Articles in Category: Anti-Dumping

Andrey Kuzmin/Adobe Stack

Anxiety is rising among Europe’s steelmakers that a potential U.S. plan to levy steel tariffs, on national security grounds, could have a disastrous impact on the region’s sales into the market.

Benchmark Your Current Metal Price by Grade, Shape and Alloy: See How it Stacks Up

Reuters reported that the European steel association Eurofer is worried that “….measures potentially stemming from the U.S. section 232 investigation may lead to a proliferation of disastrous global trade flow distortions.”

Eurofer is worried on two counts. First, it is worried that with China largely already cut out of the U.S. market by anti-dumping legislation, the axe will fall on imports from other regions, of which Europe is a major supplier. Many European countries are already experiencing steep declines in sales to the U.S. between 2015 and 2016 — in some cases of 50% — but the largest, Germany, remains the fifth-largest external supplier to the U.S. of flat-rolled products, according to International Trade Administration data.

The second worry is that should the investigation support bans or large duties, suppliers in the affected countries will look for alternative mature, high-value markets for their products, namely the EU. This would potentially flood an already overcrowded market with more low-priced material.

Having championed free trade in recent statements, Europe may have to eat its own words if it is forced to find ways to counter such a flood. Reuters reports that moves are already afoot, at the G20 summit in Germany last weekend, leaders from the world’s 20 leading economies set an August deadline for an OECD-led global forum to compile information about steel overcapacity. That also includes a report on potential solutions, due in November, which could result in the region acting of its own.

In reality, Europe may not be the primary target of the president’s 232 action. Supplies from Canada, Brazil, Mexico, South Korea, Japan and Russia dwarf those from Europe, but that will not necessarily stop the region from suffering considerable collateral damage.

The move would come at an unfortunate time for the European steel industry.

After prices rose nearly 50% last year, they have since fallen back some 10% this year, according to Reuters. Demand, however, is recovering with a 1.9% rise forecast for this year, according to Eurofer, suggesting prices could stabilize (although demand growth is expected to ease again next year, with only 1% growth forecast).

EU Strikes Back?

However, The Guardian reports Europe is also looking at retaliatory measures, should they suffer exclusion or tariffs because of the 232 action. The paper quotes the European Commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker, who is reported to have said that if the U.S. took measures against Germany and China’s steel industries, the EU would “react with counter-measures.”

The article says one industry in the Europeans’ crosshairs is Kentucky bourbon, worth $166 million to the state last year and directly employing some 17,500.

Kentucky was staunchly supportive of Trump during his campaign, with 62.5% of the electorate voting for him.

Free Sample Report: Our Annual Metal Buying Outlook

“I am telling you this in the hope that all of this won’t be necessary,” Juncker said during the G20 summit. “But we are in an elevated battle mood.”

Bellicose talk, indeed.

gui yong nian/Adobe Stock

Before we head into the weekend, let’s take a brief look back at some of the news from the world of metals this week:

China’s Falling Steel Exports?

Earlier this week, our Stuart Burns wrote about the phenomenon of dropping Chinese steel exports:

“As we noted in a piece yesterday reviewing the 232 probe, China’s share of the U.S. import market for steel products has been falling for the last couple of years, mainly due to successful anti-dumping cases,” Burns writes. “China no longer appears even in the top 10.

So, what exactly is going on in China with respect to steel production and demand? Can we take it that Beijing’s actions to tackle excess steel production have finally resolved China’s deflationary impact on global steel markets?”

Benchmark Your Current Metal Price by Grade, Shape and Alloy: See How it Stacks Up

In case you missed it on Monday, definitely give the story a read, especially as the Department of Commerce’s Section 232 steel investigation results will be announced any day now.

Indian Coal Faces Green Wave

Also earlier this week, our Sohrab Darabshaw wrote about coal mine closures in India, partially a result of the growth of the renewable energy sector:

“One estimate by the Energy and Resources Institute predicts if the cost of renewable energy and storage continue to fall, India may phase out coal power completely by 2050. Both solar and wind energy prices have been steadily decreasing over the last three years.

“In 2016-17, India added over 14,000 megawatts of new renewable energy power compared to almost 7,000 megawatts of new coal power capacity.”

Even so, the dependence on old energy sources won’t disappear immediately. Yesterday, Indian Steel Minister Choudhary Birender Singh announced India will ramp up its steel production significantly. That uptick in production will need energy, and Singh indicated Coal India Ltd. will be asked to provide the coal needed to back the steel-production operations.

In general, however, the interplay between older, dirtier sources of energy and clean, renewable energy sources is happening all over the world.

China-U.S. Back and Forth

Tensions have been building between the U.S. and China, as Reuters reported President Donald Trump was growing frustrated with China over its inability to rein in North Korea, while China expressed concern this week about the results of the Section 232 aluminum investigation.

The Department of Commerce investigations into steel and aluminum imports were announced in April.

Adding to the tension is China’s disapproval of a planned $1.42 billion arms sale by the U.S. to Taiwan, which the Chinese embassy denounced in a statement, Reuters reported Friday.

With many expecting tariffs or quotas (or a combination of the two) to be slapped on steel and aluminum imports (as an outcome of the 232 investigation), there’s no doubt the tension between the U.S. and China will only increase.

What’s Next For U.S.-India Ties?

President Donald Trump met with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi earlier this week in Washington D.C. Our Stuart Burns wrote about Modi’s visit and what could be in store for the U.S.-India relationship throughout the Trump administration.

During a joint press statement this week, Trump stressed India’s status as the world’s largest democracy and touted himself as a friend to India.

However, he also touched on thornier issues, like trade barriers.

“I look forward to working with you Mr. Prime Minister to create jobs in our countries, to grow our economies, to create a trading relationship that is fair and reciprocal. It is important that barriers be removed to the export of U.S. goods into your markets and that we reduce our trade deficit with your country.”

After the Tragedy

The Grenfell Tower fire earlier this month could have been prevented if safe building materials had been used. Burns wrote about that and more in his piece on the tragedy.

Free Download: The June 2017 MMI Report

In the week when the world pensively awaits the U.S.’s Section 232 judgement — a move promised by President Donald Trump during his election campaign and aimed largely at China — a recent Reuters report on Chinese steel exports makes interesting reading.

Two-Month Trial: Metal Buying Outlook

Source: Reuters

China’s steel exports have been sliding for months.

According to Reuters, China’s January-May export total was 34.2 million tons, down 26% from last year’s equivalent period and the lowest level since 2014. The year drop in export tonnage amounted to 12.1 million tons — roughly equivalent to Canada’s production over a full 12-month period, Reuters reported.

Yet bizarrely enough, China produced 72.78 million tons of steel in April, an all-time record Reuters says. The following month, China tallied the second-highest monthly total at 72.26 million tons.

Meanwhile, profits on products like steel rebar have surged to $162 dollars per ton this month, as inventory levels have fallen and demand has remained robust (particularly from the construction sector). Investment in real estate is running at an annual growth rate over 6%, Reuters reports. Although there are fears of overheating in some regions, real estate has been stronger for longer than analysts outside the market expected.

As we noted in a piece yesterday reviewing the 232 probe, China’s share of the U.S. import market for steel products has been falling for the last couple of years, mainly due to successful anti-dumping cases. China no longer appears even in the top 10.

So, what exactly is going on in China with respect to steel production and demand? Can we take it that Beijing’s actions to tackle excess steel production have finally resolved China’s deflationary impact on global steel markets?

First, Reuters notes that China has been quite successful in permanently closing previously shuttered steel plants, as well as in in tackling older and more environmentally damaging mills. Those actions combined has resulted in the removal of some 100 million tons of capacity.

In addition, Beijing’s focus on environmental issues has hastened the closure of induction furnaces, which use scrap rather than iron ore as their input and are often labelled as producers of sub-standard products (and, hence, unapproved). Unapproved equates to illegal by Beijing — as such, their production and their closures does not figure in the normal statistics. A significant proportion of China’s rebar production came from these mills, which explains the record profits being earned by surviving state-owned manufacturers of the same products as they capitalize on the removal of these scrappy competitors.

Unfortunately, nobody expects China’s construction market to continue at the current pace and a slowdown is in the forecast for the second half of the year.  Replenishment of low inventory levels will maintain steel mill production runs for a while, but as Reuters notes, China’s mills have a notoriously poor record in adjusting output to demand. So, we should expect that as demand eases, inventorying levels will rise, prices will fall, and access production may well begin to leak through exports onto the international market.

Free Download: The June 2017 MMI Report

While America’s anti-dumping legislation will largely protect that market from Chinese material, the rest of the world may find itself under pressure next year from greater availability of Chinese steel at falling prices, further fueling an already rising tide of protectionist sentiment in both developed and emerging markets.

Steel and stainless steel buying organizations have expressed concern to MetalMiner about the potential outcome of the current Section 232 steel investigation led U.S. Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross.

Benchmark Your Current Metal Price by Grade, Shape and Alloy: See How it Stacks Up

According to a recent Reuters article, Ross, when discussing the Section 232 steel investigation told a Senate Appropriations Subcommittee last week that, “there is a genuine national security issue,” suggesting his agency would make recommendations that would potentially curb steel imports.

He went on to suggest several potential policy recommendations, including: “Imposing tariffs above the current, country-specific anti-dumping and anti-dumping duties on steel products; imposing quotas limiting the volume of steel imports; and a hybrid ‘tariff-rate quota’ option that would include quotas on specific products with new tariffs for imports above those levels,” and intimated that this last option would help mitigate price risk for steel consumers. Ross made several additional comments to allay consumers’ concerns regarding price increases.

Read more

Photographee.eu/Adobe Stock

What happens when an illegal business practice becomes so common and virtually accepted that it ultimately gets difficult to break?

Many U.S. manufacturers would argue that we’re in a period of global trade that features one such practice: trade circumvention. The most slippery aspect of ferreting out circumvention is first defining which segment of industry gets harmed the most, before even knowing what to do about it. Is it the upstream sector, including primary steel, textiles or plastics production? Or the downstream sector, such as the residential washing machine business?

MetalMiner Executive Editor Lisa Reisman makes the case that the lines between upstream and downstream manufacturing have blurred in this new report, Rules-Based Trade Remains Critical to Manufacturing Health.

But first we must understand the basics. Here’s an excerpt from that paper defining the landscape of trade circumvention in a short primer.

What is Trade Circumvention?

According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, circumvention refers to “getting around commitments in the WTO such as commitments to limit agricultural export subsidies. It includes: avoiding quotas and other restrictions by altering the country of origin of a product; measures taken by exporters to evade anti-dumping or countervailing duties.”

Four steel producers filed a petition last September, charging China with circumventing anti-dumping and countervailing duty orders for corrosion-resistant carbon steel and cold-rolled carbon steel by sending substrate materials to Vietnam for processing and re-export. The claim appears to be supported by trade data (as shown by an spike in Vietnamese cold-rolled and CORE imports after November 2015 while the same Chinese imports drastically decreased after duties were imposed on the latter, for example). Read more

There have been some doubts over India’s stated plans to triple its steel production capacity by 2030. The Indian cabinet recently passed a revamped policy to the extent.

While some have welcomed the document, other sector experts have expressed uncertainty over the projections in the policy.

Free Download: The May 2017 MMI Report

Ratings agency Crisil, for example, said in a statement that the ambition to add 182 million tons of new steel capacities over the next 14 years under the National Steel Policy was unlikely to be achieved. Crisil’s doubts seem logical. After all, India has managed to add capacity at the annual rate of 55 million tons in the last decade.

The National Steel Policy 2017 projects crude steel production capacity of 300 million tons by 2030-31 from the present level of about 120 million tons and per-capita consumption of 158 kilograms of finished steel as against the current consumption of 61 kilograms. The policy also sees an increase in domestic availability of washed coking coal by 2030-31.

Crisil Research said that it expects 24-26 million tons of steel capacities to be added over the next five years, leading to aggregate steel capacity to rise to 140-145 million tons by 2021-22. Beyond this, Crisil said, the key factors that would determine the pace of capacity addition would be demand growth, continued government support, and pricing environment against the backdrop of global overcapacity led by China. Crisil has also projected a 6-6.5% growth in steel demand in India over the next five years, lower than the 7% annual growth rate projected by the government till 2030. Read more

Last month we reported that in March, U.S. domestic steel prices generally rose while the GOES M3 price fell. This month, we can safely report the exact opposite price change. U.S. domestic steel prices fell while GOES prices rose in April.

Two-Month Trial: Metal Buying Outlook

In our April update, MetalMiner indicated that GOES prices might find a price floor on the back of a large 20,000/mt tender from Bharat Heavy Electricals. That indeed appears to have happened. Moreover, according to a recent TEX Report, GOES prices have continued to climb in China as Baoshan Iron & Steel needs to service the domestic market due to anti-dumping cases preventing Japanese and Korean imports to that market.

The TEX Report also suggests that global inventories remain low and that many countries have come into the market all at the same time, requiring material. This could lead to higher prices, particularly from the Japanese mills for contracts awarded during the second half of the year.

The Gorilla in the Room

The real challenge for domestic GOES prices, however, rests on the results of the Section 232 steel product investigation launched by the Trump administration in late April. The results will likely not come much before January 22, 2018, assuming the Secretary of Commerce takes the allowable 270 days to present findings to the President. At its core, the investigation seeks to address the issue of

For full access to this MetalMiner membership content:
Log In |

Liquid steel.

Photollug/Adobe Stock

This morning in metals, a big trade finding from last Friday is making the news.

The U.S International Trade Commission (ITC) found that imports of carbon and alloy cut-to-length steel plate from steelmakers in 8 different countries officially harms U.S. manufacturers, thereby “locking in” duties imposed by U.S. Commerce in March for five years, according to Reuters.

According to the ITC’s site and the Reuters report following shortly after the release, the finding applies to cut-to-length plate from Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan.

The exact anti-dumping duties Commerce imposed on eight producers’ products in March range “from 3.62 percent to 148 percent…while imports from South Korea would also face a countervailing duty of 4.31 percent,” according to Reuters. Much more detail on those duties in this MetalMiner report.

What Does It Mean for Steel Plate Prices and Buyers?

“We anticipate the dumping order will help provide support to U.S. domestic prices, at least in the short term,” said Lisa Reisman, executive editor of MetalMiner, “as the case included a fairly broad number of both European and Asian suppliers.”

In many cases, Reisman mentioned, the duty rate appears significant, which will curtail imports from both specific countries and specific producers.

From a short-term pricing perspective, according to Reisman, steel prices have slid across the board this past week, but “certainly this trade case will help support plate prices,” she said.

“Interestingly enough,” she concluded, “according to analysis conducted by Steel Market Update, domestic cut to length plate exports are at their highest level since May 2015.”

India’s steel story continues to shine. The country’s consumption of finished steel goods is expected to grow by 6.1% in 2017 compared with 2016.

According to the World Steel Association (WSA), India’s steel product demand could reach 88.6 million tons in 2017, up from 83.5 million tons in 2016. WSA was also quite positive on India’s steel demand in 2018, projecting a growth of 7.1% to 94.9 million tons.

Two-Month Trial: Metal Buying Outlook

Steel consumption in India’s neighboring country China, however, would remain flat in 2017. The WSA estimated a 2% slump in demand for 2018.

The Indian Steel Association, too, has said publicly that the country was well on its way to becoming the second largest consumer of steel, beating the United States to the second spot.

The WSA said in its report that the U.S. was expected to continue to lead the growth in the developed work in 2017-18, based on strong fundamentals, newly announced measures related to fiscal stimuli, and rising infrastructure spending. It has estimated that steel demand in the U.S. will grow by 3% in 2017 to 94.3 million tons and then by 2.9% in 2018 to 97.1 million tons.

Free Download: The April 2017 MMI Report

In India, in a further fillip to steel production, the government was contemplating making the use of Indian steel compulsory in all government or public sector funded projects. This would raise the per-capita consumption from 61 kilograms (134.5 pounds) to 160 kilograms (353 pounds) and increase production from 120 million ton to 300 million ton by 2030. The indication of this was recently given by Union Minister for Steel Chaudhary Birender Singh.

After reviewing the performance of Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited (RINL), the minister told reporters that “stringent measures” like imposing anti-dumping duty and minimum import price (MIP) had led to imports falling by 39% and exports increasing by 57%.

He added that the India’s national policy on steel would be unveiled soon, after receiving approval of the Union Cabinet.

Free Sample Report: Our Annual Metal Buying Outlook

The move to make use of “Make in India” steel mandatory by government bodies comes in the wake of the central government’s commitment to support the domestic steel sector, which has been incurring losses during the last couple of years due to excess production and dumping of steel products from China into India.

Incidentally, India was aiming for a steel production capacity of 300 million tons by 2030, while the current capacity is 120 million tons and production was 90 million tons.

The Commerce Department launched an investigation on Wednesday to determine whether a flood of aluminum imports from China and elsewhere was compromising U.S. national security, a step that could lead to broad import restrictions on the lightweight metal.

Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said the investigation is similar to one announced last week for steel imports into the U.S., invoking Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962.

Benchmark Your Current Metal Price by Grade, Shape and Alloy: See How it Stacks Up

“Here’s why we did it,” Ross told reporters, “Imports have been flooding into the aluminum industry and the defense angle is that high-purity aluminum is used in the F-35” as well as other military aircraft and vehicles. In the event of a war, domestic manufacturers might be unable to meet the Pentagon’s needs, Ross said.

The investigation mirrors a probe Commerce launched a week earlier focusing on the steel industry, also invoking section 232 of the act. North American aluminum trade groups have been pushing for such action for the last five years.