US Steel and the Return of Strategic Manufacturing
On May 21, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) submitted its reevaluation of Nippon Steel's planned acquisition of US Steel. Following the review, President Donald Trump approved a revised agreement on May 23, framing the deal as a "planned partnership" rather than a full acquisition.
Under the new terms, it appears that US Steel will retain its headquarters in Pittsburgh and remain under American control. Nippon Steel will invest $14 billion into US operations, including $4 billion for a new steel mill. The deal, expected to create at least 70,000 jobs, is being closely watched as a model for balancing foreign investment with national industrial strategy.
Trump had previously expressed opposition to the deal. However, during the US-Japan summit in February, he refrained from calling it an acquisition, referring to it instead as an "investment." Nippon Steel had not abandoned its goal of fully acquiring US Steel as a wholly owned subsidiary and continues to lobby the Trump administration behind the scenes.
In 2024, amid a heated election season, the deal became mired in politics. In particular, there was fierce opposition from rival Cleveland-Cliffs and the United Steelworkers (USW) union. Under pressure, CFIUS could not reach a consensus on national security concerns and ultimately left the decision to then-President Joe Biden.
In January 2025, Biden issued an order blocking the deal. Responding jointly, Nippon Steel and US Steel issued a joint statement declaring they "will never give up" on doing business in the US. Together, they also filed a lawsuit seeking to overturn the executive order.
US Steel reported a loss of $116 million for the first quarter of 2024, making it increasingly urgent to strengthen its management. Nippon Steel is also facing a harsh business climate. In fiscal 2023, it saw a year-on-year decline in both revenue and profit, with net income falling 36.2% to ¥350.2 billion ($2.23 billion USD).
Projections for fiscal 2024 anticipate an additional 42.9% drop to ¥200 billion ($1.40 billion). Weakened demand in China and slumping US auto sales, due in part to Trump-era tariffs, are squeezing profits. President Trump speaks to reporters before boarding Air Force One — Morristown, New Jersey. May 25 (©AP/Kyodo)
US Steel has stated that if the merger fails, it will move its headquarters to Arkansas and be forced to close factories and lay off workers in Pennsylvania.
Meanwhile, Trump has imposed 24% reciprocal tariffs on Japan, along with 25% additional tariffs on cars, steel, aluminum, and auto parts. US-Japan negotiations on those are ongoing.
The White House's broader intent is to use tariffs as economic leverage, eliminate trade deficits, attract foreign manufacturers to set up domestic production, and revive American industry. High-quality steel sheets are essential to making good cars. Strengthening the domestic steel industry, "the mother of industry," is vital to restoring the US as a global automotive manufacturing power.
Nippon Steel, which possesses the world's best technology in high-grade steel, plans to strengthen production capacity within America alongside US Steel. If successful, this would create a powerful steelmaker with the world's third-largest crude steel output, helping drive forward the revitalization of US manufacturing. Producing high-quality steel domestically would also give America greater leverage in competing with China.
To acquire US Steel, Nippon Steel has offered $14.1 billion — a 40% premium over the share price at the time of the agreement. The company has pledged not to change US Steel's name, lay off workers, or cut bonuses. It also committed to capital investments in the hot rolling mill in Mon Valley, Pennsylvania, and the blast furnace in Gary, Indiana.
The deal, which offers exceptionally favorable terms, won 98% shareholder approval. Locally, there are high hopes that Nippon Steel will preserve jobs. Executives from US Steel's production team have already visited Japan and confirmed compatibility with Nippon Steel's operations. Nippon Steel President Tadashi Imai (left) and Vice Chairman Takahiro Mori at a press conference. May 9, Chiyoda Ward, Tokyo
Trump, known as a "job nationalist," should understand that this acquisition contributes to employment, economic security, and national defense, all key pillars of his "America First" policy. What remains is largely a matter of national pride: the reluctance to see a historic American company sold to a Japanese firm.
For Nippon Steel, acquiring US Steel is a strategic investment for global market expansion. The US economy is growing, energy costs are low, and environmental regulations are lax following America's withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement.
Affected local governments in the US have also welcomed the deal. Producing within the US would reduce tariff exposure. If the acquisition succeeds, Japanese production facilities would serve as "mother mills" to support growing overseas markets. However, this could mean reduced crude steel output in Japan, impacting a wide range of domestic industries.
If Japan's auto sector relocates production to the US to avoid tariffs, further hollowing out of the domestic industry is inevitable. America and China both desire Japan's advanced technologies in automobile and steel production. Yet the Japanese government seems unaware of its own strategic value. On the contrary, it is pursuing policies that push key industries overseas.
Japan's industrial policy prioritizes climate change and CO2 reduction ideology over real economic needs. Regulations such as emissions trading and carbon pricing are marketed as pro-growth, but in reality, they shackle manufacturing output.
Japan's energy plans, with their emphasis on renewables, cannot ensure a stable power supply. To the steel industry, this effectively says: "Do not make long-term capital investments in Japan or increase production."
As Nippon Steel moves toward the US, it may be time for Japan to revisit the roots of its national industrial development and re-center its growth strategy on revitalizing domestic manufacturing.
(Read the article in Japanese .)
Author: Koko Kato
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Globe and Mail
20 minutes ago
- Globe and Mail
With Trump's budget bill looming, here's how U.S. foreign withholding tax works
Canadian investors may not be aware that when they earn income from a foreign investment, they may also be effectively paying a withholding tax to a foreign country. As countries cannot collect taxes from non-residents directly, most will hold back part of the income a foreign investor receives from a company incorporated in that country. 'It's just the simple way to make sure the government gets their tax,' says Karl Dennis, partner and national leader of the U.S. corporate tax team for KPMG in Canada. Now, a provision in U.S. tax legislation passed by the House of Representatives threatens to raise taxes on investors in Canada and in other countries that impose taxes, such as a digital services tax, that the U.S. deems unfair to U.S. corporations. Under section 899 of U.S. President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill, Canadians who hold U.S. securities or invest in U.S. companies through Canadian investment funds could see the rate of U.S. foreign withholding tax on dividends they receive rise significantly. At this point, cross-border tax experts have different interpretations of just how much the increase would be. Some understand the bill as increasing the rate of U.S. foreign withholding tax by a maximum of 20 percentage points, either to 35 per cent from the 15 per cent rate available under the Canada-U.S. tax treaty, or to 50 per cent from the 30 per cent statutory foreign withholding tax rate when a taxpayer is ineligible for the treaty rate. Others interpret the ceiling as 50 per cent, or a maximum of 20 percentage points above the statutory rate of 30 per cent, starting from the treaty rate of 15 per cent, where applicable. Tax experts say they're monitoring the progress of the bill and suggest the provision could be revised before its possible enactment. John Natale, head of tax, retirement and estate planning services, wealth, at Manulife Investment Management, says investors should speak with their financial advisors or tax advisors rather than sell U.S. investments solely because of the proposed legislation. 'Sometimes, people are eager or panic,' Mr. Natale says. Here's a brief overview of how U.S. withholding tax currently affects Canadian investors based on the types of investments and where those investments are held. (The tax implications for U.S. citizens who live in Canada aren't addressed in this article, as those investors would be treated differently.) Under the Canada-U.S. tax treaty, the U.S. imposes a withholding tax of 15 per cent on dividends paid from U.S. companies to Canadian investors, which is half the default rate of 30 per cent under U.S. tax law. To access the reduced treaty rate, a Canadian investor holding U.S. investments in a non-registered account needs to complete a U.S. W-8BEN form. The withholding tax applies to dividends but, in general, not to interest from bonds or savings accounts, or to capital gains realized on the sale of U.S. investments. (One exception is real estate: Canadians pay U.S. taxes on interest earned from U.S. rental property and on capital gains from selling U.S. real estate.) In a non-registered, taxable account, a Canadian investing directly in U.S. companies is subject to U.S. withholding tax on the dividends they receive. When a Canadian invests in a Canadian mutual fund or exchange-traded fund that invests in U.S. equities, the fund itself is the taxable entity in terms of U.S. withholding tax. The fund then distributes the foreign dividend income to the unitholder and reports the amount of foreign withholding tax. For example, a Canadian investor who is allocated $100 in U.S. dividends would receive $85, with the financial institution remitting $15 to the U.S. Internal Revenue Service. The financial institution would then issue a tax slip – either a T3 or a T5 – reporting $100 in foreign dividends and $15 of foreign tax paid. The investor would then report the $100 dividend on their income tax return and claim a foreign tax credit for $15. Under the proposed U.S. tax bill, the withholding rate would increase by five percentage points for every year the foreign country continues to charge an 'unfair' tax. (Cross-border experts have different interpretations on whether the increases would max out at 35 per cent or 50 per cent, where a treaty rate of 15 per cent is available.) Josée Baillargeon, director of taxation policy at the Securities and Investment Management Association, says it's unclear whether any additional taxes imposed under section 899 above the treaty rate would be eligible for a foreign tax credit or a deduction from income in Canada. 'We're currently seeking clarification on this matter from the Canada Revenue Agency,' Ms. Baillargeon said in a statement sent by e-mail. The U.S. doesn't recognize the tax-deferred status of Canadian registered plans that aren't retirement accounts, such as the tax-free savings account (TFSA), the registered education savings plan (RESP), the registered disability savings plan (RDSP) and the first-home savings account (FHSA). That means Canadians who invest in U.S. companies or hold Canadian mutual funds and ETFs that invest in U.S. equities held in TFSAs and RESPs are subject to U.S. foreign withholding tax on dividends, just as they would be if they held those investments in a taxable account. However, as these plans are tax-sheltered accounts in Canada, the Canadian investor doesn't receive a tax slip reporting the foreign dividends and foreign withholding tax, nor can they claim the foreign tax credit in Canada to offset the withholding tax. That means the 15 per cent U.S. withholding tax is a net cost to the investor that can't be recovered. The U.S. does recognize RRSPs, RRIFs, life income retirement accounts (LIRAs) and life income funds (LIFs) as retirement accounts and tax-deferred accounts. That means Canadians who invest in U.S. companies, or who hold ETFs listed on a U.S. exchange that invest in U.S. equities, are exempt from U.S. withholding tax on the dividends they receive. Adam Seliski, partner, international tax and transaction services with EY Canada, says it's unclear whether retirement accounts would continue to have access to their exempt status if section 899 were enacted. 'That's something we're monitoring very closely,' Mr. Seliski says. Even under current rules, the retirement account exemption isn't available for Canadian investors who hold Canadian mutual funds and ETFs that invest in U.S. equities. Canadian U.S. equity funds held in retirement accounts are subject to U.S. withholding tax, and investors don't have access to a foreign tax credit to offset, representing a drag on fund performance. While there may be an advantage to holding a U.S. investment directly in a registered retirement account in terms of avoiding U.S. foreign withholding tax, Canadian investors who own U.S. assets must also consider annual Canadian foreign reporting obligations, U.S. estate tax implications, and the cost of currency conversion.
Winnipeg Free Press
37 minutes ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Canadians divided on whether U.S. is an ‘ally' or ‘enemy' country: Poll
OTTAWA – Faced with a trade war they didn't start, Canadians are divided on whether they see the United States as an 'enemy' or an 'ally,' a new poll suggests. The Leger poll, which was conducted online and can't be assigned a margin of error, surveyed more than 1,500 people between May 30 and June 1. Almost a third of respondents said they view the U.S. as a 'neutral country,' while 27 per cent said they consider it an 'ally' and 26 per cent see it as an 'enemy country.' Just over a third of men said they consider the U.S. an ally, compared with one in five women. Almost 30 per cent of women said they view the U.S. as an enemy, compared with 22 per cent of men. Older Canadians, those at least 55 years of age, were more likely to consider the U.S. an enemy than younger Canadians. Regionally Albertans were most likely to consider the U.S. an ally while Ontarians and British Columbians were most likely to see it as an enemy. The difference is starkest between political party supporters, with 44 per cent of Conservative supporters saying they view the U.S. as an ally, compared with 17 per cent of Liberal supporters and 12 per cent of NDP supporters said the same. Comparatively 16 per cent of Conservative supporters said they view the U.S. as an enemy country, while 36 per cent of Liberal supporters and 41 per cent of NDP supporters said the same. U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order Tuesday to double his levies on steel and aluminum to 50 per cent. He claimed the measure will protect the country's national security and domestic industries. Prime Minister Mark Carney has said his government will need to take 'some time' to craft a response to the increased U.S. tariffs. The number of Canadians that report seeing the U.S. as an enemy country has dropped by six points since mid-March. At that time, 32 per cent of survey respondents told Leger they viewed the country as an enemy. The number of Canadians that view the U.S. as an ally also decreased by two percentage points since March, from 29 to 27 per cent, while the number that view it as a neutral country increased by six percentage points, from 24 to 30 per cent. Andrew Enns, Leger's executive vice-president for Central Canada, said that, broadly speaking, the patterns haven't changed much since the organization asked the question in February — when 27 per cent of respondents said they viewed the U.S. as an enemy and 30 per cent said they viewed it as an ally. Enns said the decline in the number of people saying the U.S. is an enemy likely reflects the overall sentiment on tariffs. 'It's still obviously there and, you know, clearly now we're dealing with higher steel tariffs, but the commentary coming from the White House and the Trump administration seems to have dissipated a bit and that's probably helping just tone things down,' he said. Monday Mornings The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week. Enns said Canada also has a new prime minister with a mandate that might 'take the edge off things.' 'I think that just keeps things more at a moderate level, and I think that reflects in people maybe feeling a little less threatened by the U.S.,' Enns said. Enns said political and business leaders have also sent a consistent message that the U.S. remains an important trading partner. He said that may encourage Canadians to believe there's a way to 'work things out.' The polling industry's professional body, the Canadian Research Insights Council, says online surveys cannot be assigned a margin of error because they do not randomly sample the population. This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 5, 2025.
Winnipeg Free Press
38 minutes ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Steel firms, workers to meet with MPs in Ottawa urging tariff action against U.S.
OTTAWA – Canadian steel companies and union workers are meeting with members of Parliament today with the hopes of convincing Ottawa to punch back at U.S. President Donald Trump's tariff hike. Industry and labour groups, along with Ontario Premier Doug Ford, are all calling on the federal government to quickly implement matching tariffs to retaliate against the U.S. Trump doubled his duties on steel and aluminum products on Wednesday from 25 to 50 per cent — what amounts to a massive threat to Canadian industry. Prime Minister Mark Carney says his government will need to take 'some time' to craft a response to the increased U.S. tariffs. Industry Minister Mélanie Joly says the federal Liberal government is examining different scenarios to respond and vowed it will make a decision before too long. Monday Mornings The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week. The Canadian Steel Producers Association says Trump's latest tariff assault is dealing a 'crushing blow' to the Canadian industry — a move that effectively blocks Canadian steel from entering the U.S. market. This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 5, 2025.
