The apparent success of Donald Trump´s tariffs has not only been welcomed by his domestic steel and manufacturing base, but it has also encouraged other countries to implement their own tariffs as an industry protection mechanism. Indeed, tariffs and anti-dumping actions are popping up like mushrooms. In the first full quarter (Q3) since President Trump doubled tariffs on steel in June, US steel producers have reported record domestic shipments as imports have shrunk. “A significant rebound in domestic steel demand has started,” said Lourenco Gonclaves, CEO of Cleveland-Cliffs, in an earnings call on October 20. “Automotive is rebounding, our cost actions are working, and trade policy is delivering measurable results,” he added. Meanwhile, Nucor´s Q3 results included a 12.4% increase year-on-year in domestic steel mill shipments. “We are encouraged by the administration’s action to help level the playing field for the American steel industry,” said Leon Topalian, Nucor’s CEO, in a call on October 28.

Likewise, Steel Dynamics, shipped a record 3.6 million metric tons in the third quarter. “Overall, we remain extremely optimistic concerning steel demand and pricing dynamics for the domestic producers in the coming years based on the expected demand from new manufacturing and US-produced steel content requirements,” said Barry Schneider, Steel Dynamics’ president and COO, in a call to the industry in October.

In a further boost to the US steel industry, several automotive manufacturers have recently announced plans to reshore some operations and to increase US-based production in the wake of the Trump tariffs. As a consequence, domestic steel producers are now anticipating a resurgence in auto steel demand. Cleveland-Cliffs has already said Q3 was the best auto steel shipment quarter since the beginning of 2024 and that the increased demand for flat steel will require its plants to operate at full capacity and full employment levels.

Having witnessed the effects (and success) of the Trump tariffs, other countries are in the process of replicating the tactic. In July, Canada reduced its quotas of foreign steel imports to 50% of their 2024 level for countries which do not have a free trade agreement (FTA) with Canada. In November, the new prime minister, Mark Carney, announced the level would now be reduced to 20% of the 2024 levels. Canada will also impose a global 25% tariff on targeted imported steel-derivative products, and will incorporate border measures to combat steel dumping. The steel industry in Canada employs more than 23,000 people directly and was hit hard by President Trump’s 50% tariffs on steel imports from that country. Meanwhile, in April, the Indian government imposed a 12% temporary tariff on steel import for 200 days. Consequently, India´s finished steel imports during the first seven months of the financial year were down 34.1% year-on-year. Now, the government is considering extending the import tariff as it attempts to dissuade China from sending cheap steel to India, the world’s second-biggest crude steel producer.

According to the World Steel Association, Chinese steel exports have more than doubled since 2020, reaching a record 118 million metric tonnes in 2024. Declining domestic demand has been the root cause for this expansion in exports. However, Chinese steel is now being increasingly met by resistance from governments and steel associations in many markets worldwide. The respected global think tank, GMK Centre, says that, as of October this year, 62 countries had implemented 207 restrictions against steel products from China. The actions are in response to state subsidies in China which distort competition and destabilize the global market. According to OECD estimates, the subsidisation rate for Chinese steelmakers (as a share of a firm´s revenue) is about five times higher than the average for other economies. The support comes in the form of grants, tax incentives, below‑market loans, and subsidized energy.

Anti‑dumping duties remain the most common method of combat because they offer a direct, WTO‑compliant way to counter unfair pricing practices. As an example, in November, Australia issued a preliminary affirmative determination in its anti-dumping and anti-subsidy probe into ceiling steel framing members (CSFM) imported from China, finding evidence of material injury to the domestic industry. The ADC commissioner, David Latina, said the investigation’s Statement of Essential Facts (SEF 653) showed sufficient grounds to impose dumping and countervailing duties on Chinese-origin CSFM. The Commission will submit its final recommendation by 16 January 2026.

Finally, an update on the alleged dispute between BHP and the China Mineral Resources Group (CMRG), the entity set up in 2022 as China’s state-owned iron ore buyer. Readers will recall that in September it was widely reported – though not confirmed – that the CMRG had ordered Chinese mills and traders to stop buying new shipments of Jimblebar blend fines iron ore from BHP.  Neither party confirmed that a ban was in place; with BHP only admitting that annual price negotiations were ongoing. Now, the news agency Reuters has reported that in November, in addition to the Jimblebar ban, the CMRG instructed Chinese mills and traders to cease buying cargoes of BHP´s Jinbao fines, a low-grade iron ore. Reuters could not determine how many iron ore traders and steel mills received the order. BHP told Reuters it would not comment on commercial negotiations, which it said were continuing.

Jimblebar fines account for around a quarter of BHP’s production. Sources in China have apparently told Reuters that portside stocks of the ore have surged by 156% since the alleged ban came into place. The knock-on effect, according to the sources, is that mills which had previously used Jimblebar ore have now switched to a substitute, Pilbara blend fines, which is the flagship product of BHP´s rival, Rio Tinto.