DGTR Recommends Higher Anti-Dumping Duty on Glufosinate from China after Anti Absorption Investigation Finds 46% in Export Price to Counter Anti-dumping Duty and MIP

Ø Anti-dumping Duty of US$ 2998 Imposed on Weedicide Glufosinate and Its Salt’ from China Notified for Five Years on Complaint of UPL Ltd Plus Four Entities - Notification No. 09/2025-Customs (ADD) dated 8 May, 2025

Final Findings dated 1 September 2026 – Anti-absorption investigation

· Product covered: Glufosinate and its salts, in both technical and formulation forms, originating in or exported from China PR.

· Existing duty: Anti-dumping duty of US$2,998/MT was imposed on the subject goods from China PR for five years through Notification No. 09/2025-Customs (ADD) dated 8 May 2025.

· Anti-absorption investigation: DGTR initiated the investigation on 2 March 2026 following allegations by the domestic industry that Chinese exporters had absorbed the anti-dumping duty by reducing export prices.

· Period examined: The absorption period was January 2025–September 2025, compared with the original investigation period of January–December 2023.

· Imports examined: Total imports during the absorption period were 66 MT, of which 51 MT entered after the anti-dumping duty came into force. One 5-MT consignment entered at a substantially lower CIF value, about 38% of the value of the other consignments.

· Actual export pricing: DGTR found that declared import values around the Minimum Import Price (MIP) did not necessarily reflect the exporters' actual pricing. Verified group records and China Customs data indicated substantially lower underlying export prices.

· Export price fell sharply: The net export price to India declined by about 46% after imposition of the anti-dumping duty. DGTR rejected the argument that the decline was due to rupee depreciation because the comparison was made in US-dollar terms.

· Costs declined much less: Prices of major raw materials declined by only about 7.4%, substantially less than the 46% fall in export prices. DGTR therefore concluded that the price reduction was not commensurate with the change in production costs.

· Absorption established: Under Rule 29(1), DGTR held that a decline in export price without a commensurate reduction in cost of production was sufficient to establish absorption. It concluded that Chinese producers/exporters had absorbed the anti-dumping duty, rendering the existing measure ineffective.

· Dumping margin increased: The dumping margin rose from 20–30% in the original investigation to 85–95% during the absorption period—approximately a three-fold increase.

· Injury margin also increased: The injury margin increased from 20–30% to 85–95%. The landed price fell by approximately 45%, while the reassessed non-injurious price fell by only about 18%.

· Reassessment of NIP: The reassessed non-injurious price was approximately 14% lower than in the original investigation, principally because raw-material costs had declined by around 19%.

· Existing MIP does not negate absorption: DGTR held that the MIP and anti-dumping duty are separate instruments and that the existence of the MIP does not prevent a finding that exporters absorbed the anti-dumping duty.

Key Recommendation

· DGTR recommends increasing the quantum of anti-dumping duty from US$2,998/MT to US$5,004/MT on Glufosinate and its salts from China PR.

· The form/type of duty remains unchanged; only the quantum is proposed to be modified.

· The revised duty will apply prospectively only and not retrospectively.

· Imports covered by provisional assessment during the review period will be finally assessed at the duty rate applicable during the relevant period.

· Applying the lesser-duty rule, DGTR recommends duty equal to the lesser of the dumping margin and injury margin.

· The proposed US$5,004/MT duty will remain in force for the unexpired period of the existing anti-dumping duty, subject to the Central Government issuing the implementing notification.

Bottom line: DGTR has found that Chinese exporters absorbed the existing US$2,998/MT anti-dumping duty by sharply reducing actual export prices, while costs fell only marginally. It therefore recommends raising the duty to US$5,004/MT, with the increase applying prospectively and without retrospective effect.

[DGTR Final Findings Case No. AD (AA) – 01/2026 dated 01.09.2026]