Trade Cases
SMU Market Trends: Does the Steel Industry Still Need Section 232?
Written by Tim Triplett
December 21, 2017
With demand fairly strong and prices rising, two out of three respondents to this week’s Steel Market Update market trends questionnaire feel there is no longer any need for President Trump to act on Section 232 ahead of the mid-January deadline.
Earlier this year, the Trump administration instructed the Commerce Department to investigate whether low-priced steel imports pose a threat to the U.S. steel industry, and thus to national security, under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. The administration originally planned to impose new Section 232 tariffs or quotas on steel imports in June, but then delayed action in the face of strong opposition and has left the market hanging for months. Commerce and the president have a matter of weeks to act on the controversial measure, unless they choose to let it lapse. Following are some of the more insightful comments from steel buyers this week:
Some still favor Section 232:
- “Section 232 is needed for a few select countries and products.” Service Center/Wholesaler
- “Yes, but it needs to be reasonable. Exclude all .016 and lighter HDG that the domestic mills don’t want to make anyway.” Service Center/Wholesaler
Many don’t now, nor ever did, support Section 232:
- “Section 232 would totally disrupt the market. Nothing worse could happen.” Trading Company
- “The president was never justified to act on Section 232. Such drastic protectionist measures are not good for global trade. If he acts on it, he will likely exempt half the countries.” Manufacturer/OEM
- “We never did need Section 232. Please correct me if I am wrong, but why are our domestic prices higher than the rest of the world? Then the domestic mills want even higher pricing. Soon everybody will make finished goods offshore. Then none of us will have the problem anymore because there will be no business.” Service Center/Wholesaler
- “When the Defense Department turned against Section 232, it was the strongest signal yet that it’s not needed.” Steel Mill
- Section 232 will happen, but I expect it to be watered down. Watch for a surge of Vietnamese material in the interim as the preliminary decision on circumvention empowers the trading community.” Trading Company
One observation from a service center executive that all can agree on: “The president needs to act to create visibility and allow businesses to plan for their year. Conclude it one way or the other.”
Tim Triplett
Read more from Tim TriplettLatest in Trade Cases
Steel industry groups urge House action on LTPF 2.0
Six steel industry organizations have urged House Speaker Mike Johnson to include the Leveling the Playing Field 2.0 Act in any proposed package of legislation against China’s "unfair" trade practices.
CRU: Poor steel margins continue to push down raw material prices
Both iron ore and coking coal prices fell this week because of resistance from buyers. Iron ore prices have continued to fall throughout the past week, following sharp declines in steel prices in China, given no new policy announcement from the ‘Third Plenum’ meeting.
CRU: Imports cause concern in India and Vietnam
High levels of steel imports, especially from China, in recent months are worrying steel makers in India and Vietnam.
Price: The new greenwashing – subsidies to bail out obsolete, excess capacity
The United Kingdom and other countries are using the “green” label to subsidize bailouts of obsolete, inefficient, and excess capacity that should exit the market. US steelmakers have invested billions of dollars in technologies that curb greenhouse gas output. These investments have been market-based and led by EAF producers such as Nucor, Steel Dynamics, and CMC.
AISI, AISC, University of Massachusetts get ~$6.4M EPA grant
The American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI), American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC), and the University of Massachusetts at Amherst have received a grant to enhance emissions reporting for steel construction projects.