Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2386of 27 November 2025imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of ironing boards originating in the People’s Republic of China following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council

Article 14(6) database.

Imports from PRC2020202120222023Review Investigation periodAverage import price (EUR/piece)11,3617,0020,6918,3517,73Index100150182162156

(113) Import prices from the PRC increased by 56 % during the period considered. Import quantities increased in particular for product types using stainless steel covered by HS code 73239300 (TARIC 7323930010) yielding higher prices than product types imported under 73239900 (TARIC 7323990010). The import quantities of the latter decreased during the period considered, as illustrated in recital (110).

(114) In order to determine price undercutting during the review investigation period, the weighted average sales price of the sampled Union producers charged to unrelated customers on the EU market, adjusted to an ex-works level (i.e. excluding freight costs in the EU and after deduction of discounts and rebates), was compared on a type-by-type basis to the corresponding weighted average price of the imports as established above in recital (111), on a CIF basis, and then including the customs and anti-dumping duty.

(115) The comparison showed that, when expressed as a percentage of the sampled Union producers’ turnover during the review investigation period, imports from the PRC were undercutting the prices of the Union industry by 4 %. When deducting the anti-dumping duty in place, the undercutting margin amounted to 26 %.

5.3.

Imports from third countries other than PRC

(116) The imports of ironing boards from third countries other than the PRC were mainly from Türkiye, Ukraine and India.

(117) The (aggregated) volume of imports into the Union as well as the market share and price trends for imports of ironing boards from other third countries developed as follows during the period considered:

Table 5

Imports from third countries

Source:

14(6) database.

Country2020202120222023Review Investigation periodTürkiyeVolume (pieces)112088711204139297739453251028524Index100100838492Market share18 %19 %17 %18 %19 %Average price (EUR/pieces)9,049,2812,5911,8811,62Index100103139131129UkraineVolume (pieces)1076875960185564541491488655160Index10089524661Market share17 %16 %10 %9 %12 %Average price (EUR/pieces)11,0311,6414,1514,4414,07Index100106128131128IndiaVolume (pieces)193309132660240236173572181278Index100691249094Market share3 %2 %4 %3 %3 %Average price (EUR/pieces)8,9910,8414,2919,6119,36Index100120159218215

OthersVolume (pieces)218575195270873986889995031Index10089403243Market share3 %3 %2 %1 %2 %Average price (EUR/pieces)11,912,518,920,420,1Index100105159172169Total of imports from third countries other than PRCVolume (pieces)25490082516117175529916870041778 729Index10099696670Market share41 %40 %33 %32 %35 %

(118) The volume of imports from all third countries not subject to measures taken as a whole was about 1,8 million pieces in the review investigation period, translating into a market share of 35 %. Most of these imports came from Türkiye and Ukraine. Over the whole period considered, the volume of imports from all third countries not subject to measures decreased from 41 % in 2020 to 32 % in 2023 before increasing slightly again up to 35 % in the review investigation period.

(119) Imports from Türkiye remained overall stable during the period considered fluctuating between 0,9 and 1,1 million pieces per year. Total imports amounted to 1,1 million in 2020 and 1,0 million during the review investigation period.

(120) In contrast to this, imports from Ukraine decreased from 1,0 million to 0,5 million pieces in 2023. The biggest drop occurred from 1,0 million 2021 to less than 0,6 million pieces in 2022 reflecting the outbreak of the war in Ukraine. In the review investigation period, imports from Ukraine started to increase again.

(121) Imports from India remained relatively stable around 0,2 million pieces annually during the period considered. The volume of imports from other third countries was low, decreasing from 0,2 million pieces to 0,1 million pieces during the period considered.

(122) In terms of market share, the trends described above translated into an increase by 1 percentage point, from 18 % in 2020 to 19 % in the review investigation period, for Türkiye and a decrease from 17 % market share in 2020 to 12 % in the review investigation period for Ukraine. The market share of India remained stable around 3 % during the period considered. The market share of the remaining third countries decreased from 3 % in 2020 to 2 % in the review investigation period.

(123) The average price of imports from Türkiye increased from 9 EUR/piece in 2020 to 11,6 EUR/piece in the review investigation period. During the same period, the average price of imports from Ukraine increased slightly from 11 EUR/piece to 14 EUR/piece, while the average price of imports from India increased from 8,99 to 19,36 EUR/piece.

5.4.

Economic situation of the Union industry

5.4.1.

General remarks

(124) The assessment of the economic situation of the Union industry included an evaluation of all economic indicators having a bearing on the state of the Union industry during the period considered.

(125) As mentioned in recital (17), sampling was used for the assessment of the economic situation of the Union industry.

(126) For the injury determination, the Commission distinguished between macroeconomic and microeconomic injury indicators. The Commission evaluated the macroeconomic indicators on the basis of data contained in the questionnaire submitted by the applicants as well as data contained in the Article 14(6) database. The Commission evaluated the microeconomic indicators on the basis of data contained in the questionnaire replies from the sampled Union producers.

(127) The macroeconomic indicators are: production, production capacity, capacity utilisation, sales volume, market share, growth, employment, productivity.

(128) The microeconomic indicators are: average unit prices, unit cost, labour costs, inventories, profitability, cash flow, investments and return on investments.

5.4.2.

Macroeconomic indicators

5.4.2.1.

Production, production capacity and capacity utilisation

(129) The total Union production, production capacity and capacity utilisation developed over the period considered as follows:

Table 6

Production, production capacity and capacity utilisation

Source:

Questionnaire replies.

2020202120222023Review Investigation periodProduction volume (measuring unit)38098283817450403648038131993722588Index10010010610098Production capacity (measuring unit)60380006038000603800060380006038000Index100100100100100Capacity utilisation63 %63 %67 %63 %62 %Index100101106103101

(130) The total Union production remained stable over the period considered, only increasing in 2022 by 6 % amounting to 4,0 million pieces, but decreasing in 2023 and during the review investigation period where it reached similar levels as in 2020. The peak of production in the year 2022 followed the evolution of sales volume being presented in the following section. The production capacity remained the same during the whole period considered.

5.4.2.2.

Sales volume and market share

(131) The Union industry’s sales volume and market share developed over the period considered as follows:

Table 7

Sales volume and market share (pieces)

Source:

Questionnaire replies.

2020202120222023Review Investigation periodTotal sales volume on the Union market32384673267174341821633195673268752Index100101106103101Market share51 %54 %62 %63 %59 %Index100106121123115

(132) The sales volume of the Union industry on the EU market remained basically stable with slight fluctuations during the period considered. After an increase from 3,2 million in 2021 to 3,4 million pieces in 2022, sales volume decreased again to 3,3 million in 2023 and, in the review investigation period, was about the same level as in the year 2020 amounting to 3,2 million pieces. Market share of the Union industry followed the trend of sales, increasing in 2022 and 2023 and decreasing again during the review investigation period, overall, it increased by 15 % during the period considered.

(133) While the sales volume remained about the same level during the period considered, the market share of the EU industry increased by 9 percentage points to 59 %. This is explained by the overall slightly declining Union consumption, as described in recital (107).

5.4.2.3.

Growth

(134) The Union Industry’s production and sales volume remained stable while consumption was declining slightly, resulting in an increase of the Union’s industry’s market share. Employment of the Union industry remained stable throughout the period considered. On this basis, it can be concluded that the Union industry maintained but did not increase its position in terms of production and sales in a slightly decreasing market during the considered period.

5.4.2.4.

Employment and productivity

(135) Employment and productivity developed over the period considered as follows:

Table 8

Employment and productivity

2020202120222023Review Investigation periodNumber of employees484472492482482Index10098102100100

Productivity (unit/employee)78778088821279147725Index10098102100100Source: Questionnaire replies.

(136) Employment, while fluctuating slightly, remained overall stable during the period considered. More specifically, there was a decrease of employment from 2020 to 2021 followed by an increase in the year 2022 to peak level. Subsequently, the number of employees decreased again to the same level as in 2020, reflecting also the lower production and sales volumes in the year 2023 and the review investigation period when compared with the year 2022.

(137) Productivity, measured as output (pieces) per person employed per year, remained rather stable with minor fluctuations. Starting in 2020, it increased slightly in 2022 and fell back to the level of 2020 in the review investigation period.

5.4.2.5.

Magnitude of the dumping margin and recovery from past dumping

(138) Dumping continued during the review investigation period at a material level. Chinese exporting producers also continued to undercut the Union industry’s sales prices during the review investigation period.

(139) At the same time, despite the anti-dumping measures in place, the level of imports from China remained material representing between 5 % and 7 % of the market share in the review investigation period. Therefore, the impact of the magnitude of the actual dumping margin from China on the Union industry persisted and cannot be considered to be negligible.

(140) However, despite the fact there was still dumping for imports from the PRC, the analysis of the injury indicators shows that the measures in place had a shielding effect and an overall positive impact on the Union industry.

5.4.3.

Microeconomic indicators

5.4.3.1.

Prices and factors affecting prices

(141) The 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/pieces)

Source:

Questionnaire replies.

2020202120222023Review Investigation periodAverage unit sales price in the Union on the total market10,812,413,914,514,4Index100114128133133

Unit cost of production1113151415Index100119138130132

(142) Average prices increased by 33 % between 2020 and the review investigation period. This increase follows the sharp rise of costs of production, namely for the most important input material steel, as a consequence of the outbreak of the war in Ukraine

Request, para. 98.

. The Union industry managed to increase prices, also in the context of a general rise of inflation in the EU caused by the disruption of supply chains as a consequence of the outbreak of the war in Ukraine. However, this trend of price increases following the rise of input material costs ended in the course of the year of 2023. In the review investigation period, the Union industry did not raise the price level anymore also in a context of increasing imports as set out in recitals (109) and (118). Prices even decreased slightly compared with the year 2023.

5.4.3.2.

Labour costs

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

Table 10

Average labour costs per employee

Source:

Questionnaire replies.

2020202120222023Review Investigation periodAverage labour costs per employee (EUR)205212162733962525426914Index100105114123131

(144) The average labour costs increased steadily during the period considered, overall by about 30 %. This increase reflects the overall trend in the EU with nominal wages rising in order to respond to rising costs of living including of energy costs, especially following the outbreak of the war in Ukraine

Labour market and wage developments in Europe 2024 – Publications Office of the EU, p. 47.

.

5.4.3.3.

Inventories

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

Table 11

Inventories

Source:

Questionnaire replies.

2020202120222023Review Investigation periodClosing stocks (pieces)96867100185125849145766131157Index100103130150135

Closing stocks as a percentage of production3 %3 %3 %4 %4 %

(146) The level of stocks expressed as a percentage of the production volume remained overall stable during the period considered with an increase of the closing stock from 3 % in 2022 to 4 % in 2023.

5.4.3.4.

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

(147) 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

Source:

Questionnaire replies.

2020202120222023Review Investigation periodProfitability of sales in the Union to unrelated customers (% of sales turnover)3,69 %4,61 %3,27 %6,85 %6,52 %Index10012589185176Cash flow (EUR)1976678153709782733228599123348485Index1007842145169Investments (EUR)566161391113209915289386324510Index10069375157Return on investments6 %9 %11 %20 %17 %Index100160193334285

(148) 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 EU as a percentage of the turnover of those sales. During the period considered the profitability of the Union industry fluctuated. It first increased between 2020 and 2021 from 3,69 % to 4,61 %, then decreased in 2022 to 3,27 % and increased again in 2023 to 6,85 %. In the review investigation period profitability dropped slightly to 6,52 %. Overall, profitability increased from 3,69 % in 2020 to 6,52 % in the review investigation period, which represented an increase of 2,83 percentage points. Despite the increasing trend, the level of profits did not reach the target profit that was considered

adequate for this industry in the previous expiry review (i.e. 7,0 %)

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1662, recital (194).

, except in 2023 where profitability levels were close to this threshold. This is mainly due to the increase in production cost, as set out in recital (142), which was more pronounced from 2020 to 2022 than the increase of sales prices in the same period. In 2023 and in review investigation period, this trend reversed, and sales prices increased more rapidly than the costs which was also reflected in the profitability of these years that increased significantly as compared to 2022.

(149) The net cash flow from operating activities follows the same trend as profitability. The net cash flow decreased between 2020 and 2022, and especially between 2021 and 2022. This occurred during a period of increasing sales prices, but also increasing costs of production. From 2023 onwards, the net cash flow improved being also substantially higher than at the beginning of the period considered.

(150) Overall, the amount of annual investment declined by about half between 2020 and 2022. Following this sharp decline, investment levels recovered in 2023 and the review investigation period, while remaining at relatively low levels. Thus, compared with 2020, there was still a fall by 43 %. In the previous expiry review, the Commission observed that the high amounts of annual investment were preceded by high profit rates

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1662, recital (188).

. This is confirmed in the current expiry review. The low profit rates at the beginning of the period considered were followed by a decreasing amount of annual investments, leading to a significant scaling down of investment activities of the Union industry.

(151) The return on investments is the profit in percentage of the net book value of investments. Between 2020 and 2022, the percentage increased with the net book value of investment decreasing while profits remained stable. From 2023 onwards, the rates of return on investment were the highest, where the annual investment amounts were increasing. This shows that the Union industry was able and willing to increase investments, once the profitability was sufficiently high.

5.5.

Conclusion on injury

(152) The main injury indicators, such as market share, sales prices as well as profitability and other financial indicators such as investment showed a positive trend. None of the injury indicators showed significantly negative trends. However, profitability remained well below the target profit of 7 % until 2022 and only just reached around this threshold in 2023 and the review investigation period.

(153) The Union industry’s capacity to increase its sales prices was limited due to the unfair competition of imports from the PRC which, despite the antidumping measures in force, increased in volume during the review investigation period at prices undercutting those of the Union industry. As such, the Union industry was unable to increase its prices sufficiently to compensate for the increase in the cost of production that occurred during the period considered.

(154) In view of the above, it can be concluded that the situation of the Union industry did not deteriorate during the period considered and that the measures were effective to a certain extent, in particular, in a situation of increasing production costs, and served as a safety net preventing a significant increase of the low priced imports from China which allowed the Union industry to realise some profits and not become loss-making.

(155) It is therefore considered that the Union industry did not suffer material injury during the review investigation period. However, given the increase in production costs during the period considered, the low level of investments and the profitability that, albeit increasing, remained below the target profit, it can be considered that the Union industry still needs time to consolidate its positive development and is therefore still in a vulnerable situation.

(156) Overall, on the basis of the above, the Commission concluded that the Union industry did not suffer material injury within the meaning of Article 3(5) of the basic Regulation during the review investigation period.

5.6.

Likelihood of recurrence of injury

5.6.1.

Preliminary remark

(157) Given the findings and conclusions outlined in recitals (152) to (156), the Commission assessed, in accordance with Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation, whether there would be a likelihood of recurrence of injury originally caused by the dumped imports from the PRC if the measures were allowed to lapse. To this end, the Commission examined the following elements: the production capacity and spare capacities in the PRC, the attractiveness of the EU market, the price behaviour of Chinese exporting producers and likely price levels to the EU should measures be repealed and the effect of future imports on the Union industry’s situation.

5.6.2.

Production capacity and spare capacity in the PRC

(158) As set out in recitals (91) to (94) based on the information available in accordance with Article 18 of the basic Regulation, the Chinese producers of ironing boards have significant spare capacity and are capable of adding further production capacity.

5.6.3.

The attractiveness of the EU market

(159) As set out in recitals (95) to (101), the Union market remained attractive for Chinese imports as evidenced by the fact that they still entered the Union market in significant quantities representing a market share of 6 % during the review investigation period despite the measures in force.

(160) While the overall import quantity decreased during the period considered, as mentioned in recital (108), the quantity of imports of stainless-steel ironing boards increased, yielding higher prices than other product types, as pointed out in recital (110) and (113). This trend of increasing imports is expected to accelerate in case measures are repealed. Stainless steel is precisely an area where the producers in the PRC enjoy an advantage over foreign competitors due to persistent government intervention, as already pointed out in the Report.

5.6.4.

Price behaviour of Chinese exporting producers and likely price level to the EU

(161) For the likely price levels of imports from the PRC in the absence of anti-dumping measures, it was considered that the Chinese imports were already undercutting the Union industry during the review investigation period. The undercutting margin without taking into consideration the anti-dumping measures amounted to 26 % which was considered as a reasonable estimate of possible future price levels of Chinese imports should the measures be repealed.

5.6.5.

Impact on the Union industry

(162) Given the above considerations, should measures be allowed to lapse, the Union industry will be confronted with an important increase of Chinese imports, significantly undercutting the Union industry’s prices. If, in an attempt to remain profitable, the Union industry would maintain its current price levels, it is likely that it would lose sales volume and market share rapidly, even in case of increasing consumption. Losing sales volume would lead to lower capacity utilisation rates and an increase in the average cost of production. This in turn would lead to a deterioration of the financial situation of the Union industry and to a decrease of its profitability which was already below the target profit during the period considered.

(163) In the alternative, if the Union industry would try to match the lower price levels of the imports in an attempt to keep its sales volume and market share, this would have an immediate negative impact on its profitability level which is currently still below the target profit. There would also be a negative effect on the investments that in any event had not fully recovered during the period considered and also a negative impact on the financial indicators of the Union industry. This situation would have a serious impact on the Union industry’s capacity for its further development. Ultimately, this would lead to a decrease in sales volume and market share and the loss of employment on the Union market.

5.6.6.

Conclusion

(164) On this basis, it is concluded that the absence of measures would in all likelihood result in a significant increase of dumped imports from the PRC at injurious prices and material injury would be likely to recur.

1. UNION INTEREST

(165) In accordance with Article 21 of the basic Regulation, the Commission examined whether the maintenance of the existing anti-dumping measures would not be against the interest of the Union as a whole. The determination of the Union interest was based on an appreciation of the various interests involved, including those of the Union industry, importers, retailers, consumers and users.

(166) The Commission recalls that, in the previous investigations, the adoption or maintaining of measures was considered not to be against the interest of the Union. Furthermore, the fact that the present investigation is a review, thus analysing a situation in which anti-dumping measures have already been in place, allows for the assessment of any undue negative impact on the parties concerned by the current anti-dumping measures. On that basis, it was examined whether, despite the conclusions on the likelihood of a continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury, compelling reasons existed which would lead to the conclusion that it is not in the Union interest to maintain measures in this particular case.

6.1.

Interest of the Union industry

(167) As set out in recitals (162) and (163), the investigation showed that the expiry of the measures would likely have a significant negative effect on the Union industry. On the other hand, the continuation of measures would allow the Union industry to maintain or even increase its current price levels and reach sustainable profit margins, thus avoiding periods of financial deterioration. This would allow the Union industry to continue and increase its investments and thus maintain and develop its position on the EU market.

(168) Therefore, it is concluded that maintaining the anti-dumping measures in force is in the interest of the Union industry.

6.2.

Interest of unrelated importers, retailers and interest of consumers (households)

(169) No unrelated importers cooperated in the investigation. None of the other potential interested parties made themselves known during the investigation. Like in the previous investigation, no parties representing the interests of end-users, such as associations of consumers, came forward or cooperated in the investigation.

(170) Based on the findings of the previous expiry review, there were no indications that maintaining the measures would have a significant negative impact on the importers or users that would outweigh the positive impact of the measures on the Union industry. The current review did not bring into light any information that would challenge these findings.

(171) Furthermore, as set out in recital (116), imports from other third countries not subject to anti-dumping duties accounted for approximately one third of the Union market share contributing to price competition and choice of supply on the market. Therefore, it is concluded that there is no evidence suggesting that the measures in force considerably affected the importers of the product under review or other interested parties.

6.3.

Conclusion on Union interest

(172) On the basis of the above, the Commission concluded that there were no compelling reasons of Union interest against maintaining the anti-dumping measures in force.

1. ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES

(173) On the basis of the conclusions reached by the Commission on likelihood of continuation of dumping, likelihood of recurrence of injury and Union interest, in accordance with Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation, the anti-dumping measures on imports of ironing boards from China should be maintained.

(174) 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. The application of individual anti-dumping duties 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 originating in the People’s Republic of China.

(175) While presentation of this invoice is necessary for the customs authorities of the Member States to apply the individual rates of anti-dumping duty 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(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 is justified, in compliance with customs law.

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

(177) 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.

(178) 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

European Commission, Directorate-General for Trade, Directorate G, Rue de la Loi 170, 1040 Bruxelles/Brussel, BELGIQUE/BELGIË.

. 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.

(179) Statistics of ironing boards are frequently expressed in pieces. However, there is no such supplementary unit for ironing boards specified in the Combined Nomenclature laid down in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2522 of 23 September 2024 amending Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (OJ L, 2024/2522, 31.10.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2024/2522/oj).

. It is therefore necessary to provide that not only the weight in kg or tonnes but also the number of pieces for the imports of ironing boards must be entered in the declaration for release for free circulation. Pieces should be indicated for TARIC codes 3924900010, 4421999910, 7323930010, 7323990010, 8516797010 and 8516900051.

(180) 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.

(181) In view of Article 109 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council

Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2024 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union (OJ L, 2024/2509, 26.9.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/2509/oj).

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.

(182) 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

1. A definitive anti-dumping duty is imposed on imports of ironing boards, currently falling under CN codes ex39249000, ex44219999, ex73239300, ex73239900, ex85167970 and ex85169000 (TARIC codes 3924900010, 4421999910, 7323930010, 7323990010, 8516797010 and 8516900051) and originating in the People’s Republic of China.

1. The rates of the definitive anti-dumping duty applicable to the net, free-at-Union-frontier price, before duty, of the product described in paragraph 1 and produced by the companies listed below shall be as follows:

Country of originCompanyAnti-dumping duty ( %)TARIC additional codePeople’s Republic of ChinaFoshan City Gaoming Lihe Daily Necessities Co. Ltd, Foshan34,9A782People’s Republic of ChinaGuangzhou Power Team Houseware Co. Ltd, Guangzhou39,6A783People’s Republic of ChinaSince Hardware (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd, Guangzhou35,8A784People’s Republic of ChinaGuangdong Wireking Household Supplies Co. Ltd, Foshan18,1A785People’s Republic of ChinaZhejiang Harmonic Hardware Products Co. Ltd, Quzhou26,5A786People’s Republic of ChinaGreenwood Houseware (Zhuhai) Ltd, Guangdong22,7A953People’s Republic of ChinaAll other imports originating in the People’s Republic of China42,3A999

1. The application of the individual duty rates specified for the companies mentioned in paragraph 2 shall be conditional upon presentation to the Member States’ customs authorities of a valid commercial invoice, on which shall appear a declaration dated and signed by an official of the entity issuing such invoice, identified by his/her name and function, drafted as follows: I, the undersigned, certify that the (volume in kilograms and number of pieces) of ironing boards sold for export to the European Union covered by this invoice was manufactured by (company name and address) (TARIC additional code) in the People’s Republic of China. I declare that the information provided in this invoice is complete and correct. Until such invoice is presented, the duty applicable to all other companies shall apply.

1. Where a declaration for release for free circulation is presented in respect of the product referred to in paragraph 1, irrespective of its origin, the number of pieces of the products imported shall be entered in the relevant field of that declaration.

Member States shall, on a monthly basis, inform the Commission of the number of pieces imported under TARIC codes 3924900010, 4421999910, 7323930010, 7323990010, 8516797010 and 8516900051.

1. Unless otherwise specified, the provisions in force concerning customs duties shall apply.

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, 27 November 2025.

For the Commission

The President

Ursula von der Leyen