Anti-dumping tariff on Chinese pea protein: costs and impact for EU importers

Key data

European companies importing pea protein from China face a structural increase in their raw material costs from 24 September 2026. The Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2026/2101, published in the EU Official Journal on 25 September 2026, establishes definitive anti-dumping duties on this ingredient and confirms the retroactive collection of provisional duties that were already in place.

The European Commission concluded that Chinese exports of pea protein were being made at dumping prices—that is, below their actual production cost—causing material injury to the European producing industry. The definitive measure consolidates and makes permanent what was previously a provisional restriction.

What does this regulation establish?

Regulation 2026/2101 closes the anti-dumping investigation initiated by the European Commission and adopts two decisions with immediate effect:

• Definitive anti-dumping duty: An additional permanent tariff is established on all imports of pea protein originating from the People's Republic of China.
• Retroactive collection of provisional duty: Importers who had already provided guarantees or deposits under the provisional regime will see those amounts definitively collected by customs authorities.

The legal basis for the measure is the finding of dumping: the Commission determined that Chinese export prices were artificially below the normal value of the product, creating unfair competition against European pea protein producers. This type of measure is regulated by the EU Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 on anti-dumping of the European Union.

Economic and operational impact

The impact is twofold: immediate cost from the retroactive collection of provisional duties already collected, and structural cost from the permanent increase in import costs from China.

• Direct importers: Must pay definitive duties on each shipment imported from China. Additionally, deposits or guarantees provided under the provisional regime are definitively collected, which represents a cash outflow already realized.
• Food and supplement manufacturers: If your cost structure was based on Chinese pea protein without anti-dumping tariff, your margin is directly compressed. The magnitude depends on the weight of this ingredient in the total cost of the product.
• Feed manufacturers: Pea protein is a relevant ingredient in animal nutrition. The price increase can be passed on to the final price of the feed or absorbed in margin depending on negotiating power with the customer.
• European pea protein producers: They are the direct beneficiaries. They regain price competitiveness against Chinese product, which can translate into greater market share and improved margins.

From an operational perspective, importing companies must update their cost structures, review supply contracts with Chinese suppliers, and assess whether the European or third-country alternative is technically and economically viable.

Who does it affect?

• European importers of pea protein originating from the People's Republic of China.
• Food manufacturers using Chinese pea protein as an ingredient (plant-based products, meat substitutes, protein snacks, plant-based beverages).
• Manufacturers of nutritional supplements and protein powders based on Chinese-origin pea protein.
• Feed manufacturers and animal nutrition incorporating Chinese pea protein in their formulas.
• Distributors and traders of plant-based protein ingredients operating with Chinese product in the European market.
• European pea protein producers (positive impact: regain competitiveness against Chinese competition).

Practical example

A Spanish company manufacturing plant-based beverages and protein powders regularly imports pea protein from China. Before the provisional regime came into force, it purchased this ingredient at market price without anti-dumping tariff. During the provisional period, it provided guarantees on its imports.

With the entry into force of Regulation 2026/2101:

1. The guarantees provided during the provisional period are definitively collected by customs: that liquidity is not recovered.
2. Each new import of Chinese pea protein is subject to the definitive anti-dumping duty, permanently increasing the cost of raw materials.
3. The company must decide whether to absorb the additional cost, pass it on to the selling price, or seek an alternative supplier from Europe or a third country not affected by the measure.

European pea protein producers, for their part, can now compete in price with Chinese product under more balanced conditions, which opens opportunities for renegotiating supply contracts for manufacturers seeking alternatives.

What should companies do now?

1. Audit the impact on costs: Quantify the weight of Chinese pea protein in your cost structure. Calculate how much the definitive tariff increases your production cost per unit or per ton.
2. Review current supply contracts: Check whether your contracts with Chinese suppliers include price revision clauses for tariff changes. If they do not, negotiate conditions or activate force majeure clauses if applicable.
3. Verify the status of provisional guarantees: Confirm with your customs agent what amounts provided under the provisional regime have already been collected and in what amount, to update your accounting and treasury.
4. Evaluate alternative suppliers: Analyze the technical and economic viability of replacing the Chinese origin with European pea protein or from third countries not affected by the anti-dumping measure.
5. Update selling prices if necessary: If the additional cost cannot be absorbed in margin, prepare a tariff review with your customers, especially in long-term supply contracts.
6. Monitor possible measure reviews: Definitive anti-dumping duties may be subject to review due to expiration or change in circumstances. Maintain active regulatory monitoring of this regulation.

Official source

Consult full regulation at official source

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific decisions, consult a qualified professional. Source: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/./legal-content/AUTO/?uri=OJ:L_202602101