What changed between the plenary report and the adopted text

Added:P10_TC1-COD(2025)0012

Removed:Despite the title, this legislative proposal does not relate to the current trade tension between the US administration and the EU. The objective of the proposal is simply to introduce a limited, targeted and technical amendment to Regulation (EU) 2018/196 by including a de minimis threshold for the imposition of retaliation against the United Stated for a WTO case the US lost in 2003.

Added:Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 1 April 2025 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2025/… of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2018/196 on additional customs duties on imports of certain products originating in the United States of America

Removed:The case relates to the United States’ Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000 (‘CDSOA’, or the Byrd Amendment). The CDSOA mandates the yearly distribution of the anti-dumping and countervailing duties collected during the previous fiscal year to US companies. The CDSOA was found incompatible with the United States' WTO obligations in January 2003.

Added:(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) 2025/783.)

Removed:Given that the United States failed to bring itself into compliance with its obligations under the WTO agreements, the Union was authorised to impose an additional import duty on a list of US products covering on a yearly basis a total value of trade not exceeding the amount of 72 % of the CDSOA disbursement from duties collected on imports from the Union. The Byrd Amendment was repealed in 2006, but the US created a transitional period whereby disbursements would continue as long as they concerned duties collected before 1 October 2007.

Removed:In 2024 the amount of the EU authorised retaliation was negligible (USD 34,98) but the Commission was still required to adopt a delegated regulation to set the rate of duty to 0%. Retrieving USD 34,98 would have had no trade impact and would have imposed a disproportionate administrative cost to the Union. INTA did not oppose the proposed Delegated Act.

Removed:It is expected that in the future the authorised level of retaliation will continue to remain low and will go towards exhaustion. For that reason, the Commission suggests setting a threshold at USD 30 000 of disbursements made by US authorities in relation to Union imports in one fiscal year (which would correspond to an authorised level of retaliation of USD 21 600) under which no EU duties would apply. In the unlikely event that sums disbursed by the US exceeded the USD 30 000 sum, the EU would be entitled to apply retaliation.

Removed:The legal basis for this Regulation Amendment is Article 207(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. This limited amendment to the basic act should be adopted by the end of April, so as to avoid initiating the yearly Delegated Act procedure.

Removed:Given the limited, targeted and technical nature of the amendment in question, the Chair, as Standing Rapporteur for trade relations with the US, suggested that the proposal be adopted via the Simplified Procedure under Rule 52 (1) of the Rules of Procedure (approval without amendments).