ProCon designs its own windows, makes them in its own factory in China and installs them across Australia. It says interim securities will tie up more than half a million dollars of its cash. Its founder has run the numbers on a typical new house. They show where the cost could land, and where the estimate stops.
ProCon says it had less than an hour of business time to prepare.
According to the Melbourne window and door company, the Australian Trade Remedies Commission’s email reached importers at 4:12pm on 14 October. From the next day, aluminium windows and doors from China needed a security lodged at the border before they could be released.
ProCon is not a simple importer. It designs its own window and door systems, which it says are engineered and owned by the company, and makes them at a dedicated factory in Shandong that began production in May 2025. Vaisman says it is the only Australian owned window factory in China. Back home, the company handles glazing, transport, craneage and installation in every state and territory.
At the border, though, it is treated like any other importer. Its goods sit on the 24.4 per cent rate.
“I honestly couldn’t believe it. Canberra gave us less than an hour of business time to find more than half a million dollars. No business can plan for that,” says founder Ellie Vaisman.
When we covered this on 20 October, the point was that the cost starts before the duty decision. This piece looks at the same decision from inside one of the businesses paying it, and tests the number ProCon wants home buyers to see.
How much cash is ProCon putting up?
ProCon estimates about $470,000 in securities on orders landing by 31 January 2027. Across a year of contracted work, Vaisman puts the total above half a million dollars.
A security is not a duty. It is a guarantee held while the investigation runs. If no duty is imposed, there is nothing for it to cover.
But the money leaves the business now. For a business with more than 20 staff, that is a working capital problem today, not a pricing problem in January.
The company says it put more than $1 million into design, tooling, moulds and testing in 2025 alone. “We put more than $1 million into doing this properly, and now we’re being punished for it,” Vaisman says.
Where does the $26,500 figure come from?
ProCon built its estimate from two published figures.
The commission puts windows and doors at 5 to 7 per cent of the cost of building a typical three to four bedroom home. The ABS put the average new house approval at $517,430 in the year to June 2026.
At 7 per cent, the windows and doors on that house come to about $36,200. A 24.4 per cent security on that is about $8,800. At the top rate of 73.3 per cent, it is about $26,500.
“That’s my own arithmetic, not a forecast. It’s staggering that nobody in government has done the sum,” Vaisman says.
The sums are right. What they describe is a ceiling, and several things sit between that ceiling and a real job.
What the $26,500 estimate assumes
The estimate only applies to a house built with Chinese made windows and doors. It assumes the full 73.3 per cent rate, which covers uncooperative and unnamed exporters, and that every dollar is passed on to the buyer. It applies the rate to the windows’ share of the whole build cost, while a security is calculated on the value of the goods as imported. ProCon calls its own figure an upper bound, not a forecast.
On our reading, that last point matters most. An installed window price carries freight, installation and supplier margin on top of the value at the border, so applying the rate to the installed share overstates the security. It does not capture any margin added further down the chain either.
The estimate also only reaches some homes. The commission’s preliminary findings put Australian made product at about 79 per cent of the market.
Why does the gap between rates matter so much?
The securities in the commission’s notice run from 5.3 per cent for one individually examined exporter to 73.3 per cent for uncooperative and other unnamed exporters. Aluminium supplier Capral, which supports the case, says the 24.4 and 73.3 per cent groups together hold about 71 per cent of Chinese import value in the investigation.
So 24.4 per cent is 4.6 times the lowest rate. 73.3 per cent is almost 14 times it.
“It’s staggering. Nobody meant to pick a winner, but they have. One major Chinese exporter got about 5 per cent. Most of the rest got five times that. That’s not a level playing field. In my view it’s a monopoly in the making,” Vaisman says.
The gap comes from how the system works. Exporters the commission examines individually get a rate based on their own measured margins. Cooperating exporters who were not examined get a residual rate, and the rest get the highest. ProCon’s argument is about the commercial result, not the method.
What is ProCon’s case against the measures?
ProCon’s core claim to the commission is that premium thermally broken systems are not like goods to what local fabricators make. It argues 7 star energy requirements have pushed architects toward bigger glass and taller openings.
“The architect designs the home. The legacy systems cut it down to fit their limits,” Vaisman says. He says ProCon regularly hears of openings being reduced to suit what local suppliers can make. “That isn’t a like product. It’s a smaller house.”
The sums are right. What they describe is a ceiling, and several things sit between that ceiling and a real job.
Local manufacturers dispute that. The case was brought by window maker Ventora Group and the Australian Glass and Window Association, which says it is asking for fair competition, not protection from it. Local manufacturers have also lodged submissions rejecting claims that Australian industry cannot supply high performance product.
The commission’s preliminary view is that dumped imports caused material injury to local manufacturers. It did not consider testing results or quality claims in those findings.
Where does this leave builders on fixed price jobs?
A builder buying Chinese windows through a supplier carries whatever the supply terms pass on. On a fixed price contract signed before 15 October, there may be no room to move that cost to the client.
Master Builders Australia raised this in its submission last December, saying builders had already priced and won work. It asked for any duty to be phased in over four to five years.
It lands on a sector already carrying the most failures. ASIC data shows 3,472 construction companies entered external administration for the first time in the year to June 2026, 24.5 per cent of the national total and more than any other industry, though slightly fewer than the year before.
What happens before the Minister decides?
Submissions on the preliminary findings close on 3 November. The commission’s final recommendation is due to the Minister for Industry and Innovation, Tim Ayres, by 16 December, with a decision expected within 30 days.
ProCon points to a line in the Statement of Essential Facts noting the broader public interest has not been considered by the Commissioner. That reflects the commission’s remit, which tests dumping and injury. Any wider weighing of cost to home buyers rests with the Minister.
“I built this business so my kids would see that you can back yourself in this country. I never imagined I’d have to fight my own government to keep it,” Vaisman says.
The $26,500 figure will get the attention. For builders, the more useful number is the date on the contract. A job priced before 15 October with Chinese windows in it is where this cost lands first, whatever the Minister decides in January.
“We’re not going anywhere,” Vaisman says.
We will report the commission’s final recommendation when it is published. For the wider picture on costs and supply, our industry trends guide is updated as new data lands.
Frequently asked questions
ProCon estimates up to about $8,800 on an average new house built with Chinese windows on the 24.4 per cent rate, and up to about $26,500 at the 73.3 per cent rate. It describes these as upper bounds, not forecasts. They assume full pass through and apply the rate to the installed share of build cost, which overstates the security calculated at the border.
Since 15 October 2026, securities range from 5.3 per cent for one individually examined exporter to 73.3 per cent for uncooperative and unnamed exporters. Cooperating exporters that were not individually examined, including ProCon’s supply, sit at 24.4 per cent.
No. A security is a guarantee lodged at the border while the investigation runs. A dumping duty is only imposed if the Minister publishes a duty notice after the commission’s final report. If no duty is imposed, the security has nothing to cover.
The Australian Trade Remedies Commission’s final recommendation is due to the Minister by 16 December 2026, with a decision expected within 30 days. Submissions on the preliminary findings close on 3 November 2026.
Related articles
- Imported Aluminium Windows Now Carry Securities. The Cost Starts Before the Duty Decision.
- Imported Aluminium Windows Are Under Investigation for the First Time. The Next Decision Is Due 23 September.
- 540 Companies in One Day. Why the Insolvency Numbers Will Look Worse Next Year.
Last updated 22 October 2026. Rates and dates are from the commission’s preliminary findings and may change in the final report. Cost estimates are ProCon’s.
General Information Only: This article provides general information only and does not constitute legal, financial, trade or other professional advice. It does not take into account your particular circumstances. Before making decisions about imported products, contracts or pricing, seek advice from a qualified professional.
0 Comments