UK proposes extending antidumping duties on Chinese organic coated steel
The UK Trade Remedies Authority published its initial findings late Feb. 25, proposing that antidumping and countervailing measures on organic coated steel, or OCS, imported from China be maintained for an additional five years, until May 4, 2029. This proposal aims to protect the UK industry from potential harm that could occur if these measures were removed.
OCS is used to maintain the durability of various structures, particularly in construction, as well as in metal furniture, heating and ventilation systems, and a range of domestic appliances.
In its statement, the TRA concluded that removing these measures would likely result in a recurrence of dumping and subsidization practices, which have historically undermined domestic production. Since their implementation in 2013, these measures have proven effective in keeping Chinese OCS imports below 1,000 mt annually.
Tata Steel UK is the sole producer of OCS in the UK, manufacturing it at the Shotton facility in North Wales. The company contributes approximately GBP 222 million ($280 million) annually through OCS sales and employs around 8,100 individuals across its various operations.
This transition review was initiated on April 15, 2024, examining data from the period April 1, 2023, to March 31, 2024, with the injury assessment covering from April 1, 2020, to March 31, 2024.
Currently, antidumping duties imposed on Chinese OCS imports range from 5.9% to 26.1%, while countervailing duties vary from 13.7% to 44.7%, depending on the specific exporter.
The TRA has opened a window for businesses potentially impacted by these findings to voice their opinions. Interested parties can submit comments to the TRA via the TRA’s public file until March 18, 2025, allowing for a collaborative approach to shaping the future of the UK OCS market.
The UK government and TRA view these measures as crucial in maintaining a level playing field for UK manufacturers and ensuring the sustainability of local production. Last week, the UK government accepted the recommendation to maintain an antidumping measure on imports of corrosion-resistant steel from China for an additional five years.
Platts, part of S&P Global Commodity Insights, assessed the weekly steel hot-rolled coil (HRC) UK at GBP530/mt DDP West Midlands Feb. 20, stable week over week.
Sweden’s SSAB to supply low carbon steel to Italian crane manufacturer Fassi
Swedish steelmaker SSAB has reached an agreement with Italian crane manufacturer Fassi to supply it with low-carbon steel.
The deal includes steel produced from both iron ore and recycled scrap, SSAB Fossil-free™ steel and SSAB Zero™, which will be used in Fassi’s hydraulic and truck-mounted cranes.
SSAB Zero™ is made using recycled steel and produced with fossil-free electricity and biogas; it has been available for commercial deliveries since 2023. SSAB has also developed fossil-free steel made from iron ore using HYBRIT technology, which employs hydrogen and fossil-free energy instead of coal in the steelmaking process.
The two companies did not disclose the amount of steel included in the deal.
“We look forward to deepening our collaboration with Fassi by delivering premium high-strength steel produced with a significantly lower carbon footprint,” said Per Elfgren, head of SSAB Special Steels.
Fassi CEO Giovanni Fassi added: “Innovation is a projection towards the future. And there is no future without sustainability.”
Fassi is one of the world’s largest loader crane manufacturers. The two companies are already in partnership, with Fassi utilizing SSAB’s Strenx steel, which the company claims adds lifting power, reduces weight and extends reach for its heavy-duty cranes.
Platts, part of S&P Global Commodity Insights, assessed Northwest European hot-rolled coil carbon-accounted at Eur680/mt ex-works Ruhr Feb. 25, stable day over day.
Global crude steel production declines year on year in January
Sizable falls in output were reported by top producing countries Iran, Germany, South Korea, Japan and China in January compared with the same period the year prior. India and the US were the only top ten producing countries to show growth in crude steel production in January year on year, according to worldsteel on Tuesday February 25.
China and India: Diverging trends among leading producers
China, the world’s largest steel producer, had its estimated output fall by 5.6% to 81.9 million tonnes in January 2025 compared with January 2024. The decline is driven by weaker domestic demand amid ongoing property sector struggles, slowing infrastructure investment and intensified environmental regulations to curb carbon emissions.
Crude steel production in China has been on a downward trend since it reached the historical high of 1.07 billion tonnes in 2020.
The country’s steel industry is also facing trade protectionist measures and anti-dumping probes.
Rebar producers were reported to have shifted crude steel capacity to produce semi-finished products due to weakening demand and decreased profit in the fourth quarter of 2024, but member mills of the China Iron & Steel Association (CISA) reported higher steel production rates in the last 11 days of January following the country’s observance of the Lunar New Year holiday.
The world’s second largest crude steel producer India, in contrast, boosted production by 6.8% to 13.6 million tonnes, reflecting strong domestic demand and continued expansion in infrastructure projects and steel-making capacity.
That said, the south Asian country is currently facing coking coal supply issues.
Crude production declines among most major steel producers
Production drops were reported among most of the other top ten steel-producing nations, worldsteel said.
Iran recorded the most severe decline among major producers in January, down 24.1% year on year to 2.2 million tonnes.
Low steel prices within the Asia region, a prime destination for Iranian billet, has led to increased competition and reduced demand. The Middle Eastern country’s steel industry has also dealt with gas and electricity shortages over the winter as well as currency issues due to a complicated exchange-rate system.
Other major producers, such as Germany, South Korea and Japan also reported significant declines in crude steel production in January compared with the same month in 2024, according to worldsteel.
South Korea’s domestic steel sector has weakened due to an oversupply of low-priced Chinese steel products, leading to the introduction of tariffs in February, sources said.
Germany’s crude steel output has remained at a recession level (below 40 million tonnes) for three years amid weak demand, high energy costs and competitive imports, according to the country’s national steel industry association WV Stahl.
The association has called for urgent economic stimulus from the west European country’s newly elected conservative government, following the weak start to the year in terms of crude steel production.
The US, meanwhile, was the only other country apart from India that had crude steel production grow from January 2024 to January 2025, by 1.2% to 6.6 million tonnes.
Regional performance: Widespread contractions
Most regions reported declines in crude steel production for January 2025.
The only region to post growth was Russia & other CIS countries + Ukraine, where production rose by 1.4% to 7.0 million tonnes.
EU expects €28 billion loss in exports due to US steel and aluminum tariffs
According to a report by Bloomberg, the first round of the US president Donald Trump’s new steel and aluminum tariffs is expected to cost the European Union member states up to €28 billion in lost exports.
Maroš Šefčovič, European Trade Commissioner, noted that the current situation is constantly evolving, so the extent of any tariffs could still change.
European market players anticipate that the number of products affected will be four times higher than in 2018, as the list of the products subject to the tariffs also includes derivative steel items.
On February 10, Trump announced 25 percent tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from trading partners with duty-free exemptions or tariff-rate quota deals, such as the EU, as SteelOrbis previously reported.
In 2024, the EU’s steel exports to the US amounted 3.89 million mt, with the value of the exports at $6.99 billion, according to census data from the US Department of Commerce.
Eusider Trading joined as Member of EUROMETAL
EUROMETAL is delighted to welcome Eusider Trading as a new member company.
Eusider Trading SA, established in Switzerland in 2019, specializes in the global trading of flat and long steel products, as well as raw materials, with a particular focus on Metallics. The company procures high-quality materials worldwide, supplying key markets across Europe, MENA, and Latin America.
A strong emphasis is placed on coils, especially coated materials sourced from top-tier suppliers, which are regularly distributed to major steel service centers and stockists worldwide.
Thanks to the leadership of their CEO, Marco Micciché, and the active role of experienced steel professionals coming from previous engagements in primary international steel trade companies, Eusider Trading has expanded its reach and solidified its presence in global markets over the past five years.
Discover more: eusidertrading.com
European aluminium, steel, iron importers speculate on effect of leaked CBAM changes
Reports of impending changes to CBAM have circulated since EU tax commissioner Wopke Hoekstra gave an interview to UK newspaper Financial Times on February 6.
But speculation increased among European importers of the goods affected by CBAM – including aluminium, iron and steel – following the February 24 leak of a document outlining proposed revisions.
The European Commission declined to comment on the document, which has been widely shared on social media and by other industry news outlets.
“We do not offer comment on leaked documents,” a European Commission spokesperson told Fastmarkets via email on February 25. “On CBAM more generally, the first Omnibus package on sustainability is indeed scheduled for discussion and possible adoption tomorrow, February 26, 2025.”
New exemption threshold for small importers
Under the current CBAM legislation, which was scheduled to come into effect from January 1, 2026, any entity importing more than €150-worth ($157) of aluminium, cement, fertilizers or iron and steel must report the CO2 emissions embedded in the incoming material.
But under the changes proposed in the leaked document, only companies importing more than 50 tonnes (or 100 tonnes of embedded CO2) of net mass of goods, covered by the legislation, will have to comply.
“A threshold set at a level of 50 tonnes will exempt the vast majority of importers from obligations under this Regulation while maintaining more than 99% of embedded emissions in the scope of the CBAM,” the leaked document was reported to say.
“This is what the European Commission should have done from the start,” Fastmarkets chief economist Stuart Evans said. “By excluding small emitters, the proposed changes bring CBAM into line with the approach taken for the [EU’s previous] Emissions Trading Scheme.”
One of the chief aims of CBAM was to reduce carbon leakage by ensuring that imported materials with embedded CO2 were subject to the same carbon taxes paid by European producers of similar material.
“It’s an easy win for the European Commission,” Evans said. “It is improved policymaking because it fundamentally doesn’t change the result. CBAM will still cover 99% of emissions but the cost of compliance will be far lower.”
The other change in the proposal was said to be a delay and simplification of CBAM certificate purchases. The leaked document proposed moving the start date of the CBAM certificate sale to February 2027, from the current official start date of January 1, 2026.
According to Dan Maleski, CBAM adviser at Redshaw Advisors, importers would have more time to comply with the requirements, but the costs associated with the emissions embedded in 2026 imports will still apply. “They will simply be incurred in 2027,” he said.
Speculation
The European Commission may have refused to comment on the leaked document, but it has already sparked speculation in the European metals trading community.
“I’m not surprised by this document,” an aluminium trader said. “CBAM in its official current form is ridiculous and clearly needs to be changed. But these proposals don’t address the real issue, which is that CBAM just looks at scope 1 emissions, which are a tiny part of the overall carbon footprint of a tonne of aluminium.”
“These proposals don’t get me too excited,” a second Europe-based aluminium trader said. “They need to include scope 2 emissions to make it an effective policy.”
The trader also pointed out that the new exemption threshold would make little difference for metal traders. “Our shipments are well above the threshold,” he said, “so this new proposal wouldn’t change the CBAM obligation for traders.”
But the trader did feel that the leaked document was significant. “It shows that CBAM won’t stand in its current form. It has started a debate,” he said.
“CBAM will happen,” Evans said. “But I wouldn’t be surprised if we see more changes down the line. The current trade policy of the US administration allows the EU to take a more muscular approach.”
Mixed reactions from the European steel sector
Fastmarkets’ sources in the steel sector shared mixed views on the latest proposals for amendments of CBAM coming from the leaked document.
“I do not think that the European Commission wants to step back from its green ambitions,” a distributor source engaged with imports of flat steel products told Fastmarkets. “There is still a lot to discuss and adjust in the current version of CBAM, and I think this is the aim of a potential proposal for amendment of the current regulation.”
A trader source, who actively imports flat steel products, also expressed satisfaction with the proposals.
But European steelmakers were more reserved. “[The amendments] will, for sure, weaken the system for a year,” a producer source told Fastmarkets.
A second producer source did not expect a significant effect on the domestic market, but the proposed legislative amendments were considered positive for the import industry because they would have one year more for preparation.
The source expressed a concern about the proposed exemption threshold, saying that “50 tonnes are nothing.”
The steel industry was currently responsible for around 5% of CO2 emissions in the EU and 7% globally, according to European Commission data.
European Commission schedules Steel Dialogue, reinforces strategic role
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen will host a Strategic Dialogue on Steel on 4 March, Kallanish notes.
In a statement issued on Tuesday, the Commission reinforced that steel is a strategic sector, saying it plays a central role in the EU’s broader strategic autonomy.
The meeting is anticipated to bring together steel manufacturers, raw material suppliers, off-takers, and representatives of social partners and civil society. EUROMETAL will be represented by its president, Alexander Julius, the association says.
This comes ahead of the dedicated Steel and Metals Action, which Executive Vice-President Séjourné has been tasked with delivering in the spring. Feedback from the Steel Dialogue and related wider consultation will be fed into this dedicated plan.
“The steel industry is a key sector of our European single market. At the same time this industry is of utmost importance in our fight against climate change,” von der Leyen notes. “The Strategic Dialogue will help develop a concrete Action Plan to tackle the unique challenges of this sector in the clean industrial transition. We want to ensure that the European steel industry is both competitive and sustainable in the long-term.”
“Europe has a plan for its industry: we must produce more, we must produce clean, and we must produce European,” says Séjourné. “This starts with our most strategic sectors: steel is one of them. We must protect our steel sector from unfair foreign competition and boost our own production of clean European steel.”
Key Strategic Dialogue discussion points will include how to enhance competitiveness and circularity, drive the clean transition, decarbonisation, and electrification, ensure fair trade relations and an international level playing field. The Commission will inform and consult with the Council and European Parliament throughout the Dialogue process.
Proposals include the joint purchasing of raw materials on behalf of interested companies, which could ensure diversification of supplies, and a Circular Economy Act to incentivise the use of secondary scrap material in manufacturing. Also discussed will be the use of guarantees and risk reduction instruments to facilitate conclusion of long-term power purchase agreements, and to accelerate the uptake of hydrogen.
To speed up investment, the meeting will also discuss the creation of a dedicated financing mechanism for industrial decarbonisation based on the auctions-as-a-service model.
On the foreign trade front, global overcapacity is expected to reach 630 million tonnes in 2026. This means “it is essential to make more efficient use of anti-dumping or anti-subsidy duties to prevent that our market becomes an export destination for state-induced excess steel production,” the Commission says.
In addition, the safeguard measures for steel currently in place are set to expire by June 2026. The Commission will define a long-term solution to replace those measures in light of global non-market overcapacity, it concludes.
Adam Smith Poland
3 years of war: new headwinds arise for struggling Ukrainian steel sector amid mounting geopolitical tensions
Reinstatement of US tariffs under Trump
The US suspended its Section 232 import tariffs on steel from Ukraine in May 2022, under the administration of then-President Joe Biden, following the Russian invasion earlier in the year.
But on February 10, 2025, incumbent US President Donald Trump issued an executive order reinstating the 25% import tariffs on steel and aluminium products that he had begun during his first term in office, this time ending all exemptions.
Under the new order, tariff exclusions currently in place will expire on March 12, 2025.
But due to a number of anti-dumping measures, finished steel products from Ukraine were not currently supplied to the US, with pipe products being an exception. In 2026, pipe exports from Ukraine to the US will be under threat.
In 2024, Ukraine exported around 100,000 tonnes of tube and pipe products – under Chapter 73 of the harmonized tariff code, according to data from Global Trade Tracker.
Over the same period, Ukraine exported 943,941 tonnes of iron and steel products to the US under Chapter 72 of the harmonised tariff, GTT said. Almost all of this tonnage was pig iron, which is not covered by Section 232 tariffs.
And steel made in Ukraine but processed in the EU was also exempt from the 25% tariffs in the US.
Notably, European steel processors using Ukraine-origin feedstock to manufacture finished steel products (including tubes and sections) were able to ship those products to the US without facing import taxes.
Ukraine’s Metinvest Holding owns the Promet asset in Bulgaria, which is currently using billet from its parent company to produce rebar, with some of its output being sold to the US.
In 2024, Bulgaria shipped 131,857 tonnes of rebar to the US, according to GTT, versus 53,774 tonnes in 2023.
If the US should apply the tariff to Metinvest-origin products, this would result in a reduction of steel billet production at its Ukrainian asset Kamet Steel by a similar volume, while iron ore extraction would go down by 180,000 tonnes per year, railway shipments would drop by 400,000 tpy, and transhipments via ports would drop by 200,000 tpy, which in turn would result in a $58 million per year loss of foreign currency inflows, while tax deductions to the country’s budget would drop by 1 billion hryvnias ($23.9 million) per year, according to Ukrainian steel producers’ association Ukrmetallurgprom.
In total, Ukraine shipped 543,241 tonnes of semi-finished steel products to Bulgaria in 2024, versus 457,866 tonnes in 2023, according to GTT.
The total value of steel that was delivered to the US from Ukraine, directly and via processing in the EU, amounted to $258 million in 2024. This was only 0.81% of the total value of US steel imports ($31.7 billion) and therefore cannot be a threat to US industry, Ukrmetallurgprom said.
Ukrainian government officials were ready to negotiate with counterparts in Washington and hoped that an exemption for Ukraine could be granted until March 2026. But it remained to be seen whether the US would consider such a proposal.
EU remains key strategic partner, but what lies ahead?
Ukraine was also exempted from all anti-dumping duties and safeguard measures in the EU in June 2022, shortly after the Russian invasion.
This exemption was renewed on both June 6, 2023, and June 6, 2024. The current measures will remain in force until June 5 this year.
It remained to be seen whether the EU would extend the exemption for Ukraine for one more year, with other factors to be considered.
For example, on December 17, 2024, the European Commission announced a review of steel safeguard measures, which was expected to be concluded by March 31, with any adjustments to the current measures expected to come into force the following month.
Market sources familiar with the matter expected a World Trade Organization notification regarding the new measures to be published before the end of this month.
“There were rumors that steel slab and billet would both be included in new safeguards,” a source familiar with the matter said. “We also monitor the Ukraine situation, but it seems that, at this stage, trade liberalization measures would stay in place.”
Europe remained Ukraine’s largest trading partner in 2024, with Poland, Bulgaria, Italy, Romania, Greece and Moldova being the major destinations for Ukrainian steel exports, GTT data showed. In 2024, steel deliveries from Ukraine to these six countries amounted to 3.38 million tonnes, 58% of Ukraine’s total steel exports of 5.84 million tonnes.
At the same time, for the EU, carbon steel imports from Ukraine represented around 6% of the total volume in 2024. In that year, Ukraine delivered to the bloc 1.68 million tonnes of carbon steel products, up by 43% from 1.17 million tonnes in 2023, according to statistics from regional steel association Eurofer.
The volume was sharply down compared with pre-war steel deliveries from Ukraine to the EU of 2.54 million tonnes in 2021, Eurofer data showed.
What to expect from 2025?
Despite efforts by Ukrainian steelmakers, steel output and exports were likely to decrease in 2025, according to Ukrainian national commodities think tank GMK Center. The main reason for this conclusion was an expectation of weak performance in global steel markets and import restrictions in key outlets that Ukraine was likely to face.
Local steel consumption was also unlikely to increase. GMK expected steel production in Ukraine to go down by more than 9% to about 6.8 million tonnes in 2025, from 7.58 million tonnes in 2024.
Exports of steel products from Ukraine were expected to decrease by 600,000-700,000 tonnes in 2025, according to GMK.
Steel billet
Steel product exports from Ukraine reached a peak of 4.17 million tonnes in 2024, versus 2.99 million tonnes in 2023, according to the country’s customs service.
This was largely due to a surge in shipments of semi-finished products, particularly billet, to 1.92 million tonnes from 1.26 million tonnes in 2023. Bulgaria and other EU countries, as well as Egypt and Turkey, were the key destinations.
The re-opening of the sea corridor in late August 2023, which restored access to vital trade routes from the Black Sea basin, and higher prices for steel scrap versus billet, were the key reasons for the rise in export volumes.
The principal factor behind more competitive billet prices was a lower iron ore price in 2024.
Fastmarkets’ daily price index for iron ore 62% Fe fines, cfr Qingdao, averaged $109.46 per tonne in 2024, compared with $119.54 per tonne in 2023.
The average daily index for steel scrap, HMS 1&2 (80:20 mix), US origin, cfr Turkey, was $381.60 per tonne in 2024, while the corresponding average daily steel billet index, export, fob Black Sea, CIS, for the year was $487.75 per tonne.
The corresponding average figures in 2023 were $397.42 per tonne and $514.65 per tonne respectively. So the price gap between scrap and billet dropped to $106.15 per tonne in 2024 from $117.23 per tonne in 2023.
The decline in scrap prices that started at the end of 2024, amid an inflow of cheap Chinese semi-finished steel products, was expected to reduce billet exports from Ukraine in 2025.
According to Fastmarkets’ analysts, the index for US-origin steel scrap was expected to average $369.64 per tonne in 2025, while the steel billet index should average $492.45 per tonne.
If this proves to be correct, the gap between scrap and billet prices would rise to $122.81 per tonne, which would make billet less attractive to foreign customers.
Long steel
The countries neighboring Ukraine seemed to be the nation’s leading trade partners in terms of long steel products, GTT data showed.
Exports of bar and rod products to Eastern Europe reached 356,000 tonnes in 2024, with only minimal volumes being sold to Western Europe. This volume was close to the tonnage exported in 2021 (364,000 tonnes), just before the Russian invasion. In 2023, Ukraine’s exports of bar and rod to Eastern Europe totalled only 279,000 tonnes.
Ukrainian exports to Poland reached 130,000 tonnes of bar and rod in 2024, according to GTT, compared with 90,000 tonnes in 2023. This made Poland a leading trade partner of Ukraine, accounting for 36.31% of the total export of steel bar and rod to Europe.
With its competitive offer prices, Ukraine has become a more decisive factor in the Polish long steel market, industry sources told Fastmarkets.
The construction sector was struggling all across Europe, but the Polish market was performing slightly better compared with other European economies, even compared with Germany, Fastmarkets understands.
This also supported the importing of long steel products, including those from Ukraine.
Trade sources told Fastmarkets that Metinvest’s Kamet Steel even considered focusing its exports to Poland more on rebar than wire rod in the next few months, due to the better market conditions for rebar.
“This means we would expect increased supplies of rebar in the next few months, but there would be a lack of wire rod [to import from Ukraine],” a Polish trader source told Fastmarkets.
“We do continue to sell wire rod in the Polish market while also expanding our rebar sales,” a Metinvest spokesperson told Fastmarkets. “However, the availability of wire rod for export depends on the monthly production schedule for each specific product, and the volume of sales in the domestic Ukrainian market.”
Pig iron
In contrast to steel products, pig iron export volumes from Ukraine could increase, several market sources told Fastmarkets.
In 2024, Ukraine exported 1.29 million tonnes of pig iron, according to GTT. That was almost equal to the total for 2023, when exports were 1.25 million tonnes, and in 2022 at 1.33 million tonnes. The US was the key buyer.
The forecast increase will be mainly on higher demand in the EU, where buyers need to find replacement material for Russia-origin pig iron that is now affected by international trading sanctions.
Imports of pig iron from Russia will be completely banned from 2026 in the EU, if there is no change in the situation. Imports were restricted to a quota of 1.14 million tonnes between December 19, 2023 and December 31, 2024, and to a quota of 700,000 tonnes between January 1, 2025 and December 31, 2025.
This would leave a shortfall of 440,000 tonnes to be filled by alternative supply to the EU in 2025. Fastmarkets’ research team believed that Ukraine would struggle to fully replace the Russian volumes, however.
“I think the first choice [to substitute Russian pig iron in the EU] will be Ukraine,” one international trader based in Europe said. “However, when CBAM [the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism] is fully in place, it will need to compare costs. Ukrainian blast furnace pig iron might face a big CO2 duty disadvantage compared with Brazil [the other major global supplier, which uses charcoal in the making of pig iron], so Ukrainians still might want to follow the US import market.”
Another trader said that Ukraine could substitute the basic pig iron supply to the EU because it was preferable to material from Brazil, which “is usually at a $10 [per tonne] disadvantage to Ukraine in freight rates, and [because] Ukraine can offer much shorter lead times, so there is less price risk for EU mills.”
He added that the difference between the prices of import pig iron in the US and the EU should become very narrow, helping to attract suppliers.
In 2024, Fastmarkets’ weekly price assessment for pig iron, import, cfr Gulf of Mexico, US, averaged $476.39 per tonne, while the weekly price assessment for pig iron, import, cfr Italy, averaged $417.74 per tonne.
The US import pig iron market therefore showed a $58.65 per tonne premium over the price in Italy in 2024. In 2021, the price in Italy was at a premium over the US of $2.45 per tonne.
The US import pig iron market price became higher partly as a consequence of US pig iron importers refusing to accept Russia-origin material after the invasion of Ukraine, while the EU continued to import it.
According to Fastmarkets’ forecast, the average gap between the US and Italian import pig iron prices will be about $97 per tonne in the second quarter of 2025.
So the US market will remain more attractive for Ukrainian pig iron exporters.
“Potentially, yes, we can increase pig iron supply, because we have stopped some blast furnaces,” one supplier from Ukraine said. “However, a restart of blast furnaces will depend on the availability of human resources and cost effectiveness.”
Ukrainian pig iron supplier ArcelorMittal Kryvyi Rih (AMKR) has been operating with one blast furnace since early in the fourth quarter of 2024.
But it now intends to restart its second furnace in the second quarter of 2025, chief executive officer Mauro Longobardo told local press in late 2024. AMKR planned to increase steel output as well, once it has more pig iron.
European HRC prices inch upward on limited imports, restocking
Most European buyers currently relied mainly on domestic producers and avoided buying imported HRC due to the trade risks, related to the latest steel safeguard review of the European Commission, Fastmarkets understands.
According to Fastmarkets’ sources, this was the main factor that fueled the observed price increase. Despite some small fluctuations, HRC prices in Europe have been increasing gradually since the beginning of January.
Besides, Fastmarkets’ sources expected that there would be more clarity on the new safeguard measures by the end of the week.
This also fostered expectations among local buyers that the domestic prices of HRC would only increase in the short run, stimulating them to make some restocking, sources told Fastmarkets.
Mills in Northern Europe were heard offering HRC with delivery in the second quarter of 2025 at €640 ($669) per tonne ex-works.
One integrated steel mill continued offering such material at €660 per tonne ex-works.
“I think that by the end of the week, offers of other producers in the region will also reach the €660-per-tonne level,” an industry source told Fastmarkets.
Fastmarkets’ sources estimated the workable market level for HRC in the region at €610-620 per tonne ex-works.
As a result, Fastmarkets calculated its daily steel hot-rolled coil index domestic, exw Northern Europe at €618.75 per tonne on Monday, up by €0.62 per tonne from €618.13 per tonne on Friday February 21.
The Northern European index was up by €13.75 per tonne week on week and by €32.50 per tonne month on month.
Meanwhile, in Southern Europe, Fastmarkets’ daily steel hot-rolled coil index domestic, exw Italy was calculated at €610.00 per tonne on Monday, up by €2.92 per tonne from €607.08 per tonne on Friday.
The index was up by €15.00 per tonne week on week and by €30.00 per tonne month on month.
Italian producers were offering April-delivery HRC at €620-640 per tonne delivered, which would net back to €610-630 per tonne ex-works.
Most Fastmarkets’ sources estimated the workable market level for HRC in Italy at €610 per tonne ex-works.
The European market for imported HRC was quiet on Monday.
Asian suppliers were heard offering May-shipment HRC to Italy and Spain at €560-580 per tonne CFR.
CBAM 2.0: Is the EU making compliance easier or just postponing the pain?
Changes have been proposed to Europe’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) that would simplify some processes, and reduce its scope, Kallanish learns from an obtained leaked draft amendment.
While CBAM will still come into force in January 2026, the requirement to purchase certificates will be delayed and payment will be simplified. Certificates will now need to be purchased from February 2027 to cover the previous year, removing the obligation to purchase certifications on a quarterly basis for the first year.
Gabriel Rozenberg, chief executive of software company Cbamboo, says that while the definitive CBAM period will still start in 2026, there is an easing up in term of cash flow and bureaucracy.
Other changes proposed will see more companies now exempt from CBAM’s scope, with the thresholds at 50 tonnes/year or less than 100 t/y of embodied CO2 emissions of imported goods. This move is believed to remove around 90% of companies from the mechanism’s scope.
EU documents show that for the first year of CBAM’s transitional phase, which only required reporting, iron and steel accounted for 69% of overall tonnages reported across targeted sectors. Given the large tonnages handled by steel importers, the minimal threshold exemption is unlikely to benefit this sector.
“The European Commission is tightening the focus on the big emissions that CBAM is designed to tamp down on,” Rozenberg notes.
He adds that some sub processes and side processing of metals and goods that have minimal emissions associated with them are now out of scope.
This consists of finishing processes that are carried out by separate installations not covered by the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS). The embedded emissions of those production processes, which are relatively low, should be excluded from the system boundaries of the calculation of emissions, the document says.
Meanwhile, penalties have also been increased for deliberate non-compliance, rising by 3-5 times.
“This is all about refining and focusing CBAM – making it stronger and clearer, while cutting out a lot of bureaucracy where that would have a low impact. CBAM will go ahead: on time, as planned, in January 2026,” Rozenberg adds.
Meanwhile, Dan Maleski, senior environmental markets advisor and CBAM lead at Redshaw advisors, tells Kallanish that while the changes may relieve some immediate pressure, the financial risk exposure stays the same. “Companies will still be on the hook for 2026 emissions but won’t need to fully account for them until 2027. This delay doesn’t remove the financial burden, it just shifts when it hits.”
“[This] grossly simplifies an overly-complex and burdensome regulation for importers of smaller quantities of goods: a positive development that made the EU CBAM appear overly-bureaucratic,” he adds. “The proposal maintains a proportionate approach to internalising the external cost of carbon pollution despite the threat of global border tariff escalations.”
Maleski also notes the uncertainty surrounding US President Donald Trump’s threats of reciprocal tariffs and how this will impact CBAM. The EU industry’s existing direct subsidy – EUA free allocation – will be reduced via free allocation reductions, so that a level playing field is baked into the mechanism.
Carrie Bone UK