Vietnam Definitive Anti-Dumping Duty on Hot-Rolled Steel Coils from China (AD20)

Mechanism

Decision 1959/QĐ-BCT closes the definitive phase of Vietnam TRAV anti-dumping case AD20, which investigated imports of hot-rolled steel coils (HRC) of width up to 1,880 mm (HS chapters 7208 / 7225 series). The investigation was initiated in response to a domestic-industry petition by Vietnamese HRC producers, primarily Hòa Phát Group (HPG), who alleged material injury from surging low-cost Chinese HRC imports enabled by severe Chinese over-capacity.

Duty rates (China-origin, definitive): 23.10%–27.83% ad valorem CIF. The range reflects company-specific dumping margins for investigated Chinese exporters; a residual rate applies to non-cooperating companies at the higher end.

India termination: The parallel investigation on Indian-origin HRC was terminated simultaneously by the same decision — TRAV found no material dumping margin or injury attributable to Indian imports. This is a meaningful signal: the investigation was specifically aimed at China's over-capacity redirect into SE Asian markets, not a broad protectionist sweep.

Price undertaking rejected: Decision 1958/QĐ-BCT (same date) rejected a price undertaking proposal from Chinese producers on grounds of insufficient cooperation, opaque reference pricing, inadequate quantity/price commitments, and unenforceable monitoring mechanisms.

Anti-circumvention follow-on (AC03.AD20): On 27 October 2025, MoIT issued Decision 3176/QĐ-BCT, initiating anti-circumvention investigation AC03.AD20 into wider HRC coils (width 1,880 mm–2,300 mm) not covered by the definitive duty scope — consistent with a pattern of Chinese exporters rapidly widening coil width to evade the AD perimeter. This does not change the definitive duty itself but confirms the measure is generating evasion pressure.

Context: China HRC over-capacity and SE Asia as a redirect market

China produces ~60% of global crude steel and has sustained output at peak levels despite domestic construction demand contraction. Vietnam, Thailand, and other SE Asian markets have absorbed a rising share of Chinese HRC exports as US/EU/India raise barriers. Vietnam already imposed provisional AD measures under AD20 prior to this definitive determination. Decision 1959 completes the legal architecture: a 5-year definitive barrier priced at ~25% CIF, covering the mainstream coil-width range, closing the principal redirect channel.

This is the first trade-remedy action (anti-dumping, safeguard, or CVD) filed for Vietnam in the IPTM register, despite Vietnam running an active TRAV AD/CVD/safeguard regime. The 23 prior VN actions were all industrial-policy, regulatory, export-control, or subsidy instruments.

Downstream implications

• Re-prices a major China→Vietnam bilateral HRC flow; affects downstream Vietnamese steel users

(construction, automotive, appliances) that depended on cheap Chinese coil

• Signals SE Asian trade-defence escalation mirroring the EU and Indian steel barriers against

Chinese overcapacity; Thailand (aluminium extrusions, 2025-11-24) and Egypt (HRC safeguard, 2025-09-11) filed similar trade-remedy actions in the same cycle

• AC03.AD20 anti-circumvention investigation (wider coils) will likely extend the effective scope

to 2,300 mm within 12–18 months if Chinese mills continue widening strategy

• India termination creates an asymmetric trade flow: Indian HRC (e.g. JSPL, Tata Steel) gains a

competitive window in Vietnam vs. Chinese peers

Open questions

• What are the company-specific rates for named Chinese exporters (e.g. Baosteel, HBIS, Shagang)?
• Will AC03.AD20 reach a definitive determination before the 2025 review trigger?
• Does Vietnam plan a CVD investigation alongside the AD measure?