Date of publication: 15 October 2026
Olena Omelchenko, Attorney at Law, Partner, Head of International Trade Practice
Source: Ukrainian Law Firms 2026
Anti-dumping instruments acquired particular significance for both Ukraine and the European Union in 2025-2026. Global excess production capacity, primarily in China, the redirection of trade flows following stronger protection of major markets, and the growing role of industrial policy have increased pressure on domestic producers.
This pressure is particularly acute for Ukraine. Ukrainian companies compete with dumped imports in the midst of the ongoing war, damaged production facilities, energy shortages, disrupted logistics and a shrinking domestic market. Trade defense is, therefore, no longer merely a technical customs instrument but an important element of economic security.
Intensification of Trade Defense in Ukraine
In 2025, Ukraine significantly intensified its anti-dumping practice. The Interdepartmental Commission on International Trade imposed a definitive duty of 37.35% on heating radiators from Turkey. For radiators from China, individual rates of 23.30-25.19% were introduced, with a rate of 42% for other producers and exporters. Definitive duties were also imposed on fittings for water supply and heating systems at 34.72% for products from Turkey and 166.65% for products from China.
Measures were also imposed on fresh cucumbers and tomatoes from Turkey and matches from India. Ukraine extended anti-dumping duties on cement from Russia, Belarus and Moldova until 2030 and initiated anti-dumping investigations into cable and wire products from several countries and electric storage water heaters from China.
In 2026, new investigations were initiated into steel bars and angles from Turkey and China, welded steel pipes from Turkey, welding equipment from China, and coated carbon steel products from Turkey, Vietnam, the Republic of Korea and India. Despite the war and institutional constraints Ukraine, therefore, continues to use trade defense instruments actively.
However, imposing a duty is only the first stage. The principal challenge is to ensure its effective collection and prevent circumvention through changes in tariff classification, declared origin, exporter or supply route. Our experience representing domestic producers shows that a successful case increasingly requires not only proof of dumping and injury but also an understanding of customs practices and the actual supply chain.
First Anti-Circumvention Decisions
Last year, based on cases handled by our team, we drew attention to the large-scale circumvention of Ukrainian anti-dumping duties through Malaysia and the absence of an effective procedure for countering such practices.
Ukraine took an unprecedented step in 2026 by extending measures originally imposed on Chinese products to certain goods declared as originating in Malaysia. The decisions covered steel fasteners, silico-manganese steel wire and coated carbon steel products.
Another important development was the amendment of the Commission’s existing decision on fittings for water supply and heating systems. Following the work carried out by our team, the Commission clarified the description of the product covered by the anti-dumping measures. This helped to prevent potential circumvention through minor modifications to the design of fittings or attempts to formally exclude certain product types from the scope of the measures.
For the first time, the Ukrainian authorities demonstrated their readiness to not only extend measures to imports from a third country but to also adjust the product description in an existing decision where its wording created a risk of circumvention. Anti-dumping protection must, therefore, reflect the actual characteristics of the product and its real supply chain rather than merely the formal information contained in customs documents.
These cases also confirmed the key role of the State Customs Service of Ukraine. Proving circumvention requires verification of foreign production facilities, the origin of raw materials, manufacturing operations, transport documents, related parties and certificates of origin. Cooperation between domestic producers, the Ministry of Economy and the Customs Service is, therefore, essential to the effectiveness of trade defense measures.
EU Practice
The EU is moving in the same direction but uses considerably more developed mechanisms. In 2025, the European Commission imposed definitive duties of 13.1-62.3% on Chinese tinplate and 131.1% on vanillin from China. For epoxy resins, the duties came to 17.3–33% for China, 10.8-11% for Taiwan and 29.9% for Thailand. The investigation into South Korea was terminated because no dumping was established. A definitive duty of 62.5% was also imposed on Chinese steel track shoes.
In 2026, the EU imposed definitive duties of 56.7-60.3% on candles from China and 88.7-110.6% on Chinese-fused alumina. In the latter case, the duties were combined with a duty-free tariff quota, balancing the interests of EU producers and industrial users.
The European Commission increasingly makes imports subject to registration during investigations, allowing retroactive collection under certain conditions. It also monitors trade flows and systematically initiates anti-circumvention investigations where imports are redirected through third countries. A notable example is the extension of duties on Russian birch plywood to imports from Kazakhstan and Turkey.
Countries in Focus
China remains the principal target of EU trade defense action, particularly in the steel, chemicals, industrial components and consumer goods sectors. At the same time, the EU is increasingly investigating imports from Turkey, India, Taiwan, Thailand and Vietnam, including where Chinese or Russian products may have been redirected through those countries.
In Ukraine, China and Turkey are also the principal countries in focus. However, the geographical scope of investigations is expanding to Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Vietnam, South Korea and India. Malaysia occupies a distinct position as the first third country to which Ukraine extended measures following a finding of circumvention of duties on Chinese goods.
Turkey requires particular attention. On 14 July 2026, the Ukrainian Parliament ratified the Free Trade Agreement between Ukraine and Turkey, Once it enters into force, further liberalization of access for Turkish goods to the Ukrainian market is likely to increase demand among Ukrainian producers for anti-dumping protection. It remains to be seen, however, whether the state will have sufficient political will to apply trade remedies against Turkey as an important economic and political partner of Ukraine.
Challenges and Prospects
Ukraine’s legal framework remains based on legislation adopted in 1998, which does not adequately regulate modern supply chains, import registration, circumvention or cooperation between the investigating authority and Customs Service.
Transparency is another concern. Unlike EU regulations, Ukrainian decisions are generally published as brief notices without detailed reasoning. This makes the authorities’ methodology less predictable and complicates the defense of measures before the courts.
Attempts by importers to suspend Commission decisions by seeking interim injunctive relief from administrative courts have become an additional risk. Where a court suspends an anti-dumping duty as an interim measure before the case is considered on its merits, the goods may be imported and sold without payment of the duty, while the resulting injury to domestic producers may be impossible to remedy later.
As the EU and the United States strengthen protection of their markets, excess production will be increasingly redirected to less protected jurisdictions. The rebuilding of Ukraine will also generate substantial demand for steel, cement, cables and other industrial goods.
For Ukrainian producers, the principal lesson is that trade defense should be proactive. Companies need to monitor imports before injury becomes critical, maintain reliable product-specific financial data and prepare evidence in advance. Once measures are imposed, continued monitoring and coordinated legal and customs work are required to defend them against judicial challenges and circumvention. Only this comprehensive approach can turn individual decisions into effective and consistent protection for Ukrainian industry.
