European industry associations urge swift publication of ETS and CBAM benchmarks
Six European industry associations, the European Cement Association (CEMBUREAU), the Association of European Ferroalloy Producers (Euroalliages), the European Steel Association (EUROFER), the European Association of Metals (Eurometaux), European Aluminium, and Fertilizers Europe have issued a joint statement, welcoming the European Commission’s two-step timeline for publishing Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) benchmarks.
The approach foresees the publication of indicative CBAM benchmarks based on 2021-2025 EU ETS benchmarks before the end of 2025, followed by the release of definitive CBAM benchmarks derived from the 2026-2030 EU ETS benchmarks once finalized early next year. The definitive values would apply from January 1, 2026.
Ensuring transparency and industrial alignment
According to the associations, this two-phase process will provide the highest level of predictability for industries covered by both the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) and CBAM.
However, the associations urged the European Commission to publish both definitive ETS and CBAM benchmarks without delay, ensuring clarity and stability for businesses. They also called for robust benchmark design to prevent potential loopholes.
All Steels: EU and UK steel prices set to surge as new tariffs and CBAM framework take effect
According to UK-based steel supplier All Steels, the UK steel market has entered one of its longest weak phases following the strong conditions of 2021 and 2022. Demand and prices remain at historically low levels, while the broader European economy also shows limited momentum. Recent US protectionist import measures have further undermined European producers’ competitiveness.
In 2024, EU steel exports to the US totaled 3.8 million mt and are now subject to a 50 percent import tax, while UK steel exports of 180,000 mt face a 25 percent tariff. With even higher duties applied to other global suppliers, Europe has become a destination for surplus steel, pushing mills to cut prices to retain market share, often at a loss.
CBAM and new import quotas to reshape market
The European Commission’s new trade policy, combining import restrictions with the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), represents a major structural shift. CBAM, scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2026, is expected to add £30-130/mt to import costs depending on origin and carbon intensity.
The revised safeguard system will cap tariff-free imports at 18.3 million mt per year, about half of the current quota, while raising out-of-quota tariffs from 25 percent to 50 percent.
UK expected to mirror EU’s approach
Although the UK government has yet to announce its final position, it is widely expected to implement parallel or coordinated measures with the EU to limit non-EU imports. If EU and UK producers can recover 18-20 million mt of domestic demand, the sector could regain profitability and free capital for decarbonization investments.
All Steels warns that if surplus imports are fully taxed at 50 percent, a sharp price surge will follow.
Existing EU and UK safeguard measures are due to expire on June 30, 2026, but the European Commission aims to ratify new rules earlier, potentially from January 1 or April 1, 2026, pending legislative and WTO approval.
Discussions with European mills and distributors show early reshoring trends, as buyers seek to avoid CBAM-related costs. Traders are withdrawing from Asian markets due to long lead times and tariff risks, tightening import supply in 2026 and shifting pricing power to domestic producers.
All Steels forecasts sharp price increases
All Steels projects that EU and UK steel prices could rise by up to £80/mt in the short term, with increases exceeding £200/mt later in 2026 once protection measures are fully applied. It draws parallels with recent US price movements following the recent trade measures, noting that hot rolled coil rose 27.1 percent to $845/nt ($931/mt), plate 18.3 percent to $970/nt ($1,069/mt), rebar 23.1 percent to $880/nt ($970/mt), and welded pipe 17.4 percent to $1,350/nt ($1,488/mt) in 2025. The company notes that CBAM and tariffs now overshadow all other market variables.
In the near term, aggressive discounting may persist due to seasonality, but mill sentiment is improving as buyers return to local sourcing. All Steels advises partners to prepare for sharp price adjustments, noting that its own prices will reflect expected increases in replacement costs.
Italian rebar price increases struggle to gain traction
Italian rebar prices are struggling to rise despite recent attempts by steelmakers to increase levels by around €30/tonne ($35/t) compared to early October.
The increases are aimed at recovering margins and halting the price erosion seen in recent weeks, Kallanish learns from market sources.
Buyers, however, are either adopting a wait-and-see attitude or continuing to restrict purchases to small truckload volumes. One distributor says he is willing to pay slightly more than his previous contract level but remains cautious, noting that producers are “asking too much given the current low consumption” while they are struggling to pass any increases downstream.
Steelmakers are asking for €260-270/t base ex-works with buyers pressing them to accept €240/t. Multiple sources say they are still being delivered material they purchased in the past weeks at €230-240/t base ex-works and are therefore not in immediate need of new bookings.
While most buyers are adopting a wait-and-see attitude, recent transactions for very small tonnages have been reported at around €250/tonne. Some additional sales are expected this week at slightly higher levels.
Meanwhile, the scrap price decline seen in October in Italy seems to have ended, with prices now stabilising.
Domestic rebar contract values are currently assessed at €240-250/t base ex-works. Including size extras of between €260-270/t, effective prices are reported in the range of €510-520/t ex-works. Mesh prices, meanwhile, are also averaging €250/t base ex-works, excluding an additional €300/t in size extras.
Natalia Capra France
Polish domestic long steel prices remain flat, weak demand
Polish steel rebar and wire rod prices remained stable in the week to Friday October 17, with weak demand and cheap imports affecting the market, sources told Fastmarkets.
“Demand is still weak,” a distributor source told Fastmarkets, adding that the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) should help “lift up” prices once it comes into effect in early 2026.
In the week to October 17, estimations of workable levels for wire rod were heard around 2,580-2,650 zloty ($711-730) per tonne CPT, the same as a week earlier.
Some offers were also heard hovering around 2,650-2,700 zloty per tonne on CPT.
Therefore, Fastmarkets’ weekly price assessment for steel wire rod (drawing quality), domestic, delivered Poland, was 2,580-2,650 zloty per tonne on October 17, unchanged week on week.
Prices for steel wire rod have remained unchanged since mid-August, with regulatory uncertainty, a sluggish construction sector and high energy costs among the key reasons for the market slowdown, Fastmarkets heard.
Rebar prices in Poland were also stable in the week to October 17.
Estimations of workable levels were heard hovering around 2,420-2,450 zloty per tonne CPT, the same as other estimations seen at the beginning of October.
Prices for Polish domestic rebar have also been static since the beginning of October, following some early price growth seen in the second half of September as a result of mills aiming for higher offers, Fastmarkets heard.
Fastmarkets’ weekly price assessment for steel reinforcing bar (rebar), domestic, cpt Poland, was 2,420-2,450 zloty per tonne on October 17, also unchanged week on week.
Some rebar imports from Ukraine were also reported at around €525 ($611) per tonne, DAP border.
European HRC buyers stay cautious; mills push for higher prices amid policy-driven optimism
European hot-rolled coil producers were pushing for higher offer prices amid trade policy developments, but buyers remained cautious citing subdued real demand, sources told Fastmarkets on Monday October 20.
The European HRC market has remained in a state of uncertainty so far in October, with many buyers resisting higher prices.
Market participants reported that while trade policy developments and future expectations point to potential price rises in early 2026, conditions for the remainder of 2025 remain fragile due to high buyer inventories and subdued consumption.
“Demand is missing totally. Stocks are [high on] low buying activity,” one German buyer said, adding that the current conditions could persist for a few more weeks.
Prices in Northern Europe edged slightly higher in mid-October, supported by seller optimism around the European Commission’s new trade regime proposed on October 7.
Mills reported an increase in inquiries following the policy news, although few have yet translated into transactions.
Offers for December- and January-delivery HRC were widely reported at €600-650 per tonne ex-works or delivered, with ArcelorMittal announcing new offer prices of €630 per tonne for December and €650 per tonne for January.
Despite these moves, resistance on the buying side remains, with bids typically reported at around €580-590 per tonne ex-works for December delivery HRC and with buyers estimates of achievable December delivery prices at around €580-600 per tonne ex-works.
Fastmarkets’ daily steel hot-rolled coil index domestic, exw Northern Europe was €591.46 per tonne on Monday, up by just €0.21 per tonne from €591.25 per tonne on Friday.
The index rose by €4.41 per tonne week on week and by €11.46 per tonne month on month.
Sources told Fastmarkets they expected to get a bit more clarity on price developments during the Blechexpo trade fair in Stuttgart, Germany, on October 21-24.
Fastmarkets’ corresponding daily steel hot-rolled coil index domestic, exw Italy was calculated at €585.00 per tonne on Monday, up by €5.00 per tonne from €580.00 per tonne on Friday.
The Italian index was down by €2.38 per tonne week on week but up by €35 per tonne month on month.
In Italy, December delivery HRC was on offer from local and European suppliers at about €600-630 per tonne delivered, which corresponds to about €580-610 per tonne ex-works.
Buyers in Italy estimated the workable level to be at around €570-590 per tonne ex-works.
Several stakeholders in the Italian market told Fastmarkets that new offers “could be accepted shortly” due to the lack of alternatives.
“New imports are very risky. And local mills are well aware of that,” a domestic buyer in Italy said.
“And in the first quarter [of 2026] we will mainly have to rely on European supplies,” the buyer added.
The market for imported coil has been very quiet because most of overseas suppliers are offering HRC with delivery in the first quarter of 2026 and, therefore, prices for these tonnages will be subject to the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM).
Sources reported that a deal for Indonesian HRC to Italy had been concluded at around €465 per tonne CFR – although because the sale was to a trader and included the trader’s margin and CBAM-related costs, it would be equivalent to around €520 per tonne delivered in Italy.
Climease: CBAM, ETS quota system and how to calculate their costs for steel companies
The transition phase of the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), which began on October 1, 2023, is coming to an end. From January 1, 2026, all importing companies will be obliged to purchase CBAM certificates through which they declare the amount of CO2 emissions for imported goods.
The cost calculation of these certificates imposed by the European Union has turned out to be very complex and unclear, also because many of its factors are still to be defined. To support stakeholders in this transition, SteelOrbis has interviewed Nicolas Endress, CEO and founder of Climease, a globally experienced Swiss company that has developed dedicated software to calculate CBAM costs.
Starting with the basics, what is CBAM?
Basically, it is a carbon tariff applying the same price as the EU carbon scheme. It affects steel, aluminum, fertilizers, cement and other industries. It involves approximately 35,000 companies in the EU, and on average we can say that every importer pays roughly half a million euros per year in CBAM costs, even if such data are very skewed because many companies pay just a little and a handful pay hundreds of millions or tens of millions. The EU is forecast to raise between €13-30 billion per year from CBAM.
Why do we need CBAM?
So, first, we are in a situation of climate urgency. We need to cut half of the emissions globally by the next five years, approximately. That’s what science says.
The European Union has had a carbon tax framework for 15 years, called the Emissions Trading System (ETS), but it works only to a certain extent, because right now the system only taxes local producers. If this carbon tax is further increased, they might risk losing their business to cheaper imports that are not subject to any carbon tax so far. That’s where the CBAM comes in, because it applies to imports the same price that local producers would pay, levelling the playing field. It’s something that the local EU industry wants and supports, aside from it being so complicated.
Does CBAM go in parallel with the ETS system? Does it substitute it? How much does it influence the ETS system?
The ETS is a system that has existed since 2006, and it has been working properly since 2015. Essentially about 13,000 companies in the EU have to buy ETS certificates every year. At the beginning of the year, the EU provides some certificates for free, and some others that have to be obtained through auctions. When a company needs more, they need to go to an auction or to the market and buy them from either the EU or another company that has certificates to spare.
So, this is the mechanism, but the problem is that it’s very EU-centered. Consequently, if a product comes in from, say, China, it is not taxed, and that’s unfair to local producers in the EU.
At the same time, some of them have even stopped producing just to avoid buying new certificates and started importing products from China. So, CBAM is now making sure that all imports are paying the same tax as local producers.
There is a whole market behind the certificates. The auction system is the primary market, but then there is a secondary market where companies trade those certificates, with speculators, banks and so on. It’s a very liquid market, and volatile as well.
CBAM is tied to this market, so that every time an importer buys, he needs to go and get certificates. To sum up, it does not substitute, rather it really complements the ETS system.
On the technical side, how does CBAM work and how will it actually influence importers?
Let’s start again with emissions calculations. The last two years have been mainly focused on collecting emissions data and reporting them. Importers were getting these files, they didn’t really care whether they were right or wrong, they just filled them with data, and they did their job on the calculation of emissions on the supplier side. I’m not going to be too technical, but basically you can calculate emissions based on gas bills, electricity bills, etc.
You follow some rules, and you can calculate emissions. That’s the simple method. The complex method is when you really split your whole company into multiple processes and you track all the production routes.
In the end, with the first one you have one emission factor for all your products, and with the second one you have one specific emission factor for every product.
That being said, it’s very important that companies – especially across the steel value chain – obtain emissions declarations from their own suppliers. For instance, let’s say you have an exporter in Turkey that sells tubes. He buys steel from another producer, who maybe buys his raw materials from others. The thing is that downstream manufacturers are responsible for a very low part of emissions, maybe 10 to 30 percent, but upstream emissions are really the big chunk. So, it’s very important to get those real emissions, otherwise you will have to use higher default values provided by the EU, which are penalizing.
So, the more actual data you collect across the value chain, the better, and the lower the emissions you declare. By the way, soon – when emissions will need to be verified – only either real, verified emissions or default values will be accepted. Nothing in-between.
How do you calculate emissions on the financial side?
There is a formula. This means the importer is taxed on the difference between the import supplier’s emissions minus a benchmark specific to every product. The benchmark represents the greenest way you can possibly produce that particular good, so, essentially, you’re taxed on where you’re at, minus where you could be. This is the first logic.
The second logic is that this benchmark becomes smaller every year. That’s because, also on the EU ETS side, benchmarks decrease over a certain period of time.
Because the aim is to reduce emissions, so consequently the benchmark becoming lower means that the greener you produce the lesser emissions you have to declare and the less you pay, right?
If you declare green emissions, you can either pay very low tax or if you’re below the benchmark you can even enter tax free. But the second part is that the benchmark itself, which is a fixed number right now [at the time of the interview], will decrease over time.
According to the formula, this difference between the imported emissions and the benchmark are then multiplied by the ETS price, and eventually you can deduct any price paid upfront.
What can a company do about this? And how can Climease support them?
The main aim is, first, to find greener suppliers. But what a company should do is decrease the risk all of this and then calculate the opportunity. And how do you reduce the emissions risk? You ask for verification statements across the whole supply chain. The more verified the carbon footprint is, the better.
Now, about the average EU ETS price, we’ll have to wait for the EU to release its benchmarks, which were supposed to be released in September [at the time of the interview], but now it turns out that they will be released in Q1 2026. So, essentially traders and producers are now gambling because they have no clue what benchmark to use.
At Climease, we have validated benchmarks by [Switzerland-based testing, inspection and certification company] SGS (Société Générale de Surveillance). We’ve also worked with a few major steel producers and traders to make sure they are at least logically correct. Still, they are not the final ones, because they are still being revised [at the time of the interview].
Last but not least, you can deduct any kind of carbon tax. But honestly, this emission trading system in the EU that we have is very peculiar, because the total amount of certificates in the market decreases every year and by 2039 or 2040 there will be none. So, companies won’t be allowed to emit CO2 anymore.
This means that our carbon tax framework is not only quite a high tax, but also a commitment to net zero. And again, this is all about reducing the risk of this whole formula and seeing what you can do across this whole scope.
And that’s what we do at Climease. We have this software where we calculate the emissions of the suppliers. We have two experts in our team who can speak Turkish and Chinese that can support suppliers. We have SGS-validated benchmarks that are also confirmed by major steel traders.
As for the last factor in the formula, honestly, nobody has a carbon tax right now, so it will be more interesting to see what happens in the next one to three years maybe.
That’s pretty much CBAM, but basically nothing is confirmed.
So maybe next month we will have had this conversation for nothing.
Yes, it’s really complicated, but I think that the whole market is in desperate need of more education. We have the tool, we have the software, and there are multiple versions of it. You can have a basic, a medium, or a top tier one. But I think right now what companies need is to speak to an expert that knows about this. We have been following CBAM since it was only an idea, and since then we’ve helped around 500 companies, from smaller producers to bigger traders.
For more information: https://climease.
Slovakia launches €150 million funding round for industrial decarbonization projects
Slovakia’s deputy prime minister and minister of environment Tomáš Taraba has announced the launch of a second funding round worth €150 million for industrial decarbonization, financed entirely through the EU Modernization Fund.
The initiative aims to help industrial producers invest in advanced technologies, increase energy efficiency, and reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, thereby lowering future emission-quota costs.
Taraba emphasized that the resources come from European financing rather than the national budget, describing the call as a vital stimulus for Slovak industry at a time of reduced investment and rising employment risks.
Eligibility and evaluation
The subsidies are open to industrial companies covered by the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS), which account for about 90 percent of Slovakia’s industrial emissions. There are no minimum or maximum funding limits per project.
Applications will be assessed mainly on cost-effectiveness per ton of carbon reduced and the total reduction achieved. To qualify, projects must deliver at least 10,000 tCO₂e in savings compared with the five-year average of verified emissions, with one atypical year allowed for exclusion.
Efficient and measurable climate impact
Eligible costs include investments directly linked to project implementation and incurred after submission. Minister Taraba stated that the program is designed to prioritize high-impact projects, ensuring that each euro delivers the greatest emission reduction possible while supporting industrial competitiveness and environmental goals.
European distributors bemoan confidence deficit, regulatory cost
The outlook for the European steel distribution sector is not positive due to the current market conditions, according to panellists at the Kallanish Global Flat Steel 2025 conference in Istanbul.
“We are concerned about the [outlook] for our sector. We see prices and our profit margins going down from the beginning of 2024; at the same time, we are required to feed the market with quality steel and be competitive,” said Mario Borsese, general director of Swiss steel distributor Trasteel International. “In the short term, the big question is how the regulatory changes in Europe will function.”
According to him, the negative sentiment on China is not entirely deserved. “They export a lot of steel, but these large volumes are not forcibly accepted by the Brazilian or Turkish markets, for example. They have been offered material, and they have accepted it freely. It’s a question of supply and demand,” he explained.
Borsese confirmed that inventories at centres are reducing from four months a few years ago to one month today. “It’s a question of perspective, particularly in Europe. Since the war between Russia and Ukraine, there is a lack of confidence in the market, so it’s not just Chinese exports,” he observed.
“For example, we can order material from ArcelorMittal with a maximum delivery time of two months since all are awaiting market changes. So, our activity is limited and we can’t keep stocks,” he noted.
The sector needs to see an increase in industry confidence, which is likely to come with the end of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, according to Steven Vercammen, expert at McKinsey.
“The fundamental question is whether … traders remain competitive in a global market where costs are going up,” he said.
“We are starting to think we have reached a point where steel prices are going to start to reflect EU trade policy. I think competitiveness depends very much on how you position the cost structure, CBAM, etc, that differentiate us from other parts of the world,” he concluded.
Vercammen believes that trade policies do not directly influence the price of steel and sees the creation of demand as essential.
Chinese producers, who enjoyed solid profits of around $30/tonne during the first nine months of the year, are now seeing margins fall to $10-15/t, according to Yasin Kanbur of Hangzhou, general manager Middle East office, CIEC International.
“Chinese producers are ready to sacrifice profits in order to survive in the global arena,” he noted, adding that despite facing around 155 anti-dumping cases, China has achieved historically high steel export volumes this year.
Amid China’s expected 2025 GDP growth at 4.2% versus a steel demand contraction of 2%, prices will be more pressured next year, according to Kanbur. His expectations for the Turkish steel market are not optimistic either.
Unlike China, European steel prices are expected to rise, although short-term downward pressure may come from position cargoes, said Jérôme Waterkeyn, chief executive of SteelForce Group.
Waterkeyn said there is an improvement in African and Latin American demand and in the niche business, where you can differentiate yourself and build long-term value. He noted India is booming. “Indian mills are operating at 15-20% margins while Chinese margins barely reach 5%,” he said.
He added that CBAM is creating uncertainty and will lead to certain inflation in Europe. Waterkeyn also warned that many do not want to invest in the EU as investors seek stability.
Todor Kirkov Bulgaria , Burcak Alpman Türkiye
Increasing protectionism inevitable
More countries are turning to protectionism, impacting not only the flat steel market in Europe, but trading globally, Turkish Flat Steel Import, Export and Industry Association (Yisad) chairman Metin Tayfun Iseri said at the Kallanish Global Flat Steel conference in Istanbul on 16 October.
“Every country will have to introduce protection measures, and the main trend now is localisation with new tariffs, and smaller capacities,” he said.
“For the export market, it is going to be very difficult, everybody is going to survive in their own limits and the US has set this example, followed by the EU. Egypt is doing something similar, and Turkey is doing the same thing. A lot of countries will have to take measures against the Chinese producers, because in the first nine months of this year they’ve had record volumes of flat exports,” he added.
Some new protection measures mean market participants can no longer buy slab from China, reroll in India, and then export to the US, he noted.
“Every country will have to close its steel market with the help of tariffs and restrictions,” said GMK Center chief executive Stanislav Zinchenko.
“Thanks to this, we will see two kinds of prices, including for hot rolled prices – global and local ones, which will be the new reality. This is only the beginning of this new wave, and we see this already also in India, Turkey, Canada and other countries,” he added.
Meanwhile, Selcuk Yilmaz, general manager of Yildiz Demir Celik, noted that Turkey is currently importing hot rolled coil mainly from China, which is then exported to Ukraine and other places.
“This will most probably change with the new EU tariffs, which will hurt Turkish exports. The country’s steel capacity will also not increase in 2026 due to other new anti-dumping measures,” he added.
Svetoslav Abrossimov Bulgaria
End-user relocation unlikely, Turkey studying CBAM impact
Steel consumption has suffered globally in recent years due to slowing end-user sector activity amid high interest rates in the EU and US, geopolitical turmoil and fierce competition from China, panellists noted at Kallanish Global Flat Steel 2025 in Istanbul last week.
“I don’t think that trade barriers will force the end users of steel to relocate from one region to other places, like many people suggest,” said Eurofer director of economic and market analysts Alessandro Sciamarelli. “The process of relocation is very complex, which takes time and big investments. One of the main goals of the Trump administration in the US is to relocate businesses to the US, but it remains to be seen if this is going to be successful and I’m a bit sceptical.”
“In Europe, we need strong industries through all the supply chains, which includes steel consumers like the automotive industry, construction and others,” he added.
According to him, no real improvement in steel demand is in sight, due to US tariff-related trade disruption. “High production costs and global uncertainty – geopolitical and trade-related – continue to weigh on the sector. Import pressure also remains high, combined with expanding global excess capacity,” he observed.
“Relocation of steel mills from one region to another is not a solution,” noted Beko director for purchasing Gonca Yucel Kilic. “We need good analysis how the European measures will impact end user activity and to find a solution for all sites.”
“Almost 40% of our production is exported to Europe and, with CBAM, there will probably be a reduction of shipments to the EU, but for the moment we don’t know in Turkey how this will impact us,” said Yildiz Demir Celik supply chain director Pelin Arkan. “The reason for this is that Turkey does not have a national carbon pricing system that aligns with the European Union’s CBAM framework and we don’t know how this calculation will work for the country.”
Svetoslav Abrossimov Bulgaria