Iron ore, coking coal hold up amid tariff chaos, but for how long?: Russell
Iron ore futures traded on the Singapore Exchange ended at $99.54 a metric ton on Monday, a three-month low and down 4.1% from the $103.77 close on April 2, the day Trump imposed sweeping tariffs on U.S. trading partners.
The Singapore contracts largely reflect the views of market participants outside of China, which buys about three-quarters of all global seaborne iron ore and produces just over half of the world's steel.
But even China's domestic iron ore futures on the Dalian Commodity Exchange have held up, losing just 3.6% since April 2 to Monday's close of 762.50 yuan ($104.31) a ton.
In contrast to iron ore's relatively modest declines, Brent crude futures shed 14.1% from April 2 to Monday's close of $64.36 a barrel, a four-year low, while London-traded copper contracts dropped 10% to end at $8.732 a ton.
China is the world's biggest buyer of crude and copper, but unlike iron ore these commodities have a broader investor base and tend to more rapidly reflect changes in market sentiment and dynamics.
But even so, iron ore's performance seems at odds with Trump's announcement last week of a 34% tariff on U.S. imports from China, which was on top of 20% already imposed.
The mercurial U.S. president doubled down on Monday, threatening an additional 50% on imports from China after Beijing responded with a 34% tariff of its own on imports from the United States, as well as export controls on a series of minor metals, many of the critical to defence and technology.
If all the threatened tariffs go ahead, China's exports to the United States will face an impost of 104%, which would likely have the effect of ending all trade between the world's two largest economies.
OUTLOOK DARKENS
In this scenario it's hard to construct a case that iron ore will continue to outperform other major commodities, it's actually easier to see it suffering more.
Manufacturing accounts for about 25% of China's steel demand, so any major hit to this sector from weaker demand for exported goods such as appliances and vehicles will flow directly through to steel consumption.
The question is whether Beijing will take decisive action to stimulate both parts of the economy hit by tariffs and other sectors not as exposed but capable of helping boost overall economic growth.
If China does act to boost its economy through stimulus of sectors such as infrastructure and consumer spending on manufactured goods, it becomes a matter of whether this will be enough to keep steel demand at relatively strong levels.
If steel demand and output hold up, then so too should iron ore imports, and thus prices.
It's too early to say if iron ore imports are weakening amid the tariff concern, with March data compiled by commodity analysts Kpler suggesting a solid, if unspectacular, result.
China imported 102.1 million tons of iron ore in March, up from 84.36 million in February, although that month's total was lower than expected because of weather disruptions in top supplier Australia.
The March figure was only slightly below the 104.9 million tons from the same month in 2024, according to Kpler data.
In addition to iron ore, the other key steel raw material is metallurgical coal, and it has also shown a somewhat subdued reaction to the escalating tariff war.
Singapore Exchange contracts , which track the price of metallurgical coal from Australia, the world's biggest exporter of the fuel also called coking coal, have actually risen, gaining 5.9% from the close on April 2 to end at $186 a ton on Monday.
However, the price increase is because of weather-related disruptions in Australia's Queensland state, home to the bulk of the country's metallurgical coal mines.
China's coking coal contracts have slipped 3.1% from April 2 to the close of 971.50 yuan a ton on Monday, perhaps a better reflection of some demand concerns emerging amid the tariff uncertainty.
The views expressed here are those of the author, a columnist for Reuters.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
11 minutes ago
- Reuters
Oil prices dip as market awaits EIA report
HOUSTON, Aug 12 (Reuters) - Oil prices dipped on Tuesday as traders watched for a U.S. government short-term market outlook report following a bullish report on demand and supply issued by OPEC. Brent crude futures lost 20 cents, or 0.3%, to $66.43 a barrel by 10:36 a.m. CDT (1536 GMT). U.S. West Texas Intermediate crude futures were off by 39 cents, or 0.61%, to $63.51. "We're still locked into a range, waiting for an Energy Information Administration report this morning," said Phil Flynn, senior analyst at Price Futures Group. Flynn said traders were watching to see if the EIA report would track with a report issued earlier on Tuesday by OPEC on its demand and production outlook. The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries raised its forecast for global oil demand next year and trimmed its forecast for growth in supply from the United States and other producers outside the wider OPEC+ group, pointing to a tighter market outlook. OPEC's monthly report on Tuesday said global oil demand will rise by 1.38 million barrels per day in 2026, up 100,000 bpd from the previous forecast. Its 2025 projection was left unchanged. U.S. President Donald Trump extended a tariff truce with China to November 10, staving off triple-digit duties on Chinese goods as U.S. retailers prepared for the critical end-of-year holiday season. This raised hopes that an agreement could be reached between the world's two largest economies and avert a virtual trade embargo between them. Tariffs risk slowing global growth, which could sap fuel demand and drag oil prices lower. U.S. consumer prices increased in July as tariff-induced rising costs for imported goods helped to drive the strongest gain in six months for one measure of underlying inflation. Also potentially weighing on the oil market, Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin are due to meet in Alaska on Friday to discuss ending Russia's war in Ukraine. The U.S. has stepped up pressure on Russia to end the conflict, with Trump setting a deadline of last Friday for Russia to agree to peace in Ukraine or have its oil buyers face secondary sanctions. He has also pressed India and China to reduce their purchases of Russian oil. "If Friday's meeting brings a ceasefire or even a peace deal in Ukraine closer, Trump could suspend the secondary tariffs imposed on India last week before they come into force in two weeks," Commerzbank said in a note. "If not, we could see tougher sanctions against other buyers of Russian oil, like China."
Daily Mail
11 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Labour facing fresh 'cronyism' row after donor wins £5m contract for project 'overseen by former staff'
Labour is facing a fresh 'cronyism' row after it emerged a party donor won a multi-million pound contract for a project partly overseen by one of its former employees. Public Digital is helping to run a 'Test, Learn and Grow' initiative across public services as part of a Whitehall reform programme. The London-based consultancy is being paid £5million as the 'strategic delivery partner' for the Cabinet Office initiative. This will see 'innovation squads' of policy officials, tech specialists and other experts sent to communities across England to try and deliver better public services. According to The Times, Emily Middleton - a former partner at Public Digital - sits on the 'programme board' for Test, Learn and Grow. Public Digital donated the equivalent of £100,000 to Labour prior to last year's general election. The firm was also caught up in a row over the appointment of Ms Middleton to a senior Government role shortly after Labour won power. She was last summer named a director general at the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) earning between £125,000 and £208,100 a year. Ms Middleton had previously been on secondment to the office of Peter Kyle, who is now the Science, Innovation and Technology Secretary, from Public Digital. The costs of her employment by Mr Kyle's office, while in opposition, were paid for by the consultancy firm as a 'donation in kind'. The Tories have previously demanded an investigation into the links between Labour and Public Digital. Alex Burghart, the shadow Cabinet Office minister, said Ms Middleton's role with the Test, Learn and Grow project represented a 'a serious potential conflict of interest'. 'Labour ministers must urgently come clean on these murky decisions,' he added. Rose Whiffen, senior research officer at Transparency International UK, said: 'When Government departments award contracts to firms that previously employed their senior officials, they must demonstrate these contracts were won through genuine open competition - or provide clear justification if not. 'Simply acknowledging the existing relationship is not enough. The public deserves to see clear evidence of how potential conflicts of interest have been actively identified and mitigated.' Whitehall sources said Ms Middleton had not attended either of the two Test, Learn and Grow programme board meetings that have taken place to date. They also said the programme board is not involved in commercial decision making. A Government spokesman said the newspaper report 'has no basis'. 'Emily Middleton has had no role in decisions or deliberations relating to this contract or any other Public Digital has bid for,' they added. A Public Digital spokeswoman said: 'Our team's expertise, not political affiliations, has earned us the trust of Government bodies across multiple projects. 'The Government is right to recognise that bringing in outside expertise, including from the private sector, is sorely needed to drive reform and create better public services for everyone.'
The Sun
11 minutes ago
- The Sun
Brits' spending styles revealed from ‘Polite Pippa' or ‘Generous George' – where does research rank you?
HOW does your social spending persona compare to others? Are you the most generous out there when it comes to contributing to group gifts, or do you prefer to put your cash elsewhere, like towards your own savings goals? 2 In typically British fashion, some are scared to decline invites and go along with expensive plans to avoid appearing rude - and this test will reveal where you fall on the scale. Questions about office leaving gifts, children's birthday parties and splitting restaurant bills will decide whether you're a 'Polite Pippa' or 'Generous George'. It comes after a poll of 2,000 adults, commissioned by new savings app, Spring, found Brits spend £1,025 a year on other people, including paying for hen and stag dos, colleague's leaving gifts and children's parties. Half (52 per cent) feel pressured into attending expensive social events, with an average of £207 per guest spent on weddings, £191 on milestone birthdays and an average of £150 on hen and stag dos. Others feel obliged to attend or contribute to group meals out, baby showers and housewarmings, as well as donating to fundraisers. Head of money for the app, Derek Sprawling, said: 'Many of us feel pressure to say yes to social events that are becoming more and more expensive. 'While the quiz questions are hypothetical, it features occasions we can all relate to from the sinking feeling of seeing another wedding invite come in to dipping into savings for another person's birthday. 'In a social media world, many people want to celebrate landmark events in style and not down the local pub, which is putting more and more pressure on budgets. 'One way consumers can manage this is by learning to say no to events they don't want to go in a gracious way that doesn't offend.' The research also found 51 per cent would rather spend their money elsewhere than on other people, with 59 per cent of those preferring to save the cash. While 47 per cent would opt to put it towards a holiday and 33 per cent would rather spend on their hobbies. Among the top events people have attended when they didn't really want to were group meals (21 per cent), weddings (18 per cent) and big birthday parties (17 per cent). And the most individuals have ever spent on an occasion which they didn't want to partake in is £239. Almost half (46 per cent) have had to dip into their savings to cover the costs, resulting in delaying or putting off their own goals of travelling (36 per cent) or buying a home (19 per cent). In typical British fashion, the fear of looking rude (34 per cent), stingy (28 per cent) or being the 'difficult' one (28 per cent) made people feel obliged to contribute to or attend events. But many have felt annoyed (22 per cent) and irritated (29 per cent) about social spending expectations, with 41 per cent feeling there are too many celebratory occasions nowadays. And the likes of gender reveal gifts (44 per cent), overseas hen and stag dos (38 per cent) and evenly splitting restaurant bills (18 per cent) are seen as unnecessary spending. It also emerged 35 per cent of those polled, via OnePoll, have felt stressed when they had little time to pay for something which they hadn't pre-planned, with the ideal notice period being nine weeks before the event. Derek added: 'Given the pressure on finances these events can create, if you are going to attend, making sure your money is working as hard as possible is vital, including the interest from your savings. 'We find too many people accept a poor rate of return from their bank when they could be generating much more from a higher interest account, helping to contribute to these unexpected costs.' 2
