Trade Cases

Traders Stymied by Possible Section 232 Remedies
Written by John Packard
February 20, 2018
International trading companies are reacting to the report released by Department of Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross recommending three options to protect the U.S. steel industry based on national security concerns.
As we speak with trading companies here at the Port of Tampa Steel Conference, as well as traders located around the country, we are finding many have ceased quoting and are no longer taking any new orders for shipments in March or beyond. One trader confided in SMU that their people were going to work on their tans over the next two months and not concentrate on developing any new business until the risks associated with 232 are better understood.
Some traders have begun to cancel orders. This does not appear to be a universal action, but there are enough cancellations on import orders that they are beginning to show up in domestic order books. One service center reported SDI order books as being on an “inquire only” basis. We were told, “The mills are expecting an onslaught of new business.”
One trader advised that there is a logistical issue associated with cancellations whether by the mill, trading company or the customer. The net result is a disruption of the cargo booked on the ships carrying steel and other materials to the United States. Some mills are scrambling to fill vessels that were not an issue just a few days ago.
Steel traders are telling SMU that the only option posed by the Commerce Department that might be “acceptable” to the trading community is the first – a 24 percent duty to be charged globally. The net result being prices rise across the board by 24 percent, which would be passed on to the consumer. Traders would pay the duties and continue as before.
The other two options are much more problematic for the traders (and their customers). In both cases, the intention is to lower the number of tons coming into the United States. In one scenario, 12 countries are named (China, Russia, Brazil, Turkey, South Korea, Costa Rica, Vietnam, India, Malaysia, Indonesia, South Africa and Thailand) with the recommendation they all pay a 53 percent tariff above and beyond any antidumping and countervailing duties already in force. The rest of the international community can ship 100 percent of the tonnage exported to the United States during calendar year 2017.
The last option is to have all countries subject to an allocation restricting imports to 63 percent of the tonnage deliveed into the United States during calendar year 2017.
The common thread is to reduce the amount of foreign tonnage coming into the U.S. by approximately 13 million tons.
One trader told SMU yesterday that there are many different kinds of steels coming into the United States that are headed to automotive and other critical applications. These sources of supply have been in place for years, and any interruption could cause significant damage to the end users.
A major trading company owned by a European steel mill put out a letter to their customers today imploring them to contact their representatives in Congress. The letter stated the following:
“As a decision could be announced any time between now and April 11, we encourage you to take action and contact your congressman, pointing out that the DOC recommendations:
- Are excessive.
- Promote the continued use of inefficient and outdated technology in domestic steel production.
- Further shield an already highly protected industry sector.
- Are detrimental to technical innovation.
- Are not needed – modern steel producers in the U.S. (example Nucor and Big River) show to be competitive in the global market.
- Are detrimental for free trade and not in line with WTO rules.
- Will have a negative impact on the U.S. economic growth.
- Will substantially increase cost for steel products in the U.S. and thus reduce competitiveness of the U.S. steel processing and manufacturing sector, which employs 12 times more people than domestic steel producers.
- Likely to cause shortages of steel and disrupt supply chains as import volumes will have to be canceled.
- Result in higher imports of steel-intense manufactured goods.
- Export steel processing jobs to other countries.
- Backfire on the U.S. economy, which traditionally depends on competitive cost for raw materials.
- Trigger counter measures by other countries, targeting sensitive U.S. export products.
Please contact your elected officials. We consider it crucial you make your voice heard as soon as possible. Discussions in Washington are ongoing. The steel processing and steel manufacturing industries and their employees need to make their case.”
“It’s a bit of a mess right now,” one trader told SMU this morning. “Are we going to have an issue? That is a difficult question to answer.”
Steel Market Update will continue to follow this story over the coming weeks as the industry prepares for President Trump’s final decision.

John Packard
Read more from John PackardLatest in Trade Cases

Price on Trade: IEEPA tariffs head to the Supreme Court, DOJ ramps up trade enforcement
International trade law and policy remain a hot topic in Washington and beyond this week. We are paying special attention to the ongoing litigation of the president’s tariff policies and the administration’s efforts to heighten trade enforcement.

Mexico considers stiff tariffs for steel, autos, and other imports
Mexico is considering imposing steep tariffs on imports of steel, automobiles, and over 1,400 other products. Its target? Countries with which it does not have free trade agreements, mainly China, India, Thailand, and other South Asian nations.

Leibowitz: With ‘reciprocal’ tariffs struck down again in court, what happens next?
President Trump’s “reciprocal” tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Policy Act (IEEPA) were struck down again, this time on Aug. 29 by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC). The legal and policy mess continues, with the next stop being the US Supreme Court.

Market unfazed by US circuit court’s IEEPA decision
Repealing any reciprocal tariffs placed by President Donald Trump on US imports of direct reduced iron (DRI), iron ore, hot-briquetted iron (HBI), and pig iron would have only a nominal impact on the US steel market, market participants said.

ITC votes to keep HR duties after sunset review
The US government determined this week that hot-rolled steel imports from a handful of countries continue to threaten the domestic steel industry.