
Chaos of Trump tariff war throws US recycling industries into uncertainty
Chaos of Trump tariff war throws US recycling industries into uncertainty The recycled materials industry, a net exporter, is watching Trump's escalating tariff moves with concern.
Show Caption
Hide Caption
China vows to 'fight to the end' on President Trump's tariffs
President Donald Trump threatened China with more tariffs after they put a 34% tariff on U.S. imports.
An escalating global trade war sparked by President Donald Trump's impositions of tariffs has the recycled materials industry on edge.
It's possible tariffs could increase demand for domestic recycled steel.
You may not give a lot of thought to what happens to your plastic bottles or cardboard boxes after setting them in the recycling bin – or think they have anything to do with global trade wars.
But already on-edge U.S. recycled materials industries say they're facing an uncertain path forward in the face of escalating tariffs and funding freezes by President Donald Trump.
The industries have navigated years of market swings, the loss of a key importer and difficulties competing with the costs of new plastics and glass. The Recycled Materials Association, a Washington-based organization representing the industry's interests, told the Detroit Free Press, part of the USA TODAY Network, that new tariffs will disrupt manufacturing and recycling processes in the U.S. that depend on recycled materials input.
Trump earlier this month invoked emergency economic powers and ordered the imposition of 10% tariffs on all countries, and an individualized, reciprocal, higher tariff on countries with which the United States has the largest trade deficits. The tariffs were set to kick in on Wednesday, but hours later, Trump reversed course and put a pause on the tariffs, but raised them even higher against China.
Meanwhile, the Trump administration crackdown on federal spending has impacted a potential jobs-creating recycling project in Erie, Pennsylvania.
The U.S. recycled materials industry is a net exporter and supports nearly 600,000 jobs nationwide, helping reduce the U.S. trade deficit, according to the Recycled Materials Association. An overall trade deficit occurs when the monetary value of a country's imports exceeds that of its exports. But how do these exports play out for America's recycling industry?
Each year billions of dollars of recycled materials cross the U.S. borders with Canada and Mexico, according to the Recycled Materials Association. In 2023, China was the third-largest export market for U.S. recycled materials totaling $2.46 billion. The market could be rocked by the trade struggles playing out around the world.
The White House did not immediately respond to an April 10 request for comment on the industry's concerns.
Recycling industry is already unsteady
Recycling goes beyond household items such as cardboard, paper, cans, glass and plastic put in curbside containers for pickup.
Some of the most lucrative trade comes in recycled scrap metals from industry.
While the recycled aluminum, steel and metals trade has fared best, other recyclables have seen major volatility, particularly after China in 2017 banned the import of nonindustrial plastic from the U.S. after years of being a major market for the materials.
Supply and demand jolts amid the COVID-19 pandemic also shook markets for the American recycling industry.
But it's not all about previous hurdles the industry has faced: Experts also told the USA TODAY Network the sector is held back by market forces that allow industries to make new glass and plastics at competitive prices.
"There is almost always a good market for metals, because the cost to make new metals is incredibly high," said Shelie Miller, a professor and co-director of the Center for Sustainable Systems at the University of Michigan.
"Meanwhile, things like plastics and glass are really operating on a much closer margin. So any increase in recovered material cost is going to make it that much more difficult to compete against the virgin product."
TARIFF WAR UPDATES: China, EU slap back at US with steep tariffs as Trump is undeterred
New recycling plant project axed after federal loan freeze
Plans to build one of the world's largest plastics recycling facilities in Erie, Pennsylvania, were scrapped as the Trump administration executed another of its financial priorities: freezes on federal grants and loans.
In a January directive, Trump paused the release of federal funds under the Inflation Reduction Act and Infrastructure Improvement and Jobs Act, including Department of Energy loans and grants.
The Pennsylvania recycling plant was to receive over half of its $300 million price tag through a Department of Energy conditional loan guarantee announced last August. Mitch Hecht, the CEO and Founder of International Recycling Group, wasn't worried about the loan with the presidential election looming, but he made the call to cancel the project amid uncertainty over funding with the pause on the loan.
The International Recycling Group also cited tariffs on materials and equipment, which increased the costs to develop the plant, and difficulties securing funding in its decision to pull the plug.
Hecht said he was "personally devastated" by the decision to cancel the plant, which was expected to create hundreds of jobs. The community is also feeling the loss.
'The Erie Regional Chamber is frustrated by the financial pressure building due to economic uncertainty at the federal level, which IRG cited as the reason to cancel plans for its Erie plastics recycling plant project," Brandon Mendoza, CEO of the Erie Regional Chamber and Growth Partnership, said in a statement.
Recycling industry relies on exporting materials
In Michigan, Michael Csapo, general manager of Resource Recovery and Recycling Authority of Southwest Oakland County, said the agency's sorted products haven't been shipped directly to overseas markets "for some years." But he explained that's not typical for much of his industry.
"The overall recycling market is part of the globally connected supply chain, and its health is tied to the overall health of the domestic and global economies," he said. "As such, we are concerned about the current level of economic uncertainty."
About two-thirds of recycled materials imported into the U.S. come from Canada and Mexico. Those materials to date have been covered under tariff exemptions given by the Trump administration to goods falling under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement negotiated during Trump's first term.
"Our biggest concern is probably going to come in the form of retaliation against U.S. exports of our products," said Adam Shaffer, vice president of international trade and global affairs for the Recycled Materials Association.
The cloudy outlook is not without shafts of light. Miller said it's possible that if trade wars make raw materials more expensive, domestic markets of recycled materials could become more competitive to save on costs.
And Trump's emphasis on returning more manufacturing to the U.S. could mean more demand for recycled steel, Shaffer said.
"A lot of the domestic manufacturing goals that the administration has set, our materials are important in helping build that capacity up," he said. "Seventy percent of steel comes from recycled content. We are ready, willing and able to participate in that."
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
9 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Column: Will Tesla suffer if Musk alienates both political wings?
Donald Trump and Elon Musk — two epic disrupters of U.S. politics and the automotive industry, respectively and vice versa. Over the past year, they united over the election and efforts to cut government spending. They parted ways amicably … and then started trashing each other. It escalated quickly with Musk suggesting that the president be impeached and that he is implicated in the Jeffrey Epstein child-prostitution scandal. Musk later reportedly called the president before posting that he regretted some of his words: 'They went too far.' It was a remarkable breakup — incredible drama between the world's most powerful man and the world's richest man, who had been the closest of allies for hundreds of days of campaigning and governing. To the extent that it was a reality TV train wreck, I'd just as soon leave it be. But since the primary business in Musk's remarkable portfolio is nominally an automaker, it actually matters in this industry we cover. Sign up for Automotive Views, Automotive News' weekly showcase of opinions, insights, ideas and thought leadership. Love it or hate it, this disruptive era in which we live is providing us all with some real-life experiments in economics — the likes of which we probably thought we would never see. For decades, basically everyone who went to college was taught in an economics or history class that widespread tariffs would do more harm than good. Trump argues for a different approach, and he's pursuing it. Or he's pursuing it to negotiate for something else. In either case, we're now seeing how that works: So far, there's been a lot of paralysis, especially among suppliers and foreign automakers, but also a big investment announced recently by General Motors. His political strategy has been unorthodox, yet he's won two electoral colleges and one popular vote. He's only the 21st president to win two elections. So he's had success, whether some people like it or not. Same for Musk, of course: He approached the auto industry unlike anyone else — with an expensive electric car — had a couple of near-total collapses, and came out as the world's richest man and CEO of the world's most valuable automaker. That success helped propel his rocket business SpaceX and other ventures such as Starlink satellites and Twitter, which he bought and renamed X. But the disruptive move I'm watching was his decision to be an automaker CEO who got personally and financially involved in partisan politics. While new-vehicle sales skew to the affluent, when you sell something in the millions or tens of millions, a brand or model has to connect with a broad swath of people. And while there can be success with, say, a polarizing design, mass-market brands generally try to avoid alienating large chunks of their potential customer base. I've cited here before the story about Michael Jordan saying he didn't speak out on politics because 'Republicans buy sneakers, too.' In retrospect, he said it was just a funny line among friends. But the thing is that he wasn't wrong, and every business school graduate knows it. Musk, however, is not your typical MBA type. So out of his frustration with former President Joe Biden — who habitually sided with the UAW and its automakers against the U.S.-based global leader in EVs, even as he advocated for a carbon-neutral future — Musk threw an estimated quarter of a billion dollars behind the Trump campaign. That's an unbelievable sum of money to many of us, but when Trump won, it looked like the greatest bet ever. From late October to late December, Tesla stock more than doubled and its market cap approached $1.5 trillion. While Musk's political activism may have upset many of his loyal, environmentally motivated customers, there were a lot of reasons to be bullish on Tesla under Trump. It seemed likely that NHTSA and the SEC would take a more sympathetic view of the company's issues. Beyond that, Musk has refocused the company's future on artificial intelligence, humanoid robots and robotaxis. (Tesla said it plans to launch its service in Austin, Texas, on June 22.) A new administration with a deregulatory inclination toward self-driving cars was a significant tailwind. Now, those advantages for Tesla are gone or at least seemingly diminished. Structures that have legacy automakers paying to buy Tesla's credits for selling emission-free, fuel-efficient vehicles could be eliminated. (And let's not forget that Trump hinted at ending federal contracts with other Musk-affiliated companies.) Turning back to the auto business: The conventional wisdom is that Musk has now alienated all but the most apolitical consumers. Environmentally minded liberals might like EVs, but Musk's support of Trump (and the far-right Alternative for Deutschland party in Germany) has them seeking out other brands' offerings. There might have been an opportunity to become the preferred electric brand of the president's Make America Great Again movement — especially the tech-forward, high-income types and those motivated by the president's endorsement of the brand on the White House grounds. But after this month's blowup — with longtime Trump adviser Steve Bannon arguing to deport Musk — that notion seemed ever more remote. No fans on the left, no fans on the right. Is Elon out in deep water in an electric boat surrounded by sharks with no friends to bail him out? Maybe not. There is significant animus against Musk on the EV-inclined left, especially in the wake of his DOGE team's deep and sometimes chaotic cuts to government entities and programs. Certainly, protests at auto retail outlets are rare. The damage to stores is not acceptable, but it shows the intensity of the situation. But I still have to wonder how far consumers will follow those kinds of feelings. Michiganders, for instance, often assume that Americans prefer to buy American cars made by American (union) workers. But I've been to America, and most of them don't care. They want the best car for their money, whether it's American, German, Japanese or Korean. Some are clamoring for cheap Chinese cars: If Xi Jinping wants to pay for half of their EV, they ask, why not let him? So maybe they won't care about Elon's politics. Tesla sales are down a little this year, but some of that might be attributable to production hiccups. If the Model Y — the bestselling model in the world last year — provides a great value, they'll probably buy it regardless of what they think of the CEO. And now we get to find out. Have an opinion about this story? Tell us about it and we may publish it in print. Click here to submit a letter to the editor. Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
9 minutes ago
- Yahoo
GM to invest US$4 billion to increase US output
General Motors (GM) announced it plans to invest around US$ 4 billion in the next two years to strengthen its US vehicle production operations, in response to the recent import tariff hikes by the Trump-led US government. This new investment plan, which will result in the transfer of some production from Mexico, is in addition to the recently-announced US$ 888 million investment in the company's Tonawanda engine plant in New York State. GM confirmed it plans to increase its annual production capacity in the US to over two million battery-powered and internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles. The plants that will benefit from the new investment include: Orion, Michigan, which will begin production of a ICE full-size SUVs and light duty pickup trucks in early 2027. The Detroit-Hamtramck plant will become the dedicated assembly location for the Chevrolet Silverado EV, GMC Sierra EV, Cadillac Escalade IQ, and GMC Hummer EV pickup and SUV. Fairfax, Kansas City, will produce ICE-powered Chevrolet Equinox from mid-2027 in response to strong demand for the recently redesigned model. The plant is also scheduled to produce the new Chevrolet Bolt EV by the end of 2025, with additional 'affordable' EV models set to follow later on. Spring Hill, Tennessee: GM plans to add the ICE-powered Chevrolet Blazer to the plant's line-up from 2027, to be produced alongside the Cadillac Lyriq and Visiq EVs and the Cadillac XT5. GM's CEO, Mary Barra, said in a statement: 'We believe the future of transportation will be driven by American innovation and manufacturing expertise. Today's announcement demonstrates our ongoing commitment to build vehicles in the US and to support American jobs. We're focused on giving customers choice and offering a broad range of vehicles they love.' The company pointed out that it currently has around fifty vehicle and parts manufacturing plants in 19 US states, including eleven vehicle assembly plants, employing a COMBINED one million people directly and indirectly, including at parts suppliers and dealers. GM's capital spending guidance remained unchanged at between US$ 10 billion and US$ 11 billion for 2025, rising slightly to between US$ 10 billion and US$ 12 billion in 2026 and 2027 to 'reflect increased investment in the US, the prioritization of key programs, and efficiency offsets.' "GM to invest US$4 billion to increase US output" was originally created and published by Just Auto, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site.
Yahoo
9 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump signs resolutions killing California's zero-emissions rules
This story was originally published on Trucking Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily Trucking Dive newsletter. President Donald Trump moved to sever California's EPA waivers by signing a series of joint resolutions Thursday, rolling back the Golden State's strict truck and auto emissions policies. The president's signing of joint resolutions under the Congressional Review Act reverses the Biden administration's approval of California's Advanced Clean Trucks rule. That earlier rule called for requiring 75% of Class 8 trucks sold in the state to be zero-emissions vehicles by 2035. Another resolution also prevents the state's low-nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions rule for heavy-duty trucks from being implemented, per a statement by the president. The NOx rule intended to regulate emissions from manufacturers by cutting heavy-duty NOx emissions by 90% and overhaul engine testing procedures. The Trump administration has described his predecessor's environmental policies as overreach and unjustified mandates. Trump said the congressional moves he signed further restrict California from implementing a similar policy in the future. "Under the Congressional Review Act, the EPA cannot approve any future waivers that are 'substantially the same' as those disapproved in the joint resolutions," Trump said in a statement. "Accordingly, the joint resolutions prohibit the EPA from approving future waivers for California that would impose California's policy goals across the entire country and violate fundamental constitutional principles of federalism, ending the electric vehicle mandate for good," the statement said. In response, California Gov. Gavin Newsom declared the federal measures illegal and moved to sue the federal government, seeking to pursue the state's zero-emission vehicle policy. Newsom signed an executive order on Thursday for the state to continue regulation requiring that 100% of sales of new vehicles be zero emission by 2035 for cars, pickup trucks and drayage trucks and by 2045 for medium- and heavy-duty trucks. Trucking leaders applauded Trump for the measures. The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association said the news was a big win for both men and women behind the wheel. 'Our 150,000 small-business members have been saying it all along—electric trucks just aren't a realistic option right now. They're too expensive, the charging infrastructure isn't there,' OOIDA President Todd Spencer said in an emailed press release to Trucking Dive. Industry advocates, including the American Trucking Associations and the Washington Trucking Associations, also warned that electric truck technology and charging infrastructure were not caught up to accommodate California's ambitious EV policies. 'We've done our part to reduce carbon emissions while keeping America's economy moving,' ATA President and CEO Chris Spear said in a press release. 'But what we need is federal leadership to set realistic and achievable national emissions standards. And today brings us one step closer toward that goal,' he added. Werner Enterprises truck driver Gina Jones shared a similar sentiment, speaking as part of the signing ceremony at the White House. 'We cannot allow one state's regulations to disrupt our entire nation's supply chain,' Jones said. 'Allowing California to do so would have [negatively] impacted the hundreds of thousands of truck drivers who deliver critical goods across the country each and every day.' Recommended Reading Congress revokes Advanced Clean Trucks waiver, creating ambiguity for refuse fleets Inicia sesión para acceder a tu portafolio