The European Union wants to protect its steel from market distortions caused by global overproduction. The European Parliament has approved its position on a new regulation proposed by the European Commission in the International Trade Committee. The text, approved with 36 votes in favour, two against and five abstentions, aims to replace the current safeguard measures, in force since 2018, which will expire on 30 June 2026.
The main changes concern a sharp reduction in duty-free import quotas, an increase in customs tariffs beyond these thresholds, a strengthening of the traceability rules for imported steel and a total ban on steel imports from Russia and Belarus. “Steel production is a strategic priority for Europe. In times of geopolitical uncertainty, the strength of our steel industry is key to Europe’s resilience,” said Swedish Liberal Karin Karlsbro, the House rapporteur for the text.
Imports down by 15% and fight against unfair competition: the plan to save European steel
Lower quotas and higher duties on imports
The heart of the regulation is the reduction of duty-free import quotas. According to Parliament’s position, annual volumes of zero-duty importable steel would be limited to 18.3 million tonnes, a 47 percent cut from 2024 levels.
Once this threshold is exceeded, a 50 percent duty would be applied, applied both to steel exceeding the quotas and to products not covered by the system. The aim is to discourage the massive influx of cheap steel onto the European market and reduce pressure on EU producers.
“The EU steel sector is in great difficulty while in the meantime market distortions and unfair non-European practices are growing. For this reason, as Ecr, we have pushed for amendments to be accepted for greater cooperation with friendly and allied countries” and to ensure “adding to the regulation some steel products, previously excluded, which would have suffered greatly if not protected”, claimed Fratelli d’Italia MEP Daniele Polato, coordinator of the Conservatives and European reformists (Ecr) in the International Trade commission.
More traceability on the origin of the steel
Another pillar of the regulation concerns the transparency of supply chains. Parliament demands that importers provide more precise and verifiable evidence of the real origin of the steel, clarifying where the product was actually melted and cast.
The measure serves to prevent practices that circumvent the rules, such as the passage of metal through third countries where it only undergoes marginal processing that formally modifies its origin without changing its substance. In this way, the Union aims to ensure that steel placed on the European market fully complies with trade and customs rules and that protection measures are not circumvented.
Total stop to steel from Russia and Belarus
The House’s position includes a complete ban on the import of steel from Vladimir Putin’s Russia and Alexander Lukashenko’s Belarus, adding these products to the list of goods for which restrictions are already in place. The EU has adopted a series of economic sanctions against Moscow over the years in response to the invasion of Ukraine. Among these measures, since March 2022 Brussels has included a ban on the import of iron and steel products originating in Russia.
However, under the current sanctions framework, not all flows of Russian steel are automatically permanently blocked: some semi-finished products and raw materials can still be imported or transit through third countries if they do not expressly fall into prohibited categories or if it is not rigorously demonstrated that they contain material of Russian origin. For this reason, the legislation already provides for stringent documentary requirements.
With the proposed new regulation, Parliament wants to overcome any exceptions and regulatory ambiguities, imposing a full and clear ban on all steel coming from Russia and Belarus and making any possible circumvention through commercial triangulations more difficult.
An industry under pressure
According to the data referred to in the institutions’ press releases, the European steel industry has been under strong pressure for years. The main cause is the structural excess of production capacity at a global level, which generates a constant flow of low-cost steel to the EU. This dynamic has led to an increase in imports, a use of European plants well below profitability levels and a reduction in investments.
In 2024, the capacity utilization rate in the EU stood at around 67 percent. Since 2007, the sector has lost around 65 million tonnes of capacity and up to 100 thousand jobs, with direct consequences on industrial stability and the ability to finance decarbonisation.
The end of the old safeguards
The current safeguard measures on steel, introduced in 2018 under WTO rules, cannot be extended beyond eight years. Their expiration in June 2026 therefore risks exposing the European market to an even greater wave of imports, in a context in which global overproduction has not only not reduced, but continues to grow. Estimates indicate global excess capacity could reach 721 million tonnes by 2027, more than five times the EU’s annual consumption.
The differences between Parliament and Council
While sharing the general structure of the regulation, Parliament and the Council have some differences in approach. The Council places greater emphasis on the balance between the protection of steel producers and the interests of downstream industries that use steel as inputs. In his position he introduces more flexibility in the management of quotas, for example by allowing the carrying forward of unused quantities from one quarter to another and providing overall adjustment margins between 15.2 and 22.2 million tonnes.
Furthermore, the Council details more precisely the introduction of the obligation to indicate the country of “dissolution and payment”, providing for a transition period until October 2026 and subsequent assessments of the administrative impact. The Community Assembly, however, focuses its position on a more rigid level of protection and stringent controls, leaving the Commission with the task of monitoring the effects of the regulation and proposing any changes.
