Beyond Tariffs: Melting Trade Rules
How Trump´s new origin criteria affect global supply chains
Introduction
The Trump Administration’s recent steel and aluminum proclamations go far beyond simply raising tariff barriers. Although the headline is a 25% duty on these metals, the real game-changer is a new emphasis on where—and how—these materials are produced. In short, “melt and pour” (for steel) and “smelted and cast” (for aluminum) stages now determine origin and whether a product faces these heightened tariffs. For many exporters, this shift is more disruptive than the tariff rate itself. Below, we explore how the new origin criteria affect global supply chains, the rationale behind them, and the compliance challenges facing companies worldwide.
Recalibrating Origin
Under previous frameworks, if a steel slab or aluminum ingot was further processed in a country with preferential status or quota exemptions, it could often be labeled as originating in that country. Now, the U.S. mandates that origin is conferred only at the furnace stage. For steel, the key step is where the raw material transitions to molten metal. For aluminum, it’s about the electrolytic process that converts alumina into metallic form. If that foundational step took place in a tariff-subjected country, no finishing or re-rolling in a low-tariff location can erase the original penalty.
Why It Matters
No More Minimal Finishing: Basic operations—like coating, cutting, or shaping—are insufficient to confer new origin.
Detailed Documentation: Exporters and importers must keep robust records, including foundry logs and chemical analyses, to show the meltdown location.
Higher Penalties: If U.S. Customs questions an origin claim, the shipment may incur the full 25% tariff, plus potential penalties for misclassification.
The “Melt and Pour” Approach in Practice
Steel: To be recognized as “Country X” origin, the furnace meltdown where iron ore or scrap is turned into liquid steel must occur in Country X. Rolling or finishing steps elsewhere won’t matter if the meltdown was in a different, tariffed jurisdiction.
Aluminum: The “smelted and cast” rule requires that the electrolysis converting alumina to aluminum metal—and the subsequent initial casting—happen in the claimed country of origin. A partial finishing process in another nation does not change that origin.
Global Supply Chain Consequences
Producers that previously blended different slabs from multiple countries must now track each batch’s meltdown.
Multinational operations may reconfigure their entire workflow to ensure the meltdown occurs in a tariff-free environment.
Rationales and Critiques
U.S. Government Rationale
Prevent Transshipment: The Administration believes minimal finishing in a third country was allowing producers to dodge Section 232 tariffs introduced in 2018.
National Security: Officials argue that truly domestic or tariff-compliant melting is essential to maintain a robust industrial base for defense needs.
Skepticism and Concerns
Disguised Safeguard: Critics view these requirements as a way to block imports under the banner of national security, circumventing standard WTO safeguards processes.
Cost and Complexity: Downstream sectors (e.g., automotive, construction) fear inflated costs and supply chain disruptions, potentially fueling higher consumer prices.
Compliance: A New Challenge
For many exporters and in-house counsel, the meltdown-based origin test rewrites the compliance rulebook:
Supply Chain Mapping
Detailed logs of each production phase—from the furnace meltdown, through casting, rolling, and finishing—must be meticulously compiled.
Firms may invest in advanced tracking systems, including blockchain-based ledgers, to prove origin authenticity.
Contractual Adjustments
Buyers may insist on clauses specifying meltdown location and requiring indemnification if Customs disputes the claim.
“Tariff-sharing” provisions might appear in contracts, where costs are split if a batch is retroactively deemed subject to the 25% tariff.
Operational Overhaul
Some companies consider establishing new smelting capacity in the U.S. to avoid the tariff.
Others reevaluate whether re-melting in a second country is viable to gain a new origin—if it truly satisfies the meltdown definition.
Impact on Trade Patterns
Because these rules block minimal finishing as a route for duty avoidance, several trends may follow:
Investment Shifts: Nations that can host full-scale melting might attract foreign direct investment, as producers seek duty-free origin.
Stockpiling: Firms anticipating strict enforcement could import extra volumes before the new rule fully bites.
Downstream Price Pressures: U.S. manufacturers relying on specialized foreign steel or aluminum may see rising costs and potential bottlenecks.
Potential Legal Disputes
WTO Challenges
The Administration frames the measure as a national security act under GATT Article XXI. Critics argue it functions more like a safeguard, skipping formal procedures.
If challenged, panels might weigh how essential meltdown truly is for security, but the current paralysis of the WTO Appellate Body clouds the timeline for any binding resolution.
U.S. Courts
Section 232 lawsuits typically face judicial deference to the executive on national security.
However, procedural arguments—like missing statutory deadlines or failing to reinitiate Commerce reviews—could surface.
Practical Tips for Exporters
Audit Your Inputs: Confirm the meltdown location of every slab or ingot entering your production line.
Gather Evidence: Maintain furnace logs, chemical test results, and shipping documents.
Negotiate Origin Clauses: Incorporate meltdown warranties into supplier agreements, specifying liability if origin claims fail.
Watch for Regulatory Updates: CBP may refine enforcement protocols; any new guidance can reshape compliance requirements overnight.
Stay Proactive in Diplomacy: Lobby efforts or bilateral negotiations sometimes yield partial exemptions or clarified definitions.
Broader Outlook
The meltdown-based origin rule underscores a shift from simple tariffs to deeper scrutiny of production. As the U.S. enforces these criteria, other countries may adopt similar requirements, intensifying global demands for near-complete traceability. For trade practitioners, it’s a vivid reminder that origin is more than a label—it’s a story of precisely how and where a metal took shape. While the debate on national security exceptions rages, businesses must adapt quickly to avoid costly duties and potential penalties.
The new rules encapsulate the reality of these new U.S. rules on steel and aluminum. The 25% duty may be a headline news, but the real revolution is in origin criteria. Companies must track every molten step, or risk losing valuable U.S. market access. Legal advisors, compliance officers, and executives alike now face a future where verifying the meltdown stage is as decisive as the duty rate itself—an evolution that stands to reshape production choices, international negotiation dynamics, and the fundamental notion of “Made in X.”
By Welber Barral, Barral Parente Pinheiro Law, welber.barral@barralparente.com.b
r