Jiangsu Liugong Machinery
• Hangcha Group
• Shandong Chufeng Heavy Industry Machinery
• Mantall Heavy Industry
• Jinan Juxin Machinery
• Shandong Yuntian Intelligent Machinery Equipment

Annex II

• Reeslift
• Shandong Qiyun Group
• Sunward Intelligent Equipment

Annex III

• Zhejiang Noblelift Equipment Joint Stock