This paper focuses on the controversial issue of whether the market distortion rules issued by the EU after the sunset clause expired are consistent with WTO law. Based on the comparison between the EU’s significant distortion rules and the non-market economy rules in the sunset clause period, this paper analyzes the consistency of the EU’s significant market distortion rules with WTO law according to the interpretation principles and methods of international treaty law. This paper holds that after sunset clause expired China does not necessarily obtain market economy status without exception, but should be proved by the anti-dumping investigation agency on the basis of case analysis. The surrogate country approach may still apply if the price involved in the case proves to be a non-market price. However, government intervention, wage cost distortion and raw material distortion under the rule violate the general provisions of the WTO anti-dumping agreement. Under the rules, companies can seek redress through EU legal channels, and the government should review and adjust industrial policy.