Galvalume Anti-Dumping Duty in Pakistan: 40.47% on Chinese Origin

Last verified 25 July 2026 against the National Tariff Commission notice and report, FBR Public Notice No. 50/2026, the Pakistan Customs Tariff 2025-26 and NTC’s live registers. All sources are linked at the foot.

Galvalume — also sold as aluzinc, AZ coil, GL coil or zinc-aluminium steel — of Chinese origin attracts a flat anti-dumping duty of 40.47% ad valorem in Pakistan. The National Tariff Commission (NTC) imposed it in anti-circumvention case A.D.C. No. 37/2015/NTC/GC/Circum/2024, on a final determination report dated 27 June 2025 and a public notice dated 28 June 2025. On the face of that notice the duty runs until 8 February 2027.

This is not a fresh dumping case. It extends the existing anti-dumping order on galvanized steel from China, which the Commission found was being circumvented by shipping the same material with an aluminium-zinc coating instead of a zinc coating.

What this costs you

• The rate. 40.47% ad valorem, applied to the customs value as assessed — not to your invoice figure where Customs assesses against a valuation ruling. It is charged in addition to customs duty, additional customs duty, regulatory duty and every other levy.
• What it applies to. Chinese origin only, under four PCT codes: 7210.6110, 7210.6190, 7210.6910 and 7210.6990. Origin means where the steel was made, not where it was invoiced or loaded.
• The size of the swing. NTC’s own analysis of the period of investigation found that anti-dumping duty had pushed the landed cost of Chinese galvanized about 37% above Chinese galvalume, while the two products’ C&F prices sat within 1% of each other before duty. Closing that gap is the whole point of the extension.

Galvalume anti-dumping duty in Pakistan at a glance

Why the rate is a flat 40.47% and not a mill-specific rate

Two things fix the rate at 40.47%. First, section 63(1) of the Anti-Dumping Duties Act, 2015 allows an extension of duties “not exceeding the residual anti-dumping duty” to imports from companies that already benefit from individual rates. A Chinese mill with a 6.09% galvanized rate therefore does not carry that rate across to galvalume.

Second, nobody turned up. NTC sent the exporter questionnaire to all known Chinese exporters and producers, and to the Chinese diplomatic mission in Islamabad, on 3 September 2024, with 37 days to reply, and sent a reminder on 10 October 2024. Not one responded. Paragraph 79 of the final determination report records the consequence: “As no exporter/foreign producer from China has cooperated with the Commission, therefore, anti-dumping duty rate of 40.47% as applicable on ‘all other exporters/foreign producer’ is imposed.”

There is no lower schedule to hunt for on Chinese galvalume. For reference, these are the mill-specific rates on the underlying galvanized order:

Rates as listed on page 4 of NTC’s final determination report; every row was checked against that report on 25 July 2026. They were set by the final determination of 8 February 2017 and continued at the same levels by the sunset review concluded on 31 August 2022, with effect from 8 February 2022.

Which PCT codes attract the galvalume anti-dumping duty?

The extension covers four codes — 7210.6110, 7210.6190, 7210.6910 and 7210.6990. The underlying galvanized order covers seven: 7210.4110, 7210.4190, 7210.4990, 7212.3010, 7212.3090, 7225.9200 and 7226.9900.

All four galvalume codes sit under heading 72.10, which the Pakistan Customs Tariff defines as “flat-rolled products of iron or non-alloy steel, of a width of 600 mm or more, clad, plated or coated”. Width of 600 mm or more is therefore built into the scope through the heading itself, and both holdings in FBR Public Notice No. 50/2026 recite the same 600 mm threshold.

One mismatch is worth raising with your clearing agent: NTC’s product definition reads “iron or alloy steel or non-alloy steel”, while heading 72.10 covers only iron and non-alloy steel. Alloy-substrate aluminium-zinc material sits inside the written definition but outside all four listed codes.

Aluminised (AS) steel is caught too, not just galvalume

Under the tariff, the sixth single-dash of heading 72.10 is “plated or coated with aluminium”, which splits into 7210.61 (“plated or coated with aluminium-zinc alloys”) and 7210.69 (“other”). Public Notice No. 50/2026 states the same division: 7210.61 covers aluminium-zinc alloy coatings, and 7210.69 “covers all other products plated or coated with aluminium”.

So aluminised steel — Type 1 aluminium-silicon and Type 2 commercially pure aluminium coatings to ASTM A463, the AS coatings of EN 10346 — falls in 7210.6910 and 7210.6990, and both codes are on NTC’s list. A Chinese aluminised coil bought for exhausts, silencers, bakery equipment, ducting or heat exchangers pays 40.47%, even though it has no zinc-coating substitution story behind it. If you buy AS coil from China, this measure is yours as much as the roofing trade’s.

The thickness point to watch

The 0.15 mm to 2.75 mm range often quoted alongside this case belongs to the galvanized definition as amended at the 2022 sunset review: “Galvanized Steel Coils/Sheets of thickness ranging from 0.15 mm to 2.75 mm and of a width of 600 mm or more”. The galvalume scope carries no thickness range at all, in either the initiation notice or the final notice. Do not assume that a 0.12 mm or 3.0 mm Chinese aluzinc coil sits outside the measure on thickness grounds.

Where the two orders do not line up

The galvalume extension is narrower than the galvanized order in three respects visible on the face of the two PCT lists. None of this is a route around the duty — classification is Customs’ call, misdeclaration is an offence under section 32 of the Customs Act, 1969, and any of these would invite a further application from the same two mills — but you should know where the edges are before you contract.

The last row matters more than it looks. Public Notice No. 50/2026 routes zinc-predominant coatings to “PCT 7210.49” at six digits, then directs that “the last 02 digits of the PCT codes shall be ascertained by the clearance Collectorates on the basis of quality of goods i.e., prime or secondary quality”. Across this part of the tariff the “10” suffix is secondary quality — so secondary-quality zinc-predominant material lands at 7210.4910, which is absent from the galvanized order’s seven codes. Confirm the exact eight-digit code, not just the six-digit heading, before you assume the duty attaches or does not.

How to specify AZ and GI coatings so the paperwork agrees

Most disputes at Custom House start with a purchase order that never said what the coating was. Coating mass is quoted in g/m² total both sides, and the designation systems are not interchangeable.

The conversion is 1 oz/ft² = 305.15 g/m². ASTM G90 is 0.90 oz/ft² = 275 g/m², which is why its metric designation is Z275. ASTM AZ50 is 0.50 oz/ft² = 153 g/m², and the standard’s own metric minimum for it is AZM150. That is the trap: ASTM AZ50 and JIS AZ150 are the same coating mass, about 150 g/m² total both sides. An enquiry written as “AZ150” against an ASTM mill test certificate and “AZ150” against a JIS one is asking for two different things if the reader assumes the numbers share a basis. BS 2989 is withdrawn — do not accept it as a live specification on a new order.

For tonnage, steel density is 7.85 g/cm³, so base metal mass is thickness in mm × 7.85 kg/m², and coil weight in kg = length (m) × width (m) × thickness (mm) × 7.85. Coating mass sits on top: AZ150 adds 0.15 kg/m², which on a 0.50 mm base (3.93 kg/m²) is under 4% of the mass. State on the LC whether the ordered thickness is base metal or total including coating, so both sides compute the same tonnage against the same money.

How Customs separates galvanized from galvalume

Because the two orders sit on different headings, everything turns on the coating analysis. The Classification Committee of the Collectorate of Customs Appraisement-East, Custom House Karachi settled the test in Public Notice No. 50/2026, “Classification of prime quality iron & non-alloy steel sheets/coils coated with alloys of aluminium, zinc and other elements”, issued in May 2026. It follows Public Notice No. 12/2025 of 25 September 2025, which the Board remanded to the Committee by letter dated 3 November 2025 with a direction to re-examine whether the coating is an alloy or a layered/sprayed coating.

The Committee’s answer rests on Note 5(a) of Section XV — an alloy of base metals is classified as an alloy of the metal that predominates by weight — read with the WCO Explanatory Notes. Its two holdings:

Two practical points from the ruling. The Explanatory Notes accept that hot-dip zinc-coated products may contain aluminium, so the presence of aluminium does not by itself move a coil into 7210.61. And on the two consignments actually referred, the Committee held that a coating reported at 43.5% zinc and 16% aluminium is 7210.49, while one reported at 13% aluminium and 6% zinc is 7210.61. The notice reproduces those laboratory percentages without stating the balance of the analysis, so read them as illustrations of the predominance test, not as coating specifications.

The ruling is issued under Chapter II of CGO 02/2025, is copied to all Chief Collectors and all Collectors of Customs, and records that any appeal against it lies with the Board under Rule 2 of the Pakistan Rules in the preamble to the First Schedule of the Customs Act, 1969. It also states that it is specific to the goods described and may be treated as void if obtained on incorrect or misleading information.

On the codes actually named in the two orders, both landing zones are dutiable and 40.47% applies either way for any mill not named in the galvanized table. That reading combines the two NTC orders with the classification ruling — no single document states it in those terms — and it is subject to the eight-digit point above. What classification changes is the rate column and the FTA treatment, not whether anti-dumping duty is in play at all.

How the duty is charged, and on what value

The extension is made under section 63 of the Anti-Dumping Duties Act, 2015, read with Rules 26, 29 and 30 of the Anti-Dumping Duties Rules, 2022, and the notice is published under Rule 31. Paragraph 83 of the report records that, under section 51 of the Act, the duty takes the form of an ad valorem duty. Section 51(1) also provides that anti-dumping duties are imposed in addition to other import duties and are “collected in the same manner as customs-duties under the Customs Act, 1969”.

What that means at the port:

• The base is the assessed customs value. Customs value is the transaction value under section 25 of the Customs Act, 1969, but the Director of Customs Valuation may determine it under section 25A, and where a valuation ruling is in field section 81 bars even a provisional determination of value. Model your exposure on the benchmark value for coated flat steel, not on the contract price — at 40.47%, every dollar of uplift per tonne is real money.
• The stack does not add up in a straight line. Customs duty comes from the First Schedule under section 18(1); regulatory duty under section 18(3) and additional customs duty under section 18(5) are levied by separate notifications, both on the value determined under section 25 or 25A. Sales tax on imports is then computed under section 2(46) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 on the section 25 value including the customs duties levied on it, so the base for what follows is duty-inclusive.
• No payment, no out-of-charge. Report paragraph 83 puts it in the Commission’s own words: “release of the investigated product for free circulation in Pakistan shall be subject to imposition of such antidumping duties”. In local terms, the GD is not cleared and the delivery order does not issue until the duty is paid. The money goes into NTC’s non-lapsable PLD Account No. 187, head G-11217, Federal Treasury Office, Islamabad.

Which date fixes your liability — and what happened to cargo already on the water

Not the contract date, and not the LC date. Section 56 of the Act is explicit: definitive anti-dumping duties “shall only be applied to products which enter into Pakistan for consumption on or after the date of publication of a notice of affirmative preliminary or final determination”. Entry for consumption, not shipment. Chinese aluzinc that sailed before 28 June 2025 and cleared after it paid the duty, whatever the order date.

On the customs side, section 30 of the Customs Act, 1969 fixes the rate as the rate in force on the date the goods declaration is manifested under section 79 — and where the GD is manifested in advance of arrival and the rate changes before berthing, the date of berthing governs. Section 30A, which applies to clearance through the Customs Computerized System, fixes it on the date of payment of duty. Ask your clearing agent which of those dates applies to your GD before you commit to a landing window.

If the coating is disputed at the port

Where the Appraising Officer cannot satisfy himself of the assessment because the goods require a chemical or other test, section 81 of the Customs Act allows provisional determination of liability: the importer pays the additional amount, or furnishes a pay order or bank guarantee of a scheduled bank with an indemnity bond covering the likely differential, and the cargo moves. Final determination must follow within ninety days, extendable by up to thirty days by the Collector on recorded reasons, with any stay period or time awaiting Board clarification excluded; if it is not made in time, the provisional determination is deemed final. Note the working-capital arithmetic — a 40.47% differential secured by bank guarantee ties up cash for months even where you eventually win the classification.

Is there relief if the material goes into export production?

Yes, and the notice names it. Under section 51(1)(ea) of the Act, the duty “will not be levied on imports of the product under investigation that are used as inputs in products destined solely for exports or for use in the foreign grant-in-aid projects, and are covered under any scheme exempting customs duties for exports or foreign grant-in-aid projects under the Customs Act, 1969”.

The operative scheme is the Export Facilitation Scheme 2021, notified by SRO 957(I)/2021 dated 30 July 2021 as Chapter XL of the Customs Rules, 2001, under which an authorised user acquires input goods without payment of customs duty, federal excise duty, sales tax and withholding tax on filing of a goods declaration. EFS was introduced to run alongside and then replace the older Manufacturing Bond and DTRE schemes. Relief follows the input-output coefficients in the EFS authorisation, so the quantity that matters is the approved quantity, not the quantity you happen to consume.

How the Commission built the circumvention case

NTC compared Chinese import volumes of galvanized and galvalume over a period of investigation running 1 April 2017 to 31 March 2024. The Commission drew on Pakistan Customs import statistics from the PRAL database and the Pakistan Single Window database, in addition to data supplied by the applicants and information gathered during the investigation, and used the Pakistan Customs data for the trade-pattern table. Absolute tonnages are confidential; only an index was published, with April 2017–March 2018 set at 100.

Galvanized imports from China closed 11% below the base year while galvalume finished 480% above it, the index rising from 183 to 580 — a 217% jump — in the final year alone. NTC’s year-on-year percentages in the same table are computed on the confidential tonnages, so they will not reconcile exactly against the rounded index reproduced here.

Interested parties argued that concessionary Pak-China FTA treatment under SRO 1640(I)/2019 explained the shift; on their figures, as recorded in the report, the impact of customs duty declined over the period to 1.67% in the final year. NTC ran its own numbers and did not accept the argument. On its analysis the weighted average effective customs duty in 2023-24 was 2.47% on galvalume against 4.91% on galvanized — a gap of 2.44% — while under the Pak-China FTA prime galvanized entered at 5% (the two alloy-steel codes at 0%) against 1.67% for prime galvalume. The Commission concluded that “it is the impact of anti-dumping duties (37%) rather than customs duty (2.47%)” that moved the buyers.

The point importers most often get wrong sits right here: an FTA concession reduces customs duty. It does nothing to anti-dumping duty, which the notice imposes “in addition to other taxes and duties leviable on its imports under any other law”. A valid Form E does not touch the 40.47%.

On the underlying economics, the Commission held that galvalume prices are generally slightly higher than galvanized — the applicants put the premium at 5–7%, other information at 5–10% and in some cases 10–15% — and that the 6.09%–40.47% duty inverted that relationship. On cost, replacing the zinc with aluminium gives a coating material-cost difference of 2.75% to 4.4% in galvalume’s favour, offset by the higher energy cost of the aluminium bath, so the overall difference in cost of production “tends to be minimal”.

Case timeline, and how a determination is challenged

• 11 August 2015 — galvanized investigation initiated; final determination 8 February 2017 at 6.09%–40.47% for five years.
• 8 February 2022 — sunset review initiated, concluded 31 August 2022; duties continued with effect from 8 February 2022 and the definition amended to add the 0.15–2.75 mm thickness and 600 mm minimum width.
• 28 June 2024 — International Steels Limited and Aisha Steel Mills Limited, Karachi, file the anti-circumvention application. NTC records the two as the entire domestic industry, with installed capacity of 462,000 MT and 250,000 MT a year respectively.
• 23–24 August 2024 — investigation initiated. NTC’s review-investigations register lists 23 August 2024; the report records the notice of initiation as published in the Official Gazette and in two national newspapers on 24 August 2024.
• 22 October 2024 — Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench stays proceedings in writ petition 3196/2024 filed by M/s Essa Steel; amended on 16 January 2025 to “proceedings before NTC shall continue, but no final order shall be passed”; stay set aside on 6 May 2025, the Court holding the writ “not maintainable being premature” because the notice had given interested parties a chance to appear and no adverse order had yet been passed. The stay period was excluded from the statutory timeline.
• 27 June 2025 — final determination report signed; notice imposing 40.47% dated 28 June 2025; expiry 8 February 2027.

The Essa Steel writ failed on timing, not on the merits, and the High Court is not the route the Act contemplates in the first place. Appeals against an affirmative or negative final determination lie to the Anti-Dumping Appellate Tribunal, established under section 64 of the Act, and must be filed within forty-five days of publication of the public notice under section 70(4). Take advice on your own facts before that window closes — it does not reopen.

When does the galvalume anti-dumping duty expire?

On 8 February 2027 on the face of the notice, because the extension is co-terminus with the duty on the product already under measure rather than carrying its own five-year term. That is a life of roughly nineteen months.

Do not read that as a clean landing after February 2027. Under section 58(3) of the Act, a definitive anti-dumping duty “shall not expire” if the Commission determines, in a review initiated before the date of expiry, that expiry would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury — and the duty “shall remain in force pending the outcome of such a review”. NTC only has to start the review in time, not finish it. That is exactly what happened last time: the 2022 sunset review ran from 8 February to 31 August 2022 and the continuation was given effect from 8 February 2022, the original expiry date, so nothing landed duty-free in the gap.

The dates to watch come from section 58(2): NTC must publish a notice of impending expiry not later than ninety days before the expiry date, which is 10 November 2026 for an 8 February 2027 expiry. The domestic industry then has forty-five days from that notice to request a review. Watch for an ISL/Aisha application in that window.

Checked on 25 July 2026: NTC’s review-investigations register shows only two review investigations in progress — polyester staple fibre from China and cold rolled coils/sheets from China — and neither concerns ADC 37. The sunset notices page still lists only the 2022 review against ADC 37. Until NTC’s sunset page shows a review closed without continuation, price post-February-2027 arrivals as duty-paid.

Where this case sits among Pakistan’s circumvention cases

Of the three anti-circumvention cases on NTC’s published register, this is the earliest to reach a conclusion.

Section 63(4) of the Act says the Commission “shall normally conclude” an anti-circumvention investigation within nine months, and two of the three landed close to it; the galvalume case ran over only because the court stay period was excluded. The planning number for a buyer is that a circumvention application against a coated flat-steel product can turn into a collected duty inside a year. Two of the three cases on the register are flat steel, and both were against China.

Customs tariff on the galvalume codes

These are the customs duty rates in the Pakistan Customs Tariff for FY 2025-26, the most recent First Schedule published on FBR’s Customs Tariff page as at 25 July 2026. Additional customs duty and regulatory duty are levied by separate notifications under sections 18(5) and 18(3) of the Customs Act and are not part of this column — pull the live position for both before costing a shipment.

For comparison, NTC’s report recorded the 2024-25 structure on the same codes as customs duty 20% or 11%, additional customs duty 6% or 2%, regulatory duty 5%, with Pak-China FTA rates of 13.33% and 1.67% on the aluminium-zinc codes and 5.33% and 1.67% on the others. Flat-steel duties move with every Finance Act. Our note on the Finance Bill 2026-27 steel tariff changes covers the direction of travel.

What this means when you are buying

• Origin is the mill, not the load port. Chinese-origin aluzinc invoiced from a third country still pays 40.47%, and slitting or re-coiling abroad does not confer origin. The mill test certificate, the certificate of origin and the mill name on the coil tag all have to agree. A wrong origin declaration is not a rate argument — it is an untrue statement under section 32 of the Customs Act, 1969.
• Get the coating analysis before the LC, not at the port. Aluminium-versus-zinc predominance by coating weight decides the heading, and therefore which order, which rate and which FTA column you argue at clearance. Put the coating designation and the governing standard on the purchase order.
• Match the alternative to the end use. NTC’s report records that galvalume is not produced locally. Where the specification is genuinely open — plain roofing, general fabrication — domestic GP is worth pricing against the duty-paid Chinese number; see ISL GP coil and Aisha Steel GP coil (Raw Easy Corp is a dealer for both mills, and both were the applicants in this case). Where AZ substrate is specified and will be checked — PPGL colour coating, solar mounting structures, cold-formed purlins, sandwich-panel skins — GI is not a substitute, and the only lever is a non-China origin. Before switching origin, check NTC’s register for any measure against the origin you pick. India is not an option: Pakistan’s National Security Committee suspended all trade with India, including trade to and from any third country through Pakistan, on 24 April 2025.
• Take the roofing question separately. Our comparison of GI, galvalume and PPGI roofing sheets sets out where each coating earns its place.

FAQ

What is the anti-dumping duty on galvalume in Pakistan right now?

40.47% ad valorem on galvalume, aluzinc and zinc-aluminium coated coils and sheets of Chinese origin under PCT 7210.6110, 7210.6190, 7210.6910 and 7210.6990, imposed by NTC’s public notice dated 28 June 2025 and charged in addition to customs duty and other levies.

Does the duty apply to galvalume from origins other than China?

No. The notice states that the investigated product originating in or imported from sources other than China is not subject to this duty. The measure is China-only, and origin means where the coil was made, not where it was invoiced or shipped from. Check NTC’s register for any separate measure against whichever origin you switch to. India is not available: all trade with India, including through third countries, has been suspended since 24 April 2025.

Is there a lower rate for a particular Chinese mill?

No. Unlike the galvanized order, which has mill-specific rates from 6.09% to 40.47%, the galvalume extension is a single flat 40.47%. Section 63(1) of the Act caps an extension at the residual rate, and NTC applied the residual because no Chinese exporter or producer answered its questionnaires.

Does the classification between galvanized and galvalume change the duty?

It changes the rate column, not whether anti-dumping duty applies. Public Notice No. 50/2026 puts zinc-predominant coatings in 7210.49 and aluminium-predominant coatings in 7210.61, and on the codes named in the two NTC orders both headings carry a measure against China, with 40.47% for any mill not in the galvanized table. Confirm the full eight-digit code with your clearing agent — the last two digits turn on prime versus secondary quality, and 7210.4910 is not among the seven codes in the galvanized order.

When does the duty expire, and will it be extended?

8 February 2027 per the NTC notice, because it is co-terminus with the galvanized order rather than carrying its own five-year term. But under section 58(3) of the Act the duty does not lapse if a sunset review is initiated before that date — it stays in force pending the outcome, as it did in 2022. NTC must publish a notice of impending expiry by 10 November 2026. As at 25 July 2026 no second sunset review of ADC 37 had been initiated.

Is there relief if the material goes into export production?

Section 51(1)(ea) of the Act provides that the duty is not levied where the product is an input in goods destined solely for export, or in foreign grant-in-aid projects, and is covered by a customs-duty exemption scheme under the Customs Act, 1969 — in practice the Export Facilitation Scheme 2021 under SRO 957(I)/2021. Whether a consignment qualifies depends on the scheme approval and the approved input-output coefficients.

Sources

• NTC — final determination notice, ADC 37 (28 June 2025)
• NTC — final determination (extension) report (27 June 2025)
• NTC — notice of initiation (August 2024)
• NTC — review investigations register
• NTC — anti-dumping investigations conducted
• NTC — sunset review notices
• Anti-Dumping Duties Act, 2015
• FBR / Customs Appraisement-East Karachi — Public Notice No. 50/2026, listed on the FBR classification public notices page
• FBR — Pakistan Customs Tariff FY 2025-26, from the FBR Customs Tariff page
• FBR — Customs Act, 1969 (updated)
• FBR — SRO 957(I)/2021, Export Facilitation Scheme 2021
• Trade Information Portal of Pakistan — anti-dumping duties measure
• National Security Committee decision suspending trade with India, 24 April 2025

Regulatory positions change. This page was verified against the sources above on 25 July 2026; check the NTC and FBR positions again before you fix a price or open an LC. This note is general information from a steel trader, not legal, tax or customs-broking advice — classification and duty liability on a specific consignment are matters for your clearing agent and Pakistan Customs.

Comparing a Chinese import against domestic GP? Contact Raw Easy Corp for a current quotation.