HomeMarket InsightsPlasticisers & EstersPhthalic Anhydride and Plasticiser Trade Data to 2025, with a 2026 Monthly Update: Three Tariff Lines and the Shift Away from Ortho-Phthalates

Phthalic Anhydride and Plasticiser Trade Data to 2025, with a 2026 Monthly Update: Three Tariff Lines and the Shift Away from Ortho-Phthalates

Bottom line: the three tariff lines that carry the plasticiser trade have diverged decisively. Phthalic anhydride (HS 291735) imports contracted 9% in value in 2024 while China turned from a minor seller of PA into the largest exporter in the panel (16 m USD in 2020 to 135 m USD in 2024). Classic ortho-phthalate plasticiser trade (HS 291732, dioctyl orthophthalates) is now less than a sixth the size of the residual non-ortho ester line (HS 291739), which moved 2,162 m USD of exports in 2024. If you buy or sell plasticisers, the tariff-line mix — not the headline “plasticiser” figure — is what now shows where the volume is going.

Data updated: 2026-09-22. The trend tables further down are the original 2020–2024 series; the section immediately below extends the picture with first-cut 2025 annual data and Eurostat monthly data through July 2026.

Latest 12 months: what changed since the 2020–2024 window

The three tariff lines have carried on diverging through mid-2026. Eurostat’s monthly extra-EU statistics (latest month: July 2026) show the non-ortho ester line (HS 291739) still trading multiples of the classic ortho line, with Korea and China supplying most of the EU’s extra-EU non-ortho ester imports, while the EU in turn ships non-ortho esters to the United States.

EU27 extra-EU imports of other aromatic esters (HS 291739) — monthly, latest month 2026-07. Source: Eurostat Comext, dataset DS-045409 (EU27, extra-EU trade, monthly), retrieved 2026-09-22.
Month Value, m EUR Volume, kt Implied EUR/t
2025-08 18.26 13.56 1,347
2025-09 23.51 18.54 1,268
2025-10 22.36 17.61 1,270
2025-11 17.97 15.02 1,196
2025-12 14.81 12.89 1,149
2026-01 22.17 20.04 1,106
2026-02 20.25 17.84 1,136
2026-03 22.93 20.75 1,105
2026-04 30.01 24.19 1,240
2026-05 30.38 23.11 1,314
2026-06 40.43 28.27 1,430
2026-07 26.56 17.41 1,525
2025 full year 290.73 209.29 1,389
2026 to July 192.73 151.61 1,271
EU27 extra-EU imports of HS 291739 by origin, July 2026. Source: Eurostat Comext, dataset DS-045409 (EU27, extra-EU trade, monthly), retrieved 2026-09-22.
Partner Value
Korea, Republic of 11.32 m EUR
China 7.51 m EUR
United States 2.70 m EUR
Taiwan 2.19 m EUR
India 785 k EUR
EU27 extra-EU imports of phthalic anhydride (HS 291735) — monthly, latest month 2026-07. Source: Eurostat Comext, dataset DS-045409 (EU27, extra-EU trade, monthly), retrieved 2026-09-22.
Month Value, m EUR Volume, kt Implied EUR/t
2025-08 3.42 3.60 949
2025-09 4.54 4.70 966
2025-10 4.92 5.28 930
2025-11 2.77 2.96 934
2025-12 2.72 3.12 871
2026-01 2.23 2.50 890
2026-02 3.41 4.06 838
2026-03 3.86 4.58 843
2026-04 4.40 4.73 931
2026-05 4.80 4.87 986
2026-06 4.45 3.85 1,155
2026-07 5.77 4.48 1,287
2025 full year 48.98 48.37 1,013
2026 to July 28.92 29.08 994

2025 full-year read (first-reported)

  • Phthalic anhydride exports: reported exports across the 21 panel economies that filed both years were 392 m USD in 2024 and 328 m USD in 2025 (-16.3%), first-reported, subject to revision. China had not filed 2025 annual data at the time of writing, so the Chinese aggregate series still ends in 2024.

Analysis (not a price assessment). For a converter, the practical implication of this window is that sourcing decisions should be made tariff line by tariff line: the ortho and non-ortho lines now behave as separate markets, with separate origins, separate unit values and, in the United States, separate trade-remedy exposure. The source URLs for every figure above are listed at the foot of this page.

Sources for this section: Eurostat Comext HS 291739 imports · Eurostat Comext phthalic anhydride imports

What the data set covers

Every figure below comes from the UN Comtrade public preview API, partner “World”, annual frequency, 2020–2024, for three lines: 291735 (phthalic anhydride), 291732 (dioctyl orthophthalates, the classic DOP/DEHP line) and 291739 (aromatic polycarboxylic esters not elsewhere specified — the esters that are not ortho-phthalates; US practice classifies DOTP here, as HTS 2917.39.20 / 2917.39.70, per the ITC determinations cited below). Trend totals use fixed core panels — economies reporting the code in all five years (20/26 exporters/importers for PA, 22/26 for DOP, 25/26 for 291739) — and unit values use only those that also filed net weight every year. Values are as reported by national administrations, not price assessments.

Table 1 — Phthalic anhydride (HS 291735): a two-speed market

Year / source Exports USD m kt USD/t Imports USD m kt USD/t
2020 (src / src) 416 542.8 732 491 588.3 795
2021 (src / src) 592 581.8 970 722 634.6 1,045
2022 (src / src) 688 409.6 1,269 758 532.3 1,301
2023 (src / src) 704 549.4 1,221 702 546.4 1,221
2024 (src / src) 632 567.9 1,138 638 497.0 1,161

PA tonnage is unusually stable — exports stay inside a band of roughly 410–580 kt across the whole period. What changed is the direction of flow: Asia supplies the world. China’s reported PA exports rose from 16 m USD to 135 m USD between 2020 and 2024, making it the largest exporter in the panel, while demand rotated to the markets that compound PVC and make coatings locally. Türkiye is the largest importer in the panel at 98 m USD, ahead of India (62 m USD in 2024, down from 97 m USD in 2020) and Indonesia.

Table 2 — Dioctyl orthophthalates (HS 291732): the shrinking line

Year / source Exports USD m kt USD/t YoY exports Imports USD m Imports kt
2020 (src / src) 233 140.7 980 145 107.6
2021 (src / src) 391 158.7 1,758 +67.4% 279 136.3
2022 (src / src) 313 176.0 1,583 -19.9% 191 94.0
2023 (src / src) 283 162.6 1,379 -9.7% 155 85.9
2024 (src / src) 313 228.4 1,316 +10.8% 150 87.4

This is the line the industry built in the 20th century, and the data shows what regulation has done to it. Export value across a 22-economy core moved from 233 m USD in 2020 to 313 m USD in 2024, and almost all of the growth is Chinese: 17 m USD to 149 m USD. Unit values fell from 1,758 USD/t in 2021 to 1,316 USD/t in 2024, which is what a product losing its premium position looks like. Demand, though, has not collapsed — it has fragmented: Egypt (39 m USD in 2020, 30 m USD in 2024), Brazil and Thailand keep buying, and India’s DOP imports are broadly flat at 10 → 18 m USD. Converters have not stopped buying ortho grades; they have stopped paying a premium for them.

Table 3 — Non-ortho aromatic esters (HS 291739): where the volume went

Year / source Exports USD m kt USD/t Imports USD m kt USD/t
2020 (src / src) 1,702 1,439.0 1,665 1,631 455.3 1,147
2021 (src / src) 2,442 1,300.5 2,225 2,267 1,035.2 1,735
2022 (src / src) 2,510 972.4 2,309 2,348 765.1 1,845
2023 (src / src) 1,817 642.1 1,905 1,970 500.3 1,607
2024 (src / src) 2,162 553.5 2,109 2,444 902.2 1,679

The residual line is the story. It moved 2,162 m USD of exports and 2,444 m USD of imports in 2024, and its unit values sit structurally above the ortho line: 2,109 USD/t on the export side in 2024 against 1,316 USD/t for DOP. That gap is what substitution looks like in customs data — the same converters, paying up for chemistry that meets current regulation. Because the line is defined by exclusion, read its size as a direction rather than a precise tonnage; what it does show reliably is the origin mix. Korea and the reporter labelled “Other Asia, nes” are the largest sellers, with China third and rising fast (225 m USD in 2020 to 595 m USD in 2024).

Table 4 — Top phthalic anhydride traders, 2024

# Exporter (src) USD m kt USD/t Importer (src) USD m kt USD/t
1 China 135 137.0 986 Türkiye 98 82.2 1,186
2 Rep. of Korea 105 101.9 1,030 India 62 57.0 1,096
3 Other Asia, nes 104 98.0 1,066 Netherlands 57 40.3 1,410
4 Belgium 98 76.0 1,287 Indonesia 47 44.7 1,040
5 Italy 47 30.8 1,526 Poland 43 35.5 1,207
6 Japan 38 40.4 942 Italy 40 27.8 1,442
7 Germany 32 23.7 1,335 USA 40 41.2 960
8 India 29 27.5 1,071 Germany 35 28.8 1,224

Table 5 — Top DOP traders, 2024

# Exporter (src) USD m kt USD/t Importer (src) USD m kt USD/t
1 China 149 116.2 1,284 Egypt 30 18.3 1,652
2 Malaysia 59 46.6 1,260 Brazil 21 12.9 1,609
3 Rep. of Korea 48 33.0 1,457 India 18 13.1 1,390
4 Türkiye 24 14.1 1,687 Thailand 17 12.8 1,333
5 Other Asia, nes 9 6.4 1,420 USA 12 0.0 n/r
6 Italy 5 2.3 2,189 Netherlands 7 3.8 1,935

One pattern repeats across Tables 4 and 5: China is the marginal supplier for the chain, while the import side is a short list of repeat buyers — Türkiye, India, Indonesia, Egypt, Poland — that appears line after line. The number of credible alternative suppliers is therefore narrower than the number of countries in the import rankings suggests.

Table 6 — India’s imports of the non-ortho ester line (HS 291739) by origin (m USD)

Origin 2020 (src) 2021 (src) 2022 (src) 2023 (src) 2024 (src)
Rep. of Korea 33 59 62 79 91
China 22 31 55 38 51
Other Asia, nes 14 24 33 16 30
Japan 5 5 6 11 9
Sweden 1 1 3 4 3
Malaysia 1 2 4 2 2
All origins 89 137 171 155 194

India is a useful test case because it regulates later and buys at scale. Its non-ortho ester imports grew from 89 m USD in 2020 to 194 m USD in 2024 — roughly 2.2× in four years, on a line defined by what it excludes. Korea is the largest origin (33 → 91 m USD) and China second (51 m USD in 2024). That is the clearest single indicator here that substitution is real and is being sourced from Northeast Asia.

The regulatory ratchet behind the numbers

This trade is downstream of chemistry regulation, and that regulation has tightened on a 25-year arc. In EU law the decisive step was Commission Regulation (EU) 2018/2005, which replaced entry 51 of Annex XVII to REACH: DEHP, DBP, BBP and DIBP — all listed in Annex XIV as substances toxic for reproduction, category 1B — may not be placed on the market in articles, individually or in any combination, in a concentration equal to or greater than 0.1% by weight of the plasticised material, after 7 July 2020, subject to defined exemptions covering industrial and agricultural uses, aircraft, motor vehicles, food-contact materials, medical devices and electrical equipment (EUR-Lex, Regulation (EU) 2018/2005). The arc starts earlier still: Commission Decision 1999/815/EC banned soft-PVC toys and childcare articles intended to be placed in the mouth by children under three where they contained more than 0.1% by weight of DINP, DEHP, DNOP, DIDP, BBP or DBP (EUR-Lex, 1999/815/EC). Twenty-five years on, the tariff data carries the result: a hard 0.1% threshold on the restricted ortho grades is exactly the kind of rule that moves volume into a different customs line.

Trade remedies are now part of the sourcing decision

Regulation is no longer the only constraint. On 15 May 2025 the US International Trade Commission issued a final affirmative determination in its investigations into dioctyl terephthalate from Malaysia, Poland, Taiwan and Turkey, finding that a US industry is materially injured by reason of imports that the Department of Commerce found to be sold at less than fair value; the goods are “provided for in subheadings 2917.39.20, 2917.39.70, or 3812.20.10” of the US tariff schedule, and the petitions were filed by Eastman Chemical Company (90 FR 20688, ITC Investigation Nos. 731-TA-1675-1678 (Final)).

Two implications: the substitution product is now traded at a volume that supports a trade-remedy case, which is itself a market-size signal; and duty exposure in the United States redirects those cargoes to Europe, the Middle East and Asia, where competition in non-ortho esters will therefore bite hardest next cycle.

What to do with this

  • Split your sourcing map by tariff line, not by product name. A 1,316 USD/t DOP quote and a 2,109 USD/t non-ortho quote are not competing offers; they are two different compliance positions with different origins.
  • Track Chinese exports of 291735 and 291739 quarterly — the best leading indicator of whether substitution demand is met from Asia or from new local capacity — and model duty risk into landed cost: the US DOTP case is a template.

Need the full picture rather than the trade slice?

This article covers what customs data can show. It does not cover the capacity stack by producer, esterification economics, plasticiser demand by end-use, or the regulatory timeline by jurisdiction. If you need a sample chapter, the full table of contents or a custom scope — for example DOTP versus DINP substitution by converter segment, or a producer and capacity map for the non-ortho esters — ask for a sample report or a tailored research scope and we will send the scope, the data dictionary and pricing. You can also start from our product pages on phthalic anhydride, dioctyl phthalate and dioctyl terephthalate, which track the price series, supply-side factors and named producers for each grade.

Data sources and method

Trade values and volumes are taken from the UN Comtrade public preview API, partner code 0 (World), annual frequency, HS 291735, 291732 and 291739. Each table row links to the query that produced it; the full query list is below.

Method notes. Rows carrying a second partner code or a mode-of-transport breakdown were excluded, and where a reporter filed more than one customs procedure the all-procedures total was used. Trend totals use fixed core panels so that year-on-year change reflects trade, not reporting coverage. “Implied unit value” is reported value divided by reported net weight and is not a market price assessment. HS 291739 is defined by exclusion, so its absolute size is directional only.

发表回复

您的邮箱地址不会被公开。 必填项已用 * 标注

Contact Us

We're always here to help. If you have any questions or concerns, please don't hesitate to reach out to us.


Email:

sales@pmarketresearch.com

error: Content is protected !!