EU court: split consignments can attract complete-product duties

The complete-product test

The judgment interprets General Rule 2(a) of the Combined Nomenclature in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No. 2658/87, in its relevant 2019–2021 versions. Separate deliveries and customs declarations do not alone prevent classification as a complete unassembled article. Objective circumstances must show, at customs clearance, a single whole comprising the essential components. An intention to assemble the imports is insufficient on its own.^[1]

Why the distinction changes customs exposure

The dispute concerned Chinese electric-bicycle parts declared over 2019–2021. Classification as complete electric bicycles could bring anti-dumping and countervailing duties that do not apply on the same basis to the declared parts. The General Court supplies the interpretation; the national court must assess the facts and apply it. The ruling does not itself decide the importer’s final liability.^[1]

How this develops the earlier case law

In X BV, C-107/22, the Court of Justice held on 27 April 2023 that separate declarations could still describe one unassembled article where objective evidence established the whole. Those goods were presented at the same time. T-529/25 addresses staggered deliveries: simultaneous arrival is not an indispensable condition, and the evidential link between shipments becomes central.^[1][2]

Implications for international supply chains

For groups importing components for assembly, the practical implication is to assess the product represented by connected shipments. Contracts, invoice references, component completeness and the circumstances at clearance may matter alongside individual tariff declarations. Customs reviews should consider both ordinary classification and any trade-defence measures applicable to the finished product.^[1][2]