Trade Cases
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d3a20/d3a205d1d663e977a26b0f8d67365448426b2439" alt=""
Tariff on Tinplate a Real Kick in the Can
Written by Sandy Williams
May 15, 2018
Tinplate steel manufacturers received the backing of a bipartisan group of House members who urged the administration to exclude steel used for can manufacturing from Section 232 tariffs.
In a letter dated May 10, Congress members implored Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross not to impose 25 percent tariffs on steel used exclusively for can manufacturing, citing insufficient domestic production and injury to the can manufacturing industry.
“An exclusion for tinplate will not undermine the goals of the Section 232 measures – in fact, if tinplate is not excluded, the loss in demand resulting from the 25 percent tariff will also reduce demand for U.S.-made tinplate, injuring that segment of the domestic steel industry,” said the lawmakers in a May 10 letter to Ross.
In comments on March 2, Ross scoffed at any perceived injury from tariffs on steel cans. A soup can contains just 2.6 cents worth of steel, which would mean less than one cent would be added to the cost per can. “Who in the world is going to be too bothered by six tenths of a cent?” Ross said.
Ross’ figures are misleading, however, according to the canning industry, which said the cost of a 15-ounce can is closer to 17 cents, thereby adding an additional 4 cents per can if tariffs are applied. In the letter to Ross, lawmakers estimated that a 25 percent tariff will increase the cost of tinplate for U.S. steel can producers by more than $600 million per year.
Lawmakers wrote that U.S. demand for tinplate steel was 2.1 million tons in 2016, while domestic production was only 1.2 million tons.
“This means only 58 percent of domestic demand can be met by U.S. tinplate producers, thus leaving no choice but for U.S. can manufacturers to turn to foreign tinplate steel suppliers,” the letter states. “Exclusion for tinplate steel imports is necessary to ensure that U.S. can manufacturers have an adequate supply of quality tinplate to support their production operations and thereby protect U.S. jobs.”
The letter also noted that the rejection rate for domestically produced tinplate is approximately 300-500 percent higher than foreign-produced tinplate and has a reputation of late delivery times.
“With tariffs on tinplate steel, plastic substitutes would become more competitive and metal can manufacturers would suffer a permanent loss in demand for their products,” wrote the lawmakers.
Food producers are also weighing in on the steel tariffs. Daniel Vincent, president and CEO of Pacific Coast Producers, told Bloomberg News that “more than half” of his “projected 2018 profit was wiped out with a stroke of President Donald Trump’s pen.”
PCP expects to use approximately 700 million tin-coated steel cans this year for produce grown in California. Since the tariffs on steel were announced, PCP’s steel costs increased 9 percent due to higher steel pricing. Vincent projects his steel bill to jump nearly $20 million this year.
“Look, we all want to protect U.S. steelworkers,” said Vincent. “But we don’t want to be an unintended consequence of this.”
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/11b83/11b839fc6967d9cfa28d1af34341b98320ce962c" alt=""
Sandy Williams
Read more from Sandy WilliamsLatest in Trade Cases
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/bef95/bef9521b0f9e881d0568a3fe3d45a242dc1ecb8c" alt=""
Price: Should billions in Section 232 revenue go to foreign manufacturers or to the American people?
Do we want the benefits of the Section 232 tariffs to flow to the bottom lines of foreign steel and aluminum producers or to the US government and, ultimately, domestic manufacturers and their workers? In our view, the answer is simple. Section 232 exceptions do nothing more than lead to underserved profits for foreign manufacturers who are harming the US industrial base. That revenue could be used to pursue the Trump administration’s other policy priorities - such as deficit reduction or expanded tax cuts.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d3a8a/d3a8a44458f8535cda37f74ca219e1e0e2ea9882" alt=""
Mills allege ‘critical circumstances’ in CORE trade case vs. South Africa, UAE
"Recent activity in the marketplace strongly indicates that these imports are being rushed into the United States in an effort to avoid the imposition of antidumping duties," petitioners said.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/cd5cc/cd5ccf8fcd610d16dc861faee6fe045ca677cc79" alt=""
European Commission eyes retaliation vs. Trump steel tariffs: Report
The European Commission is looking into making current quotas on steel imports stricter as a countermeasure to President Trump’s recently announced tariffs on steel and aluminum imports to the US, according to an article in Reuters.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c1df9/c1df9ccee32d1383fa0b9bd73a6e14fd64318936" alt="The White House"
Trump could levy tariffs on auto imports in April: Report
President Donald Trump said last week that he could place tariffs on auto imports, according to an article in Politico.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c4ede/c4ede29c075e98ef5ee69f321caea25835be56b8" alt=""
Section 232 tariffs are headed downstream
The Trump administration has revealed the list of derivative steel products being added to the Section 232 tariff list.