A feud has erupted between builders and building product manufacturers over proposals to impose penalties of between 20 and 54 percent on imported Chinese products which are alleged to have been unfairly dumped onto the Australian market.

The Anti-Dumping Commission is considering an application to impose the levies on Chinese imports of aluminum windows and doors.

The application has created alarm among builders, who say the proposed charge would add to the cost of new housing delivery.

However, the proposal has generated enormous support from product manufacturers, fabricators and unions.

These groups say that the unfair dumping of products on Australian markets threatens the viability of local production.

The anti-dumping levies are needed to ensure their ability to compete in a fair marketplace, they say.

Anti-dumping complaint

The row began in October, when window and door manufacturer Ventora Group Pty Ltd and the Australian Window and Glass Association (AWGA) lodged an application for anti-dumping duties to be applied on aluminium windows and doors which have been imported from China.

Ventora owns major brands such as Stegbar, Trend and Corinthian.

In the application, Ventora and AWGA allege that local industry has suffered serious harm as a result of low-cost and highly subsided Chinese made aluminium windows and doors being unfairly dumped on the Australian market over several years.

Dumping occurs where overseas companies export products to Australia at a price that is lower compared with that charged in the country of manufacture.

This may occur as overseas manufacturers try either to offload surplus products or to eliminate local competitors by flooding the market with below-cost offerings.

Such activity is often enabled by subsidies which the overseas producer has received in the country of manufacture.

In their application, Ventora and AWGA allege that aluminium windows and doors that were imported from China had been dumped over a four-year period from July 2021 until June 2025.

Many of the financial details of the case have been suppressed in the published version of the application. However, the submission says that the impact upon local aluminium window and door producers has been significant.

Over the four-year period, it claims that domestic industry sales have declined by 22 percent.

It also says that the dumped Chinese imports have depressed local prices to a level which is well below that which Ventora would require to manufacture and sell in a viable manner.

According to media reports, the applicants are seeking anti-dumping duties of 20 to 54 percent to be applied on aluminium window and door assemblies (including partial assemblies) which are imported from China.

This would apply to:

• window assemblies (full or partial) of up to three meters in height and four meters in width; and
• door assemblies (full or partial) of up to three meters in height and seven meters in width.

Certain curtain wall products would be excluded.

Growing concern about dumping

The application comes amid ongoing concern about the impact of dumping practices on Australia’s manufacturing sector.

Such concerns have grown over the past year as manufacturers from China and elsewhere have redirected efforts to offload surplus goods to other destinations in response to US tariffs.

As mentioned above, dumping occurs where overseas companies export products to Australia at a price that is lower than that which is charged in the country of manufacture.

As also mentioned above, such practices are generally enabled by subsidies received in the country of manufacture.

Internationally, dumping is considered to be an unfair trade practice. In fact, World Trade Organization rules specifically allow countries to implement anti-dumping measures in cases where dumping occurs to the detriment of local industry.

In Australia, alleged cases of dumping are investigated by the Anti-Dumping Commission.

Where dumping has occurred, the Commission can recommend to the Minister for Industry and Science that either anti-dumping duties and/or countervailing duties (duties applied to negate foreign subsidies) be charged on imports that have injured Australian industry.

Not surprisingly, many of the anti-dumping complaints concern products made in China and elsewhere in Asia.

Of the 26 cases which are currently before the Commission, sixteen involve products from China whilst seven concern goods from Malaysia.

Most of these cases relate to aluminium or steel products.

To improve Australia’s anti-dumping regime, the Government is considering options to strengthen remedies which are available under the anti-dumping system.

A huge response

The latest case has generated enormous attention and has seen the Commission flooded with 415 submissions.

By contrast, typical anti-dumping cases generally receive around 30 submissions.

Most submissions support the proposed measures. Many of these come from manufacturers, fabricators and unions.

However, a significant minority of submissions oppose the proposed measures. These have mostly come from builders, importers and some property developers.

Builders slam proposed tariffs

Building industry lobby groups have slammed the proposed tariffs, which they argue will add to the cost of new housing provision.

In a statement released last week, Master Builders Australia CEO Denita Wawn accused the applicants of being ‘commercially selfish’.

She described the application as ‘outrageous, unnecessary and detrimental’.

In her statement, Wawn acknowledged the need to support local industry.

However, she said that this has to be balanced against the requirement to support the importation of products and materials in cases where this is required.

She added that the cost of new home building materials has risen by 37.9 percent since the pandemic.

“There are those in the supply chain that appear to have moved to impose unjustified constraints on the industry and demonstrate themselves as commercially selfish,” Wawn said.

“While we have achieved policy reforms from the Federal Government that have driven the cost of home building down, a tariff on critical imports would set us back significantly leading to a second-year housing shortfall and more unintended consequences.

“This will significantly increase home building costs and be damaging to our 33,000 members, which are 98% small Australian building and construction businesses, who rely on these compliant imports, as local manufacturing of AWD (aluminium windows and doors) cannot meet demand and, in some areas, genuinely does not exist.

“MBA is steadfast in its opposition to the proposed tariff on Chinese AWD and stresses that this application must not be taken seriously as the Government cannot afford to offset the work already undertaken by aggravating costs in other areas.”

The MBA submission is supported by several builders and property developers.

A number of the submissions from builders argue that the domestic supply chain does not have sufficient capacity to meet all of their project requirements.

Builders are also concerned about how China may respond to any tariff imposition and how this may impact the cost and availability of other essential materials.

Product makers hit back

However, local producers have hit back.

In a statement released last week, Rodger Hills, Chief Executive of the Building Products Industry Council, said that allowing dumped materials to continue unabated will wipe out local businesses and destabilise the market.

Hills rejects the MBA claims that the anti-dumping duties would drive up housing costs.

He stresses that the duties are not anti-competitive in nature and are applied only when imports are proven to be sold at below their normal overseas value.

“Anti-dumping duties don’t push prices up; they restore fair competition,” Hills said.

“They help to buffer the Australian construction sector from overseas interests intent on destroying the local market.”

Hills says that Australia’s building product sector employs around 243,300 people directly along with a further 796,500 indirectly.

He questions the aforementioned claims about the nation’s domestic manufacturing capability being unable to meet the industry’s requirements.

As for the post-COVID increase in material costs, Hills says that these have been caused by inflation and uncertainty rather than enforcement of WTO-compliant trade rules.

In fact, he says that if dumping continues unchecked, it will amplify price volatility by undermining legitimate Australian producers.

Over the long run, this will reduce domestic production diversity and will cede control of product supply chains and pricing to overseas interests.

“These concerns are not speculative; they are grounded in real-world impacts on Australian jobs, investment, and supply chain stability,” Hills said.

“Domestic manufacturing capability cannot survive, let alone grow, under distorted market conditions; it’s as simple as that.”

“Australia cannot deliver 1.2 million new homes based on a foundation of distorted markets and collapsing domestic production capability.

“A resilient construction sector requires a fair and level playing field with both competitive imports and strong local manufacturing; something (that is) impossible without enforcing anti-dumping laws.”

Enjoying Sourceable articles? Subscribe for Free and receive daily updates of all articles which are published on our site

Want to grow your sales, reach more new clients and expand your client base across Australia’s design and construction sector?

Advertise on Sourceable and have your business seen by the thousands of architects, engineers, builders/construction contractors, subcontractors/trade contractors, property developers and building industry suppliers who read our stories across the civil, commercial and residential construction sector