Metals industry backs new US tariff actions, but clash on targets in Commodity News 13/05/2026 Industry groups across the US metals and mining sectors agreed that trade action is needed to counter excess capacity and forced labor abroad, but split over which countries should be targeted under President Donald Trump’s evolving tariff strategy. The US Trade Representative requested input after launching two tariff investigations following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn President Donald Trump’s country-specific tariffs. Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 authorizes investigations into whether countries engage in unfair acts that restrict US commerce. These investigations can result in new tariffs or import restrictions. USTR’s request comes as the Trump administration turns to alternative tariff methods after the Supreme Court ruling. Following the decision, Trump implemented a temporary 10% global tariff that expires in July. The first Section 301 investigation alleges 16 countries – including China, the European Union, Indonesia, Vietnam, Korea, Japan, Mexico and India – developed production capacity that has resulted in overproduction and large trade surpluses. The second investigation alleges that 60 countries fail to prohibit the import of goods produced with forced labor. In comments submitted to USTR, metals industry groups and companies backed tougher trade action from the US, but offered competing views on which trading partners should face new Section 301 trade penalties. China largest contributor to excess capacity There was a clear consensus among industry groups that global metals markets are facing overcapacity. This is often driven by state interventions leading to price distortions, trade imbalances, weakened domestic industries and the discouragement of new investments, they wrote. For a metal like steel, global excess capacity is expected to reach 721 million metric tons in 2027 and rise through 2028, the Steel Manufacturers Association wrote in their comments, citing the Global Forum on Steel Excess Capacity. “As global overcapacity continues to increase, US producers face the threat of renewed surges of steel imports, due to exports not only from China but also from other trading partners that are unwilling to right-size their steel industries,” Brandon Farris, SMA’s executive vice president, wrote. Most metals groups identified China as the largest contributor to excess capacity and a dominant player in the steel, aluminum, battery and critical minerals sectors. SAFE, an energy and supply chain organization, recommended the USTR prioritize investigating China over other economies to address its efforts to undermine domestic metals producers. “Fueled by state-directed investment, Chinese producers refine more copper, produce more steel, and smelt more aluminum than any other country by far,” Joe Quinn, executive director of SAFE’s Center for Strategic Industrial Materials, testified at a hearing on the investigation on May 5. “These major metals serve as the backbone of the US defense industrial base and require significant federal policy intervention beyond existing tariff actions. Disagreement on which countries There were varying opinions from metals groups on which of the 16 countries should be subject to trade measures under the excess capacity investigation. Metals groups abroad – European Aluminum, European Metals, the Korea Iron and Steel Association, and the Indian Steel Association – argued that th