23.12.2025

UK to investigate AWP dumping complaint

The UK Trade Remedies Authority (TRA) has opened an investigation into a complaint that companies based in China are selling boom lifts into the UK at uncommercial or unfair pricing levels - in other words, dumping.

The complaint was filed on the 30th of September by UK boom lift manufacturer Niftylift, and applies to all fully self-propelled and semi self-propelled/self-drive boom lifts, along with trailer and spider lifts with a working height of six metres or more that are made in China.

The complaint claims that Chinese companies' ability to sell at highly discounted prices is enabled by various forms of state subsidy, ranging from cheap and supported finance to subsidised land costs, state subsidised power, grants, discounted freight, tax breaks and other such forms of support.

The TRA, part of the UK's Department for Business & Trade, announced its decision to initiate the investigation - number AS0076 - into the complaint on Friday, December 19th. It also stated that it plans to examine sales for the period from the 1st of October 2021 to the 30th of September 2025.

Anyone wishing to participate in the investigation can register their interest in doing so at https://www.trade-remedies.service.gov.uk/ by the 12th of January 2026. If you choose to take part and have registered, you can comment on any issues that might be relevant to the investigation through the Trade Remedies Service.

The TRS says that interested parties might include:
• The Chinese government
• Any overseas exporter or UK importer of the products in the complaint
• Any manufacturer of products included in the investigation
• Anyone who trades in the products
• Any company or business that uses or is involved with the products in the investigation.

The organisation will then hold a general information session for the interested parties who have registered to learn about how they can engage with the investigation and provide an opportunity for registrants to ask any general questions.
A Teams-based review session will then be held on the 14th of January 2026 at 11:00 to openly discuss the input etc… It is expected to last for around an hour. If you register, you will receive an invite, or if you are unable to attend, you can email the Service at [email protected] and request a separate discussion at another time.

The investigation will involve the following steps:
• Inviting parties to register their interest in the investigation by January 12th.
• Issuing questionnaires to those who have registered, along with any producers mentioned in the complaint that have not registered.
• Carrying out verification visits to further assess and examine information.
• Analysing all of the information gathered.
• Determining whether subsidised goods are being imported into the UK and whether it is causing injury to the UK industry.
• Determining an amount/tariff that is sufficient to remove the injury.
• Considering whether any such move would be in the economic interests of the UK.
• Publishing a Statement of Essential Facts, along with a period - no longer than 30 days - during which interested parties can comment on the Statement.

UK Government has the final say
• Once the organisation determines that the investigation is complete, it will make a recommendation to the secretary of state for Business and Trade, which may include a recommendation for an anti-dumping tariff to be applied. The secretary of state will then decide whether to accept, reject or request that the TRA reassess the recommendation. If they reject it, they may decide to apply an alternative remedy.

Vertikal Comment

This is an interesting one, there may well be a case to answer here, particularly after the EU applied anti-dumping tariffs diverted machines heading for the rest of Europe into the UK. Nifty is also clearly very concerned, and with good reason, that Chinese manufacturers will start importing cheap trailer lifts into the UK and perhaps other markets where it has an almost dominant market share.

The 152 page complaint is a challenge to wade through, but it is very thorough, well documented, and includes a huge amount of solid background material to support the case.

One aspect, though, is that while the claim submission makes a solid case for not using prices in the domestic Chinese market as a comparative, it follows the USA and the EU in using Brazil as a comparable market to assess what costs might be like in an open market country with similar development conditions to China. Brazil, for a number of reasons, is a high cost base to manufacturer self-propelled lifts, which is why few, if any, do it. It even cites the low volume truck mounted lift producer Palfinger as a comparative producer. Turkey, or perhaps better still India, would have been a more credible and open example of a comparative country, given that several companies now produce boom lifts and similar products there, including JCB, which builds all of its platforms there, while being a developing nation.

The choice of Brazil was originally instigated by the CAMMAE - largely JLG and Genie, in 2021 when it launched its anti dumping claim and persuaded the US Border Protection agency that it was a good comparative country. The EU, thinking that the American authorities had properly assessed its selection, and with a nudge from the complainants, followed suit. Hopefully, the UK will make its own decision and choose a more realistic comparative aerial lift manufacturing country.

Apart from this, the company makes a strong case, assuming that the redacted/confidential numbers and other sensitive evidence support it, which they almost certainly will.

It will be interesting to see how the TRA rules in this case, what tariffs it might recommend and what the UK government then decides to do with it. As we have said before, there are times when taking such action is warranted, although it can be a blunt tool in a complex market, while having the potential to backfire, especially if the investigation includes a distortion or two.

Hopefully, this one will meet the open and fair criteria in full and that any company found to be carrying out unfair trade practices pays for it.