Steel industry welcomes 25% tariffs but warns ‘uncertainty remains'
The US President has decided to 'provide different treatment' to the UK after a deal that was struck between Washington and London last month, as he doubled tariffs on imports from elsewhere to 50%.
Levies will remain at 25% for imports of steel from the UK into America, however Britain could still be subject to the higher 50% rate from July, or the quotas in the agreement could come into force, effectively eradicating the tax.
The 50% tariff rate for imports of steel and aluminium from other nations is due to come into force from 12.01am Washington DC time on Wednesday, which is shortly after 5am in the UK.
The Government said on Tuesday night they were 'pleased' that the industry 'will not be subject to these additional tariffs'.
Gareth Stace, the director general of UK Steel, said that Mr Trump's decision is a 'welcome pause'.
He added: 'Continued 25% tariffs will benefit shipments already on the water that we were concerned would fall under a tax hike.
'However, uncertainty remains over timings and final tariff rates, and now US customers will be dubious over whether they should even risk making UK orders.
'The US and UK must urgently turn the May deal into reality to remove the tariffs completely.'
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer's trade deal with the US, struck last month, included relief on the steel and aluminium tariffs, but it has not yet come into force.
Officials have been working to try and finalise the details of the agreement.
According to the text of the order, published by a White House X account on Tuesday, Mr Trump has 'further determined that it is necessary and appropriate to allow for the implementation of the U.S.-UK Economic Prosperity Deal of May 8, 2025 (EPD), and to accordingly provide different treatment, as described below, for imports of steel and aluminium articles, and their derivatives, from the United Kingdom'.
🚨 @POTUS just signed the order raising tariffs on steel and aluminum imports to 50%.
Here is the text of the order:
1. On January 11, 2018, the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) transmitted to me a report on the Secretary's investigation into the effect of imports of steel… https://t.co/4uwBVmd4Zj
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) June 3, 2025
The order later says that rates will for now stay at 25% and adds: 'On or after July 9, 2025, the Secretary may adjust the applicable rates of duty and construct import quotas for steel and aluminium consistent with the terms of the EPD, or he may increase the applicable rates of duty to 50 percent if he determines that the United Kingdom has not complied with relevant aspects of the EPD'.
The Government has pledged to keep working with the US to get the agreement up and running, and the 25% tariff rate 'removed'.
A spokesperson said: 'The UK was the first country to secure a trade deal with the US earlier this month and we remain committed to protecting British business and jobs across key sectors, including steel as part of our Plan for Change.
'We're pleased that as a result of our agreement with the US, UK steel will not be subject to these additional tariffs. We will continue to work with the US to implement our agreement, which will see the 25% US tariffs on steel removed.'
The Conservatives have said that Labour's 'botched negotiations have left businesses in limbo'.
Shadow business and trade secretary Andrew Griffith said: 'Keir Starmer stood in front of the nation and insisted to the British public that his Labour government had achieved a trade deal with the US – and now one month later our industries face a fresh tariffs blow.
'So once again it seems that Keir Starmer's promise was just like the rest: hollow and broken. Labour's botched negotiations have left businesses in limbo and this country simply cannot afford their continuing failure.'
Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds met White House trade representative Jamieson Greer in Paris on Tuesday.
According to the Department for Business and Trade, Mr Reynolds and Mr Greer discussed a desire to implement the deal struck between London and Washington as soon as possible, and committed to working closely to make it happen.
The general terms for the agreement between the UK and US were published in May when the deal was announced, and outline the intended plans.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt was asked if there was a text of the full deal ready to be released, and told reporters on Tuesday: 'There 's most definitely text with this deal, there is language that this side has seen.
'You'll have to ask the UK Parliament why they haven't seen it from their own Government, I obviously can't answer that question.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
30 minutes ago
- The Independent
Top US universities raced to become global campuses. Under Trump, it's becoming a liability
Three decades ago, foreign students at Harvard University accounted for just 11% of the total student body. Today, they account for 26%. Like other prestigious U.S. universities, Harvard for years has been cashing in on its global cache to recruit the world's best students. Now, the booming international enrollment has left colleges vulnerable to a new line of attack from President Donald Trump. The president has begun to use his control over the nation's borders as leverage in his fight to reshape American higher education. Trump's latest salvo against Harvard uses a broad federal law to bar foreign students from entering the country to attend the campus in Cambridge, Massachusetts. His order applies only to Harvard, but it poses a threat to other universities his administration has targeted as hotbeds of liberalism in need of reform. It's rattling campuses under federal scrutiny, including Columbia University, where foreign students make up 40% of the campus. As the Trump administration stepped up reviews of new student visas last week, a group of Columbia faculty and alumni raised concerns over Trump's gatekeeping powers. 'Columbia's exposure to this 'stroke of pen' risk is uniquely high,' the Stand Columbia Society wrote in a newsletter. Ivy League schools draw heavily on international students People from other countries made up about 6% of all college students in the U.S. in 2023, but they accounted for 27% of the eight schools in the Ivy League, according to an Associated Press analysis of Education Department data. Columbia's 40% was the largest concentration, followed by Harvard and Cornell at about 25%. Brown University had the smallest share at 20%. Other highly selective private universities have seen similar trends, including at Northeastern University and New York University, which each saw foreign enrollment double between 2013 and 2023. Growth at public universities has been more muted. Even at the 50 most selective public schools, foreign students account for about 11% of the student body. America's universities have been widening their doors to foreign students for decades, but the numbers shot upward starting around 2008, as Chinese students came to U.S. universities in rising numbers. It was part of a 'gold rush' in higher education, said William Brustein, who orchestrated the international expansion of several universities. 'Whether you were private or you were public, you had to be out in front in terms of being able to claim you were the most global university," said Brustein, who led efforts at Ohio State University and West Virginia University. The race was driven in part by economics, he said. Foreign students typically aren't eligible for financial aid, and at some schools they pay two or three times the tuition rate charged to U.S. students. Colleges also were eyeing global rankings that gave schools a boost if they recruited larger numbers of foreign students and scholars, he said. But the expansion wasn't equal across all types of colleges — public universities often face pressure from state lawmakers to limit foreign enrollment and keep more seats open for state residents. Private universities don't face that pressure, and many aggressively recruited foreign students as their numbers of U.S. students stayed flat. The college-going rate among American students has changed little for decades, and some have been turned off on college by the rising costs and student debt loads. Supporters say foreign students benefit colleges — and the wider US economy Proponents of international exchange say foreign students pour billions of dollars into the U.S. economy, and many go on to support the nation's tech industry and other fields in need of skilled workers. Most international students study the STEM fields of science, technology, engineering and math. In the Ivy League, most international growth has been at the graduate level, while undergraduate numbers have seen more modest increases. Foreign graduate students make up more than half the students at Harvard's government and design schools, along with five of Columbia's schools. The Ivy League has been able to outpace other schools in large part because of its reputation, Brustein said. He recalls trips to China and India, where he spoke with families that could recite where each Ivy League school sat in world rankings. 'That was the golden calf for these families. They really thought, 'If we could just get into these schools, the rest of our lives would be on easy street,'' he said. Last week, Trump said he thought Harvard should cap its foreign students to about 15%. 'We have people who want to go to Harvard and other schools, they can't get in because we have foreign students there,' Trump said at a news conference. The university called Trump's latest action banning entry into the country to attend Harvard 'yet another illegal retaliatory step taken by the Administration in violation of Harvard's First Amendment rights.' In a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration's previous attempt to block international students at Harvard, the university said its foreign student population was the result of 'a painstaking, decades-long project' to attract the most qualified international students. Losing access to student visas would immediately harm the school's mission and reputation, it said. 'In our interconnected global economy," the school said, 'a university that cannot welcome students from all corners of the world is at a competitive disadvantage.' ___ The Associated Press' education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
Powys County Times
37 minutes ago
- Powys County Times
MP: Grenfell-style mistakes could be repeated over battery storage regulation
The Government risks repeating the mistakes of Grenfell unless safety regulations on battery storage units are brought forward, an MP has warned. Liberal Democrat John Milne said there were 'alarming parallels' with the systemic failure which led to the west London tower block fire. Currently there are no laws which specifically govern the safety of battery energy storage systems (Bess), according to the House of Commons library. However, individual batteries could be subject to product safety regulations. Speaking in the Commons, Mr Milne accused the Government of being 'too complacent' as he called for enforceable regulations for the design and construction of the storage systems. The MP for Horsham said: 'The Grenfell disaster was the end result of many failings by both individuals and companies, but at its heart it was a failure of regulation. 'The rules left things wide open for exploitation by cost-cutting developers, and that is exactly what happened. 'Just as with lithium-ion batteries, a new technology, in this case cladding, was being used at scale for the first time without proper understanding of the risks. The time to act is now.' He continued: 'The Government itself has responded to all questions from myself and others to say that it considers the present regulatory regime to be robust. I am tempted to say pride comes before a fall. 'In the last few weeks a Department for Energy Security and Net Zero spokesman has stated that battery fires at storage sites are rare in the UK, we already have high standards in place that require manufacturers and industry to ensure batteries are safe throughout their lifespan. 'This is just too complacent. 'Fires as a result of cladding were also incredibly rare, but that did not save 72 lives at Grenfell.' Mr Milne said the industry would benefit from clear guidance, before adding: 'Any guidance needs to cover-off a number of areas, including transport of batteries to the site, design and construction, fire-fighting, ongoing inspection and decommissioning. 'In the short term, if the Government is for any reason still reluctant to regulate, perhaps it could issue clear national guidelines which are capable of being updated annually. 'Enforcement might then take place through the insurance industry, who would be likely to insist that any new applications followed such guidelines, as no project can go ahead without insurance, it is enforcement by the back door. 'Grenfell was a wholly predictable tragedy. A similar fire at Lakanal House in Camberwell, which killed six people, should have made us understand the risk, but the warning wasn't heeded and history took its course. 'We can't go back in time to stop Grenfell, but we can act now to avoid making the same mistake again with battery energy storage systems.' Elsewhere in the debate, Conservative MP for Mid Buckinghamshire Greg Smith said there should be minimum distances between battery storage sites and housing. Mr Smith said: 'This is not a debate about the principle of energy storage, although I am in principle opposed to such schemes taking agricultural land and challenging our food security, but today's debate, which is deeply concerning, and what this House must urgently address, are the real, growing, and too often overlooked safety implications of these installations, particularly when placed in close proximity to villages, and rural road networks ill-equipped to support them.' He added: 'At the very least the Government should introduce clear national guidelines on the siting of Bess installations, including minimum separation distances from residential properties, fire resilience standards, mandatory site-specific risk assessments and restrictions on placing these facilities on, or near, rural roads.' SNP MP for Aberdeen North, Kirsty Blackman, said developers should pay towards fire mitigation measures. She said: 'If we're saying to those organisations that are creating the battery storage sites, you will need to pay for the fire safety assessment, you will need to consult the local fire and you will need to pay for the training of those local fire teams in tackling fires at battery energy storage sites, I think that would be the most reasonable way forward. 'Ask them to pay for that training, because it's them that are going to be making a huge profit off it.' Energy minister Miatta Fahnbulleh said: 'It is often claimed that there is no regulation in this sector because there is no specific law addressing battery safety. This is simply untrue. 'The safety and standards of batteries are assured throughout their life cycle. The Government is therefore confident that the safety risks posed by grid-scale batteries are relatively small and well managed.'
Western Telegraph
37 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
MP: Grenfell-style mistakes could be repeated over battery storage regulation
Liberal Democrat John Milne said there were 'alarming parallels' with the systemic failure which led to the west London tower block fire. Currently there are no laws which specifically govern the safety of battery energy storage systems (Bess), according to the House of Commons library. However, individual batteries could be subject to product safety regulations. Speaking in the Commons, Mr Milne accused the Government of being 'too complacent' as he called for enforceable regulations for the design and construction of the storage systems. The MP for Horsham said: 'The Grenfell disaster was the end result of many failings by both individuals and companies, but at its heart it was a failure of regulation. 'The rules left things wide open for exploitation by cost-cutting developers, and that is exactly what happened. 'Just as with lithium-ion batteries, a new technology, in this case cladding, was being used at scale for the first time without proper understanding of the risks. The time to act is now.' He continued: 'The Government itself has responded to all questions from myself and others to say that it considers the present regulatory regime to be robust. I am tempted to say pride comes before a fall. 'In the last few weeks a Department for Energy Security and Net Zero spokesman has stated that battery fires at storage sites are rare in the UK, we already have high standards in place that require manufacturers and industry to ensure batteries are safe throughout their lifespan. 'This is just too complacent. 'Fires as a result of cladding were also incredibly rare, but that did not save 72 lives at Grenfell.' Grenfell Tower (James Manning/PA) Mr Milne said the industry would benefit from clear guidance, before adding: 'Any guidance needs to cover-off a number of areas, including transport of batteries to the site, design and construction, fire-fighting, ongoing inspection and decommissioning. 'In the short term, if the Government is for any reason still reluctant to regulate, perhaps it could issue clear national guidelines which are capable of being updated annually. 'Enforcement might then take place through the insurance industry, who would be likely to insist that any new applications followed such guidelines, as no project can go ahead without insurance, it is enforcement by the back door. 'Grenfell was a wholly predictable tragedy. A similar fire at Lakanal House in Camberwell, which killed six people, should have made us understand the risk, but the warning wasn't heeded and history took its course. 'We can't go back in time to stop Grenfell, but we can act now to avoid making the same mistake again with battery energy storage systems.' Elsewhere in the debate, Conservative MP for Mid Buckinghamshire Greg Smith said there should be minimum distances between battery storage sites and housing. Mr Smith said: 'This is not a debate about the principle of energy storage, although I am in principle opposed to such schemes taking agricultural land and challenging our food security, but today's debate, which is deeply concerning, and what this House must urgently address, are the real, growing, and too often overlooked safety implications of these installations, particularly when placed in close proximity to villages, and rural road networks ill-equipped to support them.' He added: 'At the very least the Government should introduce clear national guidelines on the siting of Bess installations, including minimum separation distances from residential properties, fire resilience standards, mandatory site-specific risk assessments and restrictions on placing these facilities on, or near, rural roads.' SNP MP for Aberdeen North, Kirsty Blackman, said developers should pay towards fire mitigation measures. She said: 'If we're saying to those organisations that are creating the battery storage sites, you will need to pay for the fire safety assessment, you will need to consult the local fire and you will need to pay for the training of those local fire teams in tackling fires at battery energy storage sites, I think that would be the most reasonable way forward. 'Ask them to pay for that training, because it's them that are going to be making a huge profit off it.' Energy minister Miatta Fahnbulleh said: 'It is often claimed that there is no regulation in this sector because there is no specific law addressing battery safety. This is simply untrue. 'The safety and standards of batteries are assured throughout their life cycle. The Government is therefore confident that the safety risks posed by grid-scale batteries are relatively small and well managed.' She added there is 'scope to strengthen' the planning process.
