KATS Adds EMC-6G Test for SiC/GaN Imports to Korea

On July 13, 2026, Korea’s Agency for Technology and Standards (KATS) announced a new import certification requirement for SiC and GaN power semiconductor modules and system-level products entering the Korean market. Starting October 1, 2026, these products must pass the newly added EMC-6G immunity test under KS IEC 61000-4-22:2026 Ed.2. For exporters, certification teams, logistics planners, and Korea-bound supply chains, the update matters because it directly affects compliance timing, delivery planning, and the risk of port rejection for uncertified shipments.

What the New Requirement Changes

The confirmed change is straightforward. KATS issued a notice on July 13, 2026 stating that from October 1, 2026, all imported SiC/GaN power semiconductor modules and system-level products must pass the EMC-6G immunity test specified in KS IEC 61000-4-22:2026 Ed.2. The test is described as being designed for 6G base stations and high-density power electronics environments. The notice also indicates that the rule will directly affect delivery cycles and compliance costs for Chinese exporters to Korea, and that products without the required certification will be refused at Busan Port.

Where the Pressure Will Appear First

Export shipments facing a narrower compliance window

From an industry perspective, direct trading companies shipping SiC/GaN modules or related system-level products to Korea are likely to feel the first impact. The immediate issue is not only whether a product can be sold, but whether it can complete the required certification process before shipment and customs arrival. What deserves closer attention is the alignment between testing status, shipment scheduling, and contractual delivery dates.

Manufacturers dealing with test-readiness and documentation risk

For processing and manufacturing companies, the requirement may affect the product release stage and technical file preparation. Analysis shows that once a new immunity test becomes mandatory, the practical burden often sits in confirming which product scope is covered, whether current certification materials remain sufficient, and how fast compliance evidence can be prepared for Korea-bound orders. In this case, the known fact is that the rule applies to imported SiC/GaN power semiconductor modules and system-level products, making product classification and document completeness an immediate business issue.

Supply chain and port-facing operators managing rejection risk

Supply chain service providers, freight coordinators, and customs-facing teams may also be affected because the consequence of non-compliance is explicit: uncertified products will be refused at Busan Port. Observably, this shifts compliance from a back-office matter to a shipment execution issue. The business impact may therefore appear in booking decisions, document checks before departure, and contingency planning for cargo already close to shipment cut-off dates.

Buyers and downstream users watching delivery reliability

Procurement teams and downstream application companies in Korea may not be the ones filing certification materials, but they are still exposed to delivery risk. Analysis shows that when a new import test is tied to port acceptance, buyers tend to focus on whether suppliers can provide clear certification status, realistic lead times, and a credible plan for orders spanning the October 1 implementation date. For ongoing procurement, delivery certainty may become as important as price and technical fit.

What Companies Should Track Now

Clarify which products fall within the mandatory scope

The first practical step is to confirm whether specific Korea-bound products are categorized as SiC/GaN power semiconductor modules or system-level products under the announced requirement. This matters because the compliance obligation begins at the product-scope level, and any uncertainty here can quickly affect quoting, shipment scheduling, and customer commitments.

Review lead times against the October 1 effective date

Companies with shipments planned around the implementation date should examine whether current order, production, and logistics timelines leave enough room for the EMC-6G immunity test requirement. What deserves closer attention is the difference between a rule being announced and a shipment being fully cleared under that rule. The closer an order is to the effective date, the greater the need for timeline validation.

Prepare certification and shipping documents as one workflow

Because the consequence of non-compliance is refusal at Busan Port, certification cannot be treated separately from shipping execution. In practical terms, exporters and logistics teams should pay close attention to whether certification records, product identification, and shipment documents are consistent enough to avoid disputes at the point of entry.

Keep customer communication tied to verifiable status

For suppliers serving Korean customers, communication should stay anchored to confirmed testing and certification progress rather than assumption-based delivery promises. Analysis shows that where a new regulatory test directly affects port acceptance, customer coordination becomes most effective when it is linked to clear milestones: product scope confirmation, test completion, and document readiness.

Why This Looks Like More Than a Short-Term Administrative Update

Observably, this notice should not be read only as a narrow paperwork change. The addition of an EMC-6G immunity test for products used in 6G base station and high-density power electronics environments suggests that Korea is placing greater compliance weight on electromagnetic resilience in advanced power applications. That said, it is more appropriate to understand this as a confirmed near-term compliance change with longer-term signaling value, rather than as proof of a broader market shift that has already fully played out. The immediate result is clear; the wider regulatory direction still needs continued observation.

How the Industry May Best Read This Signal

The industry significance of this update lies in its combination of a defined effective date, a named test standard, and an explicit enforcement outcome at port level. For companies active in Korea-bound SiC/GaN trade, the issue is already operational rather than theoretical. At the same time, a neutral reading is still necessary: the confirmed facts establish a new compliance threshold for affected imports, while the broader commercial effects on sourcing patterns, certification practices, and customer requirements should be monitored rather than assumed.

Basis of This Article and What Still Needs Verification

This article is based on the user-provided news title, event date, and event summary concerning the KATS update issued on July 13, 2026. For developments of this kind, relevant source types typically include official notices, company announcements, industry association information, authoritative media reporting, and standard organization documents. The specific official source link was not provided in the input, so continued verification is still needed. Follow-up attention should focus on any further official wording, scope clarification, or implementation guidance related to KS IEC 61000-4-22:2026 Ed.2 and the October 1, 2026 enforcement date.