An Australian industry application that triggered a safeguard investigation into imported fabricated steel lacks evidence of a surge in imports or a causal negative impact on the local industry, an EU official told a May 14 hearing.
Australia’s government tasked its independent advisory group, the Productivity Commission, with investigating the matter, which it did in January following lobbying by the Australian Steel Institute.
ASI executives kicked off the commission’s three-day investigation on May 13, requesting an emergency safeguard measure in the form of a 50% tariff rate quota on fabricated structural steel products at import levels seen from 2022 to 2024 while the inquiry is undertaken this year.
The ASI’s November 2025 application for Australian provisional and definitive safeguards on fabricated structural steel called for the TRQ based on the average volume of imports over the five years beginning January 2020.
“Australian producers had increasingly low-capacity utilization and, in many cases, declining sales volumes” from 2020 to 2024, the ASI’s application said, and “the imports have, therefore, come at the expense of Australian producers.”
Canberra, Australia-based Joanna Pocztowska, head of the trade and economic section of the EU’s delegation to Australia, told the investigation hearing on May 14 that the evidence provided thus far “does not appear to include a comprehensive analysis of the evolution of imports over the relevant period” into Australia.
“The claim relies on a simple end point comparison of 2020 to 2024 without examining the trends over time. This falls short of the evidentiary standards required under [World Trade Organization] rules,” Pocztowska said.
Therefore, the European Commission believes that the PC’s investigation should be terminated, as “the most appropriate course of action in light of the concerns raised,” Pocztowska said.
This reflects the European Commission’s April 9 submission to the PC’s inquiry, saying that “the investigation, as currently constituted, does not comply with the substantive and procedural requirements of the WTO Agreement on Safeguards and should be terminated. Any alternative course of action would be inconsistent with the applicable WTO rules and obligations.”
The ASI’s application also failed to demonstrate serious injury, Pocztowska said.
“Key economic indicators point to a stable and, in some cases, improving situation of domestic industry with significant increases in profitability, sales and employment,” Pocztowska said.
“Diverging performance among Australian producers suggests internal competitive dynamics, not injury caused by imports. These elements would appear to warrant further careful examination when assessing whether the threshold of serious injury is met,” Pocztowska added.
Pocztowska also said the application “does not provide a sufficient reason and evidence-based analysis demonstrating the causal link between imports and alleged injury, nor does it adequately assess the role of other factors.”
Wait for data gathering
In response, ASI Chief Executive Mark Cain told Platts, part of S&P Global Energy, on May 14 that his group’s application being referred by the EU was “merely a request for an investigation to be initiated and not the sum total of the evidence.”
“The role and mandate of the PC is to conduct an independent investigation that will gather the necessary data required to make a determination as to whether conditions are met for a safeguard or not,” Cain said.
Cain also said in a May 13 statement that “the preliminary evidence clearly supports a finding that increased imports of fabricated structural steel have caused and are threatening to cause serious injury.”
Commissioner Barry Sterland told the hearing after Pocztowska’s May 14 opening statement that the PC was “still in the early stages of the investigation.”
The PC will release a draft report by Sept. 23 laying out its reasoning and the evidence that will be assessed, then invite interested parties to comment on it before making final recommendations about definitive measures, Sterland said. The final report will be handed to the government by Nov. 23.
According to the ASI’s April 20 submission to the PC’s inquiry, “imports of fabricated structural steel have surged sharply, both in absolute terms (16% over CY2022-CY2024) and relative to domestic production (import market share from 38% to 45% over the same period).”
“This has been driven by unforeseen circumstances, chiefly the escalation of Chinese excess capacity, collapse of domestic Chinese demand and subsequent global redirection of trade flows following safeguard and antidumping measures imposed by the key trading partners,” including the US, EU and Canada, the ASI’s submission said.
Global policy impacts
Sterland said some submissions to the PC’s inquiry have “argued that trade measures in a range of countries, including the EU and others, may have had an impact on imports to Australia.”
On April 13, the European Council presidency and the European Parliament reached a provisional agreement on a regulation introducing a new framework to protect the EU steel sector from global excess production and trade diversion.
The regulation will replace the current EU steel safeguard measures, which are due to expire on June 30.
On July 1, the new post-safeguard regulation will enter into force with annual tariff quotas and a 50% out-of-quota duty, according to industry group EUROMETAL.
Author: Anthony Barich
