Over the past two years, China has employed a set of new legal tools in international trade investigations. In addition to traditional trade remedy investigations such as anti-dumping, countervailing, and safeguard investigations, the Chinese authorities are actively exploring new investigation types, including anti-discrimination, competitiveness, and sanction-related investigations. Some of these new investigations tend to be policy-oriented and rest on newly introduced legal authorities. Together, the developing legal authorities and investigation types may provide the government with a broader toolkit to regulate and administer international trade.

This article provides a brief overview of these investigations, their underlying legal authorities, and the respective measures involved.

I. Trade Barrier Investigation

During the past two years, the Ministry of Commerce (“MOFCOM”) of the People’s Republic of China has conducted three crucial trade barrier investigations: one concerning certain practices of the European Union (EU), another addressing the trade policies of Chinese Taiwan, and, most recently on 25 September 2025, a new investigation into Mexic’s Tariff measures affecting Chinese imports. These investigations aimed to protect the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese enterprises and to uphold a fair international trade order. They mark China’s third to fifth trade barrier investigations, and the first use of the trade barrier mechanism since 2012.

1. Legal Authority

The legal basis of these investigations by MOFCOM mainly comes from the Foreign Trade Law of the People’s Republic of China (“Foreign Trade Law”) and the Rules for the Investigation of Trade Barriers. According to Article 37 of the Foreign Trade Law, in order to safeguard the foreign trade order, MOFCOM may initiate relevant investigations on its own or jointly with other relevant departments of the State Council when encountering actions that may disrupt fair trade. The Rules for the Investigation of Trade Barriers further clarify the scope, procedures, and criteria for identifying trade barriers, providing detailed operational guidelines for MOFCOM’s investigation.

2. Main Procedures

A. Investigation into the EU’s Practices

(1) Receiving Application and Initiating Investigation: On June 17, 2024, MOFCOM received a formal application from the China Chamber of Commerce for Import and Export of Machinery and Electronic Products, requesting an investigation into the relevant practices adopted by the EU in its investigations of Chinese enterprises based on the Regulation on Foreign Subsidies Distorting the EU Internal Market (“Foreign Subsidies Regulation”) and its implementing rules. After reviewing the applicant’s qualifications, the measures at issue, the products involved, the negative impacts, and relevant evidence in accordance with the law, MOFCOM decided to initiate a trade barrier investigation on July 10, 2024.

(2) Notification and Information Gathering: Following initiation, MOFCOM promptly notified the EU delegation in China of the case-filing decision and provided access to the initiation announcement and the public version of the application. At the same time, MOFCOM actively collected information through various approaches such as surveys, public hearings, and on-site investigations. For example, on September 5, 2024, MOFCOM sent questionnaires to relevant government agencies, enterprises, and business associations, inviting them to provide information on the EU’s practices and their impacts. On-site investigations were conducted at Chinese enterprises in sectors such as railroad locomotives, photovoltaics, and wind power which had been affected by the EU’s probes under the “Foreign Subsidies Regulation”, to verify relevant information, assess the impacts on enterprises, and gather their opinions.

(3) Data Analysis and Review: The investigation team analyzed a large amount of data and evidence collected during the investigation process, including the EU’s legal documents, investigation procedures, and the actual impacts on Chinese enterprises, and evaluated whether the EU’s practices met the criteria of trade barriers under Chinese laws and regulations.

B. Investigation into Taiwan Region’s Trade Policies

(1) Receiving Applications and Initiating Investigation: On March 17, 2023, MOFCOM received a joint application from three Chinese import and export chambers, requesting an investigation into trade restrictive measures implemented by the Taiwan region against the Chinese mainland. After strictly examining the applicant’s qualifications, the measures under investigation, the products involved, the negative trade impacts, and relevant evidence materials, in accordance with relevant laws, MOFCOM announced the initiation of a trade barrier investigation into the trade restrictive measures of the Taiwan region on April 12, 2023.

(2) Notification and Information: After the initiation, MOFCOM, through the Permanent Mission of the People’s Republic of China to the WTO, notified the Permanent Mission of the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, and Matsu (“Chinese Taipei”) to the WTO in writing of the case-filing decision and provided access to the documents. MOFCOM actively collected information through multiple channels. For instance, on June 19, 2023, a notice was issued on the MOFCOM website, inviting Chinese mainland enterprises, business associations, Taiwan-based enterprises and business associations, as well as other interested parties and the public to voluntarily submit questionnaire responses and comments. By the deadline, MOFCOM had received a total of 183 questionnaire responses and 20 public comments. MOFCOM verified the relevant factual materials in the application, independently collected information such as relevant “regulations” and product lists of the Taiwan region, and conducted on-site investigations in major mainland provinces trading with Chinese Taiwan. They also held enterprise symposiums and visited relevant industry associations to comprehensively understand the impacts of the investigated measures on mainland export enterprises and related industries.

(3) Data Analysis and Review: MOFCOM analyzed the vast amount of data and evidence collected and verified evidence against the legal framework and factual contexts to determine whether the trade measures of the Taiwan region constituted trade barriers. Given the complexity of the case, on October 9, 2023, MOFCOM decided to extend the investigation period by three months. Eventually, a comprehensive and detailed investigation led to the formation of the investigation conclusion.

3. Rights of Parties

A. Rights in the EU-related Investigation

(1) Rights of Chinese Applicants and Stakeholders: Chinese applicants have the right to submit applications and relevant evidence. Chinese enterprises and industry associations affected by the EU’s measures could also participate in the investigation by providing information, filling out questionnaires, and expressing their opinions. They could detail how Foreign Subsidies Regulation-related investigations affected their exports, market shares, and EU investment plans, such as difficulties in participation in public procurement due to the EU investigations.

Rights of the EU Side: The EU side was entitled to be kept informed of the investigation progress and could collaborate by providing explanations or justifications. For example, the EU delegation in China received the questionnaire sent by MOFCOM and was thereby given the opportunity to provide relevant information and positions on behalf of the EU.

B. Rights in the Chinese Taiwan-related Investigation

(1) Rights of Mainland Applicants and Interested Parties: Chinese mainland applicants have the right to submit applications and relevant evidence to elaborate on the adverse impacts of the Taiwan region’s trade restrictive measures on them. Mainland enterprises and industry associations, as interested parties, could engage in the investigation by detailing the impacts of the Taiwan region’s trade restrictive measures on their exports, market shares, production, operation, etc. in their questionnaire responses as well as comments and opinions. Their input played a crucial role in MOFCOM’s investigation.

(2) Rights of the Taiwan Region Parties: The Taiwan region, as the investigated party, also has the option to cooperate with the investigation and provide explanations and clarifications relating to the background and purposes of relevant trade measures, among others.

4. Results

A. Results of the EU-related Investigation

(1) Determination of Trade Barriers: After investigation, on January 9, 2025, MOFCOM determined that the EU’s practices in its investigations of Chinese enterprises under the Foreign Subsidies Regulation and its implementing rules constituted trade and investment barriers. The practices, such as the way of initiating investigations, burden of proof requirements, and the application of punitive measures, were found inconsistent with fair trade principles and had a negative impact on China’s trade and investment in the EU.   

(2) Potential Follow-up Actions: No specific measures have been announced at the time of the determination. However, under the law, MOFCOM may seek bilateral consultations, challenge the measure at WTO, or take other countermeasures permitted by international trade rules to safeguard China’s legitimate rights and interests.

B. Results of the Chinese Taiwan-related Investigation

(1) Determination of Trade Barriers: On December 15, 2023, MOFCOM released the final determination finding that the trade restrictive measures implemented by the Taiwan region met the circumstances specified in Article 3 of the Rules for the Investigation of Trade Barriers, and therefore constituted trade barriers. Through instruments such as the “Statute Governing Relations between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area”, the “Measures Governing Trade between the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area”, and the “Regulations Governing the Importation of Mainland - Made Articles”, the Taiwan region established a system that almost entirely prohibited imports of mainland products, allowing the entry of only select mainland products under specific conditions. During the investigation, the list of prohibited mainland products expanded from 2,455 items at application filing to 2,509 items, further impeding mainland products’ access to Taiwan region’s market.

(2) Follow-up Measures: Based on the investigation results, the Chinese mainland has taken a series of measures. For example, the Tariff Commission of the State Council decided to stop implementing the policy of exempting 34 types of agricultural products originating from Taiwan from import tariffs. These are the products that the Chinese mainland had previously exempted from import tariffs in two batches, effective respectively from August 1, 2005 and March 20, 2007, including fresh fruits, vegetables, and aquatic products. In addition, the Chinese mainland twice suspended, at the end of 2023 and again in May 2024, partial tariff concessions under the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA), mainly covering petrochemical products, textiles, machinery, steel, and other industrial goods. Across three tranches, the number of products with suspended tariff concessions has reached 180, approximately 36% of the roughly 500 items on the ECFA early-harvest list.

In conclusion, the trade barrier investigations against the EU’s practices and the Taiwan region’s trade policies, along with the recently initiated investigation into Mexic’s Tariff measures are important measures to safeguard China’s legitimate trade rights and interests. They also demonstrate China’s firm determination to defend the fair international trade order and foster a stable, well-regulated international trading environment.

II. Anti-discrimination Investigation

Anti-discrimination is a recent addition to China’s trade investigation toolkit. Its first application is for investigating certain Canadian trade policies on Chinese electric vehicles, as well as steel and aluminum. Canada has imposed unilateral tariffs on imported electric vehicles and signaled consideration to expand tariffs on additional Chinese products in 2024. In response, MOFCOM launched an anti-discrimination investigation, a significant move to safeguard China’s legitimate rights and interests in international trade.

On September 13, China initiated an anti-discrimination investigation into U.S. analog-chip trade policy, focusing on Washington’s measures on Chinese companies.. This is the latest application to date, and it covers the broadest scope of the subject policies and measures.

1.Legal Authority

The legal basis for this investigation derives from the Foreign Trade Law of the People’s Republic of China. Article 7 stipulates that if any country or region takes discriminatory, prohibitive, restrictive, or other similar measures against China in trade, China may, in light of the situation, take measures accordingly. Article 36 further states that the foreign trade department of the State Council, for the purpose of maintaining foreign trade order and implementing the above-mentioned provisions, may initiate relevant investigations on its own or jointly with other relevant departments of the State Council. These legal provisions endow MOFCOM with the power to conduct anti-discrimination investigations to counter discriminatory trade practices imposed by other countries.

2. Main Procedures

(1) Initiation of Investigation: On September 26, 2024, based on preliminary evidence and information indicating that Canada’s measures – including additional tariffs on Chinese-made electric vehicles, steel, and aluminum products and other restrictions (hereinafter referred to as the “investigated measures”) fell within the scope of “taking discriminatory prohibitive, restrictive, or other similar measures against the People’s Republic of China in trade” as defined in Article 7 of the Foreign Trade Law, MOFCOM formally announced the initiation of an anti-discrimination investigation against Canada.

(2) Investigation Methods: During the investigation, MOFCOM adopted a variety of methods in accordance with Article 37 of the Foreign Trade Law. Questionnaires were distributed to Chinese enterprises in the electric vehicle, steel, and aluminum industries to assess how the Canadian tariffs affected their exports, production, and market share. MOFCOM also solicited and received comments and opinions from various interested parties, including domestic industry associations and enterprises. A total of five industry associations and 165 domestic enterprises participated in the investigation and submitted their comments and responses. In addition, MOFCOM invited the Canadian government and the business community to submit information. On such basis, MOFCOM analyzed the statistics of 205 products labelled with tariff numbers across the three categories affected by Canada’s measures, alongside customs data.

(3) Conclusion and Announcement: After a comprehensive review, MOFCOM issued its determination based on the facts and relevant laws. On March 8, 2025, MOFCOM found Canada’s measures discriminatory, making public the investigation process, findings, and the resulting countermeasures.

3. Rights of Parties

(1) Rights of Chinese Enterprises and Industry Associations: Chinese enterprises and industry associations had the right to participate in the investigation, submit their comments, and provide relevant evidence on how Canada’s measures affected their business operations. This process ensured their concerns were formally considered. For instance, Chinese electric vehicle manufacturers could detail how the 100% additional tariff imposed by Canada since October 1, 2024, impacted their sales volume, production planning, and employment in the Canadian market.

(2) Rights of the Canadian Side: Canadian stakeholders were afforded the same procedural rights. However, from the public case record, none of the Canadian parties substantially provided information or evidence.

4. Results

(1) Determination of Discrimination: MOFCOM determined that Canada’s relevant investigated measures constituted “discriminatory prohibitive, restrictive, or other similar measures against China in trade” as defined in Article 7 of the Foreign Trade Law. These measures affected normal trade orders and had a serious negative impact on Chinese enterprises. For example, Canada’s imposition of high tariffs on Chinese-made products without justifiable reasons disrupted the normal trade relationship between the two countries and damaged the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese enterprises.

(2) Countermeasures: According to the Foreign Trade Law and the Tariff Law of the People’s Republic of China, in response to Canada’s discriminatory measures, the State Council Tariff Commission announced that, starting from March 20, 2025, a 100% tariff would be imposed on Canadian rapeseed oil, oil-cake meal, and peas, and a 25% tariff on Canadian aquatic products and pork.

This anti-discrimination investigation by MOFCOM represents China’s most recent effort to introduce legal tools to balance international trade and a legal response to Canada’s certain trade policies. As it may follow a responsive tariff imposition from a single source, it has the potential to reshape China’s trade relations in certain products.

III. Unreliable Entity List Investigation

Unreliable Entity List is a sanction measure aimed to prompt certain corrective actions from a party or country that has adopted policies and activities deemed to have infringed upon China’s sovereignty, security, or development interests.

Although China has designated a number of foreign companies as unreliable entities and imposed certain sanctions on them, there has so far been only one investigation in this domain. In September 2024, MOFCOM announced the initiation of an unreliable entity list investigation against a US company.

1. Legal Authority

The legal basis for MOFCOM’s unreliable entity list investigations is grounded in the Foreign Trade Law of the People’s Republic of China, the National Security Law of the People’s Republic of China, and the Provisions on the Unreliable Entity List. When implementing measures, determinations may also incorporate the Counter-Foreign Sanction Law as another authority.

2. Main Procedures

1. Initiation of Investigation: On September 24, 2024, acting on recommendations and reports from relevant institutions, the investigating authority, the Unreliable Entity List Working Mechanism (administered by MOFCOM) initiated an investigation into a US company. The issues under scrutiny included suspected violations of normal market transaction principles, interruption of normal transactions with Chinese enterprises, and adoption of discriminatory measures related to Xinjiang products.

   
   

2. Collection of Evidence: During the investigation, the investigating authority may adopt necessary means, such as inquiring the parties, reviewing or copying relevant documents and materials to conduct the investigation, and requiring cooperation from the company under investigation and related enterprises.

   
   

3. Hearing of Statements and Defenses: The investigating authority could also hear the statements and defenses from the company under investigation as well as from other parties.

   
   

3. Rights of the Parties

The company under investigation has the right to make statements and defenses to the investigating authority during the investigation. It was required to provide written materials and supporting documents explaining whether there have been discriminatory measures related to Xinjiang products within the preceding three years, along with other materials requested by the investigating authority, within 30 days of the publication of the investigation announcement.

4. Results

On February 4, 2025, MOFCOM decided to include the US company in the Unreliable Entity List, though no restrictive measures were imposed. The investigation found that the company had violated normal market transaction principles, interrupted normal transactions with Chinese enterprises, adopted discriminatory measures against Chinese enterprises, and damaged the legitimate interests of Chinese enterprises.

IV. Anti-circumvention Investigation

Prior to 2025, China had no legislation or practice addressing circumvention of trade remedies. As a natural extension of trade enforcement, anti-circumvention plays a crucial role in preserving the effectiveness of trade remedy measures and maintaining fair trade order. In March 2025, MOFCOM launched its first anti-circumvention investigation on certain imported optical fibers from the US. In July, MOFCOM further solicited public comments on draft legislation establishing anti-circumvention rules.

1. Legal Authority

The legal basis for this anticircumvention investigation primarily stems from two key pieces of legislation in China’s foreign trade sector: the Foreign Trade Law of the People’s Republic of China and the Anti-Dumping Regulations of the People’s Republic of China.

Article 36 of the Foreign Trade Law stipulates that MOFCOM can, on its own or jointly with other relevant departments of the State Council, investigate acts of circumvention of foreign trade relief measures in accordance with the law. This provides a general authorization for MOFCOM to initiate investigations when it comes to circumvention issues in international trade. Article 49 further stipulates that the authority may take necessary anti-circumvention measures against acts of circumvention of foreign trade relief measures, thus establishing a legal foundation for the handling of circumvention cases.

In addition, Article 55 of the Anti-Dumping Regulations of China empowers MOFCOM to take appropriate measures to prevent circumvention of anti-dumping measures. These legal provisions form a coherent legal framework, ensuring that MOFCOM’s anti-circumvention investigation activities are carried out in a lawful and regulated manner.

2. Main Procedures

(1) Receiving Applications and Initiation: On February 10, 2025, MOFCOM received an application for an anti-circumvention investigation concerning relevant optical fiber products from the United States. The applicant alleged that US optical fiber producers and/or exporters were using cut-off wavelength-shifted single-mode optical fibers to circumvent the anti-dumping measures imposed on non-dispersion-shifted single-mode optical fibers originating from the US.

After a comprehensive review of the application and relevant evidence in accordance with the Foreign Trade Law and the Anti-Dumping Regulations of China, MOFCOM determined that the applicant’s claims and the prima facie evidence met the requirements for initiating. As a result, on March 4, 2025, MOFCOM officially announced the initiation of the investigation.

(2) Notification and Information Gathering: After the initiation of the investigation, MOFCOM promptly notified relevant parties, including the US side, of the investigation decision and provided access to relevant information such as the investigation announcement and the public version of the application.

To collect sufficient evidence, MOFCOM adopted a variety of methods. On March 28, 2025, MOFCOM distributed questionnaires to interested parties through the “Trade Remedy Investigation Informatization Platform” (http://etrb.mofcom.gov.cn). These questionnaires were designed for foreign exporters/producers, domestic producers, and domestic importers, respectively, aiming to gather detailed information about the production, export, import, and market conditions of the relevant fiber-optic products. For example, foreign exporters or producers were required to fill in information about their production processes, export volumes, and pricing strategies; domestic producers were asked about the impact of the imported products on their production and market share; domestic importers were required to provide details about their import sources and transaction volumes.

In addition to questionnaires, MOFCOM may also conduct on-site investigations if necessary. It could visit the production sites of relevant enterprises in China and abroad to verify the information provided, check the production lines, and understand the actual situation of product production and trade.

3. Rights of Parties

(1) Rights of the Applicant and Domestic Stakeholders: The applicant had the right to submit a substantial application and supporting evidence to initiate the investigation. Domestic producers and industry associations related to the optical fiber industry could also provide information on the impact of the circumvention behavior on the domestic industry, such as market share erosion, reduced production capacity utilization, and rising inventory. They also had the right to submit comments and suggestions on the investigation process and results, and to request MOFCOM to take effective measures to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the domestic industry.

(2) Rights of Foreign Interested Parties: Foreign exporters or producers were entitled to timely notification and access to information. They could fill in the questionnaires truthfully, provide explanations and justifications for their production and trade behaviors, and submit evidence to prove that their products did not constitute circumvention. They also retained the right to request a hearing if they disputed aspects of the investigation to defend their legitimate rights and interests in accordance with the law.

4. Results (As of August 2025)

On September 3, 2025, the investigating authority issued its final determination, finding that US exporters had used exports of cut-off wavelength-shifted single-mode optical fibers to China to circumvent the anti-dumping measures imposed on non-dispersion-shifted single-mode optical fibers originating from the US and deciding to impose the anti-circumvention measures effective September 4, 2025.

This first anti-circumvention investigation by MOFCOM signals its effort to improve the legal tools in trade remedy investigations. With the effectuation of the anti-circumvention legislation, such investigations are likely to become a more regular feature of China’s trade policy toolkit.

V. Industry Competitiveness Investigation

The industry competitiveness investigation serves as a crucial piece to complete the puzzle of trade remedy toolkit. In April 2025, MOFCOM initiated a competitiveness investigation into certain medical CT tubes, alongside an antidumping investigation on the same products.

1. Legal Authority

MOFCOM’s authority to conduct industry competitiveness investigations is grounded in several laws and regulations, with the Foreign Trade Law of the People’s Republic of China serving as the fundamental legal basis. Article 37 empowers MOFCOM to investigate the competitiveness of the domestic industry affected by trade in goods, services, and technologies.

2. Main Procedures

*Initiation of Investigation: In April 2025, following petitions and reports from the domestic medical CT tubes industry, MOFCOM conducted a preliminary review of the evidence and information provided. Based on the review, it decided to initiate an industry competitiveness investigation to probe the condition of medical CT tubes in China and other major production countries and regions, as well as the impact of imports on the Chinese industry.

*Procedures: The investigation was subsequently suspended, seemingly as a result of the trade truce between the US and China. As of August 2025, no substantive procedures had been carried out. However, according to the initiation notice, MOFCOM may collect and receive information and evidence through various means, including distributing questionnaires, holding public hearings, and conducting on-site investigations, among others.

3. Results

It is the first instance of a competitiveness investigation, and since it is ongoing, the results and consequent measures remain to be seen. In theory, possible policy responses may include support policies such as subsidies to improve the competitiveness of the industry, the launch of trade investigations against injurious imports, or negotiations with foreign authorities to restore an even-handed international playfield.

VI. Conclusion

In summary, from 2024 to 2025, China’s authority has been active in trade remedy investigations. As of August 2025, MOFCOM had initiated 15 antidumping investigations, one countervailing investigation, and one safeguard investigation – nearly triple the number of investigations conducted in the preceding two years. Notably, several of these investigations are high profile, including antidumping investigations into imported analog chips from the US, imported canola from Canada, and certain brandy imports from the EU.

Taken together, these developments potentially demonstrate that China is increasingly willing to employ trade law instruments to regulate international trade, particularly in a rapidly evolving and contested global environment.