Cat and LiuGong prompt UK to reconsider anti-dumping measures on Chinese excavators

The move comes after submissions from both Caterpillar and Chinese firm LiuGong.

LiuGong has claimed that battery electric machines should not be included within the definition of the goods and the tariff imposed. It has asked for battery electric machines to be removed from the description of the goods and all related tariffs.

Meanwhile, Caterpillar’s China-based operation Caterpillar (Xuzhou) Ltd. has questioned the TRA’s calculation of the individual anti-dumping amount that was calculated for it as the sampled cooperating overseas exporter to the original investigation.

It has asked the TRA to recalculate the injury margin, dumping margin, injury and causal link determination and the form of the anti-dumping measures.

The TRA undertakes reconsiderations of its recommendations as part of a process that parties can use to look again at decisions, in line with World Trade Organisation rules for free and fair trade.

The TRA launched its investigation into dumping of Chinese excavators into the UK market in November 2023 in response to an application from UK-based JCB and found that Chinese exporters undercut UK prices by an average rate of 23.4% thanks to reduced production costs.

In May 2025, the UK’s Secretary of State for Business and Trade accepted the TRA’s recommendation to impose new anti-dumping and countervailing measures on imports of excavators from China to the UK.

The anti-dumping duties range from 18.81% for a sampled exporter to 40.08% for the residual rate. The measures have been imposed on imports of excavators from China weighing 11 tonnes or more, but less than 80 tonnes. They will remain in force throughout the reconsideration process.

Caterpillar (Xuxhou) launched a judicial review against the TRA and the Department of Business and Trade’s decision to impose provisional anti-dumping measures on imports of Chinese excavators in February 2025.

The judgment in the judicial review was handed down on 9 May, with the claims against both the TRA and Secretary of State for Business and Trade ruled as unarguable. The judge in the case concluded that the TRA, in its decisions surrounding the provisional anti-dumping measures, had acted “lawfully, rationally and in a procedurally fair manner”.

The TRA’s reconsideration will now consider the grounds submitted by both applicants as part of one single investigation. It will determine whether the applications received necessitate a different recommendation to that originally given to the Secretary of State for Business and Trade.