Factbox-The top sources of U.S. steel and aluminium imports
(Reuters) -U.S. President Donald Trump said on Friday he planned to double tariffs on steel and aluminium imports to 50% from 25%, starting from Wednesday, ratcheting up pressure on global producers and deepening his trade war.
Here's a summary of the major trade partners it will affect.
STEEL:
Roughly a quarter of all steel used in the U.S. is imported, the bulk of it from neighbours Mexico and Canada or close allies in Asia and Europe such as Japan, South Korea and Germany.
While China is the world's largest steel producer and exporter, it sends very little to the United States. Tariffs of 25% imposed in 2018 shut most Chinese steel out of the market.
China exported 508,000 net tons of steel to the U.S. last year or 1.8% of total American steel imports.
ALUMINIUM:
For aluminum, the U.S. is more heavily reliant on imports. Roughly half of all aluminium used in the U.S. is imported, with the vast majority coming from Canada. At 3.2 million tons last year, Canadian imports were twice those of the next nine countries combined.
The next largest sources of imports are the United Arab Emirates and China, at 347,034 and 222,872 metric tons, respectively.
The U.S. aluminium smelting industry is small by global standards. Total smelter capacity in the country was just 1.73% of the global total according to the U.S. Geological Survey.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Associated Press
29 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Justice Department drops lawsuit against Trump adviser Peter Navarro
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department is dropping a lawsuit that it filed against White House trade adviser Peter Navarro, a case in which he was accused of using an unofficial email account for government work and wrongfully retaining presidential records during the first Trump administration, according to a Tuesday court filing. The joint filing by the Justice Department and an attorney for Navarro doesn't explain why they are abandoning a case that was filed in 2022, during President Joe Biden's term in office. The one-page filing says each side will bear their own fees and costs. The lawsuit accused Navarro of using at least one 'non-official' email account — a ProtonMail account — to send and receive emails. The legal action comes just weeks after Navarro was indicted on criminal charges after refusing to cooperate with a congressional investigation into the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. Navarro served a four-month prison sentence after being found guilty of misdemeanor charges. The civil cases alleges that by using the unofficial email account, Navarro failed to turn over presidential records to the National Archives and Records Administration. The government notified the court of the lawsuit's dismissal a day before U.S. Magistrate G. Michael Harvey was scheduled to preside over a status conference for the case. A Justice Department spokesperson and a lawyer for Navarro didn't immediately respond to emails seeking comment. Navarro served as a trade adviser during President Donald Trump's first term. A longtime critic of trade arrangements with China, he has been named senior counselor for trade and manufacturing for Trump's second administration.
Associated Press
29 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Fed lifts restrictions placed on Wells Fargo in 2018 because of its fake-accounts scandal
NEW YORK (AP) — The Federal Reserve said Tuesday that Wells Fargo is no longer subject to the restraints the Fed placed on the bank in 2018 for having a toxic sales and banking culture. It's a win for Wells Fargo, which has spent nearly a decade trying to convince the public and policymakers that it had changed its ways. 'We are a different and far stronger company today because of the work we've done,' said Wells Fargo CEO Charlie Scharf in a statement. Scharf also announced that each of the 215,000 employees at Wells Fargo would receive a $2,000 award for turning the bank around. Wells Fargo used to have a corporate culture where it placed unreasonable sales goals on its branch employees, which resulted in employees opening up millions of fake accounts in order to meet those goals. Wells' top executives called its branches 'stores' and employees were expected to cross-sell customers into as many banking products as possible, even if the customer did not want or need them. After an investigation by The Los Angeles Times, Wells Fargo shut down its sales culture and fired much of its leadership and board of directors. The fake accounts scandal cost Wells Fargo billions of dollars in fines and lost business, and permanently tarnished its reputation, particularly because the scandal broke only a few years after the Great Recession and financial crisis. It was later revealed that Wells Fargo opened up roughly 3.5 million accounts that were not wanted or needed by customers. In order to push Wells to fix itself, the Federal Reserve took the unusual step of placing Wells Fargo in a program where the bank could grow no larger than it was in 2018. No bank had previously been placed into such a program, known as an asset cap. Since taking over in 2019, Scharf's goal has been to convince the Federal Reserve that Wells Fargo had fixed its toxic banking practices.
Chicago Tribune
30 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Column: Court says Trump tariffs are presidential overreach
The Trump administration's arbitrary moves to restructure the international trade environment to accommodate White House whims have suddenly run into reality, specifically established laws. This confrontation is still in the early stages, but it does not bode well for President Donald Trump and his ardent protectionist associates. On May 28, the U.S. Court of International Trade went back to basics in a decision featuring the reminder that, under the Constitution, Congress has the authority to regulate trade. This fundamental power is not overridden by the ability of the president to address trade challenges in an emergency. 'The court does not pass upon the wisdom or likely effectiveness of the President's use of tariffs as leverage,' a three-judge panel said in the decision to issue a permanent injunction on the blanket tariff orders issued by Trump since January. 'That use is impermissible not because it is unwise or ineffective, but because [federal law] does not allow it.' The ruling came in response to two lawsuits. One was filed by the Liberty Justice Center, a nonpartisan organization, on behalf of five small U.S. companies that import goods from countries targeted by Trump's tariffs. The other was filed by a dozen state governments within the U.S. Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield, a Democrat, is coordinating the states' efforts against the administration. He has declared the tariffs to be economically devastating, reckless and unlawful. Small businesses seeking relief include an importer of wine and other alcoholic beverages based in New York and a maker of educational kits and musical instruments located in Virginia. President Trump has been basing his unilateral tariff authority on the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA), passed by Congress and signed into law by President Jimmy Carter near the end of December 1977. The law authorizes the president to declare 'an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States,' with the proviso that such threats must originate, 'in whole or substantial part outside the United States,' and requires the president to provide updates to Congress every six months. An incentive for this legislation was a desire in Congress to clarify and restrict presidential actions justified under the 1917 Trading With the Enemy Act, a law which reflected the emergency leading to U.S. entry into World War I as a formal declared combatant. The immediate incentive for our nation to enter that war was the declaration by Germany of unrestricted submarine warfare. The 1917 law had been used to justify a variety of presidential initiatives, not all related to foreign policy and international developments. Declared national emergencies then still technically in effect included the 1933 banking crisis related to the hoarding of cash and gold, the 1950 Korean War crisis, a 1970 emergency related to a strike by postal workers and a 1971 emergency related to the deteriorating fiscal condition of the federal government. Key powers granted include the ability to block transactions and take control of the assets of the parties involved in the threats. This section was used by the Trump administration to justify the new tariffs. IEEPA was passed during a time of congressional assertiveness. Another important factor, no doubt, was President Carter's fixation on clear, orderly administration, which he carried to extremes. The severe national crises, traumas and wars described above contrast with today's long-term growth and prosperity, and blessed absence of direct involvement in war. The judicial veto of presidential overreach shows our system is working.
