LONDON — Countries focused on reopening the Strait of Hormuz will meet for a
security summit in the near future, which the U.K. has offered to host.
More than 30 nations including United Arab Emirates, the U.K., France, Germany,
Italy and the Netherlands have now signed a joint statement agreeing to work on
“appropriate efforts” to safeguard the major trade route.
A British official, granted anonymity because they are not authorized to speak
on the record, said Tuesday the U.K. wanted to help “build this coalition and
develop momentum” in order to “open a route safe through the Strait of Hormuz,
and provide that reassurance to merchant shipping.”
They added that cooperation between like-minded partners would include a
security conference on the topic, which could be hosted in London or Portsmouth,
the home of the Royal Navy on the south coast of England.
NATO chief Mark Rutte and British PM Keir Starmer now appear to be leading the
push to restart traffic through the Strait, despite skepticism from other
allies.
The same British official discussed options for securing the channel, such as
deploying autonomous minehunting systems from a mothership in the Gulf, while
conceding this would not be possible while the current level of hostilities
continue.
They expressed confidence that “we will see different nations coming forwards
with different offers to support us”and “we will be able to find in the right
conditions a coalition that will be able to provide that assurance to the
merchant shipping industry.”
Tag - Trade UK
LONDON — Keir Starmer’s keeping Britain out of the war in Iran — but he can’t
duck the conflict’s grave economic consequences.
In a sign of growing fears about the impact of the war on Britain, the prime
minister chaired a rare meeting of the government’s emergency COBRA committee
Monday night, joined by senior ministers and Governor of the Bank of England
Andrew Bailey.
Starmer’s top finance minister, Rachel Reeves, will update the House of Commons
on the economic picture Tuesday, as an already-unpopular administration worries
that chaos in the Middle East is shredding plans to lower the cost of living and
get the British economy growing.
For Starmer’s government — headed for potentially brutal local elections in May
— the crisis in the Gulf risks a nightmare combination of a rise in energy
prices, interest rates, inflation and the cost of government borrowing that
threatens to undermine everything he’s done since winning office.
Economists are now warning that even if Donald Trump’s promise of a “complete
and total resolution of hostilities” with Iran were to bear fruit, the effects
on the British economy could still last for months.
Already there are signs of a split within Starmer’s party over how to respond.
Labour MPs want the government to think seriously about action to protect
households — but Starmer and Reeves have long talked up the need for fiscal
responsibility, and economics are warning that there’s little room for maneuver.
Fuel prices displayed at a Shell garage in Southam, Warwickshire on March 23,
2026. | Jacob King/PA Images via Getty Images
Jim O’Neill, a former Treasury minister who served as an adviser to Reeves, told
POLITICO the government should “not get sucked into reacting to every external
shock” and “concentrate on boosting our underlying growth trend.”
WHY THE UK IS SO HARD HIT
Just before the outbreak of war, there was reason for Starmer and Reeves to feel
quietly optimistic about the long-stagnant British economy. The Bank of England
had expected inflation to fall back sustainably toward its two percent target
for the first time in five years, giving the central bank the space to carry on
cutting interest rates.
With the Iran war in full flow, it was forced to rewrite those forecasts at the
Monetary Policy Committee’s meeting last week — and now sees inflation at around
3.5 percent by the summer.
The U.K. is a big net importer of energy and also needs constant imports of
foreign capital to fund its budget and current account deficits. That’s made it
one of first targets in the financial markets’ crosshairs. The government’s cost
of borrowing has risen by more than half a percentage point over the last month.
That threatens both the real economy and Reeves’ painstakingly-negotiated budget
arithmetic. Higher inflation means higher interest rates and a higher bill for
servicing the government’s debt: fiscal watchdog the Office for Budget
Responsibility estimates a one-point increase in inflation would add £7.3
billion to debt servicing costs in 2026-2027 alone.
The effect on businesses and home owners is also likely to be chilling.
Britain’s banks are already repricing their most popular mortgages, which are
tied to the two-year gilt rate. Hundreds of mortgage products were pulled in a
hurry after the MPC meeting last week, something that will hit the housing
market and depress Reeves’ intake from both stamp duty and capital gains.
Duncan Weldon, an economist and author, said: “Even if this were to stop
tomorrow, the inflation numbers and growth numbers are going to look materially
worse throughout 2026.
“If this continues for longer… it’s an awful lot more challenging and you end up
with a much tougher budget this autumn than the government would have been
hoping to unveil.”
DECISION TIME
The U.K.’s economic plight presents an acute political headache for Starmer, as
he faces a mismatch between his own party’s expectations about the government’s
ability to help people and his own scarce resources.
Energy Secretary Ed Miliband has promised to keep looking at different options
for some form of assistance to bill-payers hit by an energy price shock. A pain
point is looming in July, when a regulated cap on energy costs is due to expire
and bills could jump significantly.
One left-leaning Labour MP, granted anonymity to speak frankly, said: “They
[ministers] need to be treating this like a financial crisis. They need plans
for multiple scenarios with clear triggers for government support.”
A second MP from the 2024 intake said “it’s right that a Labour government steps
in, particularly to help the most vulnerable.”
Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper and Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves at
the first cabinet meeting of the new year at No. 10 Downing St. on Jan. 6, 2026
in London, England. | Pool photo by Richard Pohle via Getty Images
This demand for action is being felt in the upper echelons of the party too, as
Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy recently argued Reeves’ fiscal rules — seen as
crucial in the Treasury to reassure the markets — may need to be reconsidered if
prices continue to rise and a major support package is needed.
One Labour official said there are clear disagreements with Labour over how to
go about drawing up help and warned “the fiscal approach is going to be a
massive dividing line at any leadership election.” The same official pointed to
recent comments by former Starmer deputy — and likely leadership contender —
Angela Rayner about the OBR, with Rayner accusing the watchdog of ignoring the
“social benefit” of government spending.
Despite the pressure, ministers have so far restricted themselves to criticizing
petrol retailers for alleged profiteering, and have been flirting with new
powers for markets watchdog the Competition and Markets Authority. The
government said Reeves would on Tuesday set out steps to “help protect working
people from unfair price rises,” including a new “anti-profiteering framework”
to “root out price gouging.”
But Starmer signaled strongly in an appearance before a Commons committee Monday
evening that he was not about to unveil any wide-ranging bailout package,
telling MPs he was “acutely aware” of what it had cost when then-Prime Minister
Liz Truss launched her own universal energy price guarantee in 2022.
O’Neill backed this approach, saying: “I don’t think they should do much… They
can’t afford it anyhow. The nation can’t keep shielding people from external
shocks.”
Weldon predicted, however, that as the May elections approach and the energy cap
deadline draws nearer, the pressure will prove too much and ministers could be
forced to step in.
The furlough scheme rolled out during the pandemic to project jobs and Truss’s
2022 intervention helped create “the expectation that the government should be
helping households,” he said.
“But it’s incredibly difficult. Britain’s growth has been blown off-course an
awful lot in the last 15 years by these sorts of shocks.”
Geoffrey Smith, Dan Bloom, Andrew McDonald and Sam Francis contributed to this
report.
BRUSSELS — America’s ambassador to the EU called on the European Parliament to
back the trade deal struck with President Donald Trump, arguing it would unlock
deeper transtlantic cooperation on energy, tech and AI.
Speaking to POLITICO on Monday, Andrew Puzder cautioned that it would be a
mistake to allow a further delay of the deal reached last July at Trump’s
Turnberry golf resort in Scotland, but has still to be implemented on by the EU
side.
“All of the signals are good, but you never know. We’re hopeful, but we want to
be careful and make sure that we don’t take anything for granted,” Puzder said
in an interview at the U.S. mission in Brussels.
“It’s in the best interest of the European Union and the United States that it
passes,” he added. “Some people might think that politically, it might give them
an advantage to vote against. I hope that’s not the case. But economically, it’d
be malpractice not to vote for this in the EU.”
Puzder highlighted the importance of the EU’s commitment to spend $750 billion
on U.S. energy under the Turnberry deal.
“Europe’s going to need that energy,” he said. “So we need to cut back on the
regulatory restrictions to our shipping them the energy and also the regulatory
restrictions that make that energy more expensive once it gets here.”
IT’S BEEN LONG ENOUGH
Puzder, a former fast food executive nominated by Trump, started the role last
September and made an early impression in Brussels with his plain speaking. He
told POLITICO in December that the EU should stop trying to be the world’s
regulator and get on instead with being one of its innovators.
His latest remarks came amid mounting U.S. frustration over the EU’s slow pace
in keeping its side of the bargain, under which it would scrap import duties on
U.S. industrial goods.
The enabling legislation is now up for a plenary vote in the European Parliament
on Thursday. If it passes, talks between EU lawmakers, governments and the
Commission would then begin on finally implementing the tariff changes.
“We’re anxious to get this through the process. We understood they had to go
through a process, but it’s been long enough. And hopefully we’ll get through it
on Thursday and we can both move on to more economically beneficial endeavors,”
Puzder stressed.
Trade lawmakers backed amendments at the committee stage to strengthen the EU’s
protections in case Washington doesn’t respect its side of the deal.
They for instance introduced a suspension clause if Trump threatens the EU’s
territorial sovereignty, as he did earlier this year when he pushed to annex
Greenland. MEPs also added another provision that foresees that the deal would
expire in March 2028.
Puzder declined to speculate on whether the deal could unravel altogether if the
U.S. president were to launch any renewed threats.
“I hate to prejudge where this is going to go,” he said. “What everybody’s been
saying on both sides is a deal is a deal. We had a deal; hopefully we still have
a deal.”
The ambassador stressed there had been a “very good two-way communication”
between Trump’s team of Trade Representative Jamieson Greer and Commerce
Secretary Howard Lutnick, and the European Commission, as well as with Bernd
Lange, who chairs the European Parliament’s Trade Committee.
“I’ve also had a number of meetings with Bernd Lange and members of parliament
on these issues. So the communication has been very good and very open
throughout this process,” Puzder said.
U.S. President Donald Trump warned late Saturday that the United States will
“obliterate” energy plants in Iran if the government doesn’t fully open
the Strait of Hormuz, giving the country a 48-hour deadline to comply.
“If Iran doesn’t fully open, without threat, the Strait of Hormuz, within 48
hours from this exact point in time, the United States of America will hit and
obliterate their various power plants, starting with the biggest one first,”
Trump said in a post on Trust Social.
Iran warned in reply that any strike on its energy facilities would prompt
attacks on U.S. and Israeli energy and infrastructure facilities — specifically
information technology and desalination operations — in the region, the
Associated Press reported, citing a statement by an Iranian military
spokesperson carried by state media and semiofficial outlets.
The warnings of escalation in the Mideast conflict come after the British
government on Saturday confirmed that Tehran launched an unsuccessful attack on
Diego Garcia, a joint U.S.-U.K. military base in the Indian Ocean. Media
reports said Iran fired two ballistic missiles at the base but missed.
Meanwhile, Israel claimed that Iran has missiles with a range of about 4,000
kilometers, capable of hitting London, Paris and Berlin. “The Iranian terrorist
regime poses a global threat. Now, with missiles that can reach London, Paris or
Berlin,” the Israel Defense Forces said in a post on X.
Iran’s targeting of the base on Diego Garcia occurred before Britain on
Friday confirmed that U.S. use of its bases includes defensive operations
against “missile sites and capabilities being used to attack ships in the Strait
of Hormuz,” a permission that includes the Indian Ocean island.
The Trump administration is telling foreign officials and others that it will
not reschedule a summit between the U.S. president and Chinese leader Xi Jinping
until the Iran war ends.
A Washington-based diplomat privy to U.S.-China summit planning confirmed that
the administration has made clear “the next dates for the Trump-Xi summit will
only be proposed after the active part of the Iran conflict is over.” A
Washington-based individual close to the administration also briefed on White
House summit planning confirmed the administration shared that timeline.
POLITICO granted both the people anonymity because they were not authorized to
speak publicly about sensitive diplomatic discussions.
The U.S. State Department directed queries to the White House. The White House
denied the summit timeline was tied to the Iran war.
“This is fake news. The United States and China are having productive
discussions about rescheduling President Trump’s visit — announcements are
forthcoming,” White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said.
The Chinese embassy said it had “no information to provide” about the possible
delay in summit scheduling.
The long-anticipated meeting between Trump and Xi had originally been planned
for the end of March, but Trump said Monday the meeting would be pushed back “a
month or so” because “we’ve got a war going on.” On Thursday, he said it would
happen in “about a month and a half.”
Speaking to reporters on Wednesday, White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt
suggested the meeting might not take place until after May. “The president has
some things here at home in May that he has to attend to, and I’m sure President
Xi is a very busy man, as well, so we’ll get the dates on the books as soon as
we can,” Leavitt said.
Tying the summit preparations to the end of the Iran conflict could mean
additional delays to a meeting intended to maintain stability in a fragile
U.S.-China trade truce.
As the war on Iran enters its fourth week, the Trump administration appears to
be preparing for a longer conflict. The U.S. has made detailed plans for the
deployment of ground troops onto Iranian soil, CBS News reported Friday. The
administration is also moving to dispatch thousands of troops to the region.
Trump told reporters Thursday he’s “not putting troops anywhere” but then added:
“If I were, I certainly wouldn’t tell you.”
“There are operational constraints to managing a war from a foreign country —
particularly a hostile one like China,” said the person close to the
administration. “It would be terribly awkward for Trump and Xi to transact in
this climate.”
On Friday, Trump signaled a potential wind-down in the Iran conflict in a Truth
Social post, suggesting the U.S. could scale back its role while pushing allies
to take on more responsibility in securing the Strait of Hormuz, the major
commercial waterway that connects the Persian Gulf to the Arabian Sea.
“We are getting very close to meeting our objectives as we consider winding down
our great military efforts in the Middle East,” Trump wrote.
Trump and Xi made progress toward heading off an intensified trade war in an
October meeting in South Korea. During that meeting, Xi committed to Chinese
purchases of U.S. agricultural products like soybeans and the elimination of
many of Beijing’s restrictions on critical minerals exports. In return, Trump
agreed to extend a pause on triple-digit tariffs on Chinese goods.
Wendy Cutler, a former negotiator in the U.S. Trade Representative’s office,
argued this work can continue even if Trump and Xi don’t meet again in person.
“The stabilization part of this won’t necessarily be jeopardized without a
meeting,” she said. “Now, if something happens in the war, either foreseen or
unforeseen, there’s just lots of flash points that can threaten this truce,
which are unforeseeable at this period.”
Rush Doshi, former senior director for China and Taiwan in the Biden
administration, said a meeting between the two leaders is important to
strengthening and maintaining the bilateral relationship.
“Without leader-to-leader communication to manage a relationship of this
complexity until the war is over — and there’s no sense of when the war is going
to be over — there’s a real risk the relationship is going to be less stable
than people might have expected,” said Doshi, now at the Council on Foreign
Relations.
LONDON — Downing Street on Thursday brushed off London Mayor Sadiq Khan’s call
for Labour to take Britain back into the European Union.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s spokesperson told reporters that the government’s
manifesto promises not to unpick Brexit “still stand.”
The Labour mayor of London had told Italian newspaper La Repubblica that the
U.K. should seek to get back into the EU’s customs union and single market
“during this parliament” — and then push to rejoin the bloc wholesale.
“We should rejoin the customs union this parliament … we should rejoin the
single market. We should try and do this during this parliament,” he told the
newspaper.
“And then we should, as a Labour Party, fight the next general election with a
clear manifesto commitment, a vote for Labour means we would rejoin the European
Union.”
Khan, whose city London voted strongly to remain in the EU in 2016, said the
damage Brexit had done had made the U.K. rejoining the bloc “inevitable.”
But asked about the mayor’s comments Thursday, the prime minister’s spokesperson
told a regular briefing of journalists in Westminster: “The government’s red
lines that are set out in the manifesto stand.”
The spokesperson added that the manifesto was valid for “the duration of the
parliament” and when pushed on future plans said: “We’re not going to write the
manifesto for the next election here.”
Khan is the most senior Labour figure thus far to broach the topic of the U.K.
rejoining the bloc — with the issue still considered a political hot potato in
Westminster.
It comes after Chancellor Rachel Reeves Tuesday said the U.K. should align with
EU rules in areas where it is in its economic interest to do so.
Starmer’s government is already negotiating an agrifood deal, an electricity
trading deal, and a youth mobility agreement with the bloc — as well as beefing
up cooperation on security and climate action.
But Starmer has ruled out rejoining the EU customs union, single market, or
reintroducing free movement of people with the bloc.
U.K. public opinion has tuned sharply against Brexit in the near decade since
the 2016 vote, with the latest survey from YouGov this week showing 54 percent
of Brits support rejoining the bloc versus 34 percent who oppose doing so, with
12 percent undecided.
BRUSSELS — The Trump administration has reassured the EU’s top trade lawmaker
that it plans to shorten a list of items containing steel that are subject to
high U.S. tariffs, in a concession that could finally persuade the European
Parliament to back last year’s transatlantic trade deal.
The offer came in a call between U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer with
Bernd Lange, the chair of the European Parliament’s Trade Committee. It has
helped win the support of Lange’s fellow socialists, enabling a key committee
vote to go ahead on Thursday.
But the fix is not yet fully in, with caucus leaders still to debate exactly
when to schedule a final plenary vote on the accord reached at President Donald
Trump’s Turnberry golf club in Scotland last July.
One sticking point has been the subsequent addition by Washington of hundreds of
items that contain steel — from cranes to furniture — to a list of products
subject to a 50 percent U.S. tariff. That, in the view of the Europeans,
violates the spirit of the Turnberry accord.
In their call last Saturday, Greer assured Lange that many of these items would
go, said the German MEP, who is also steering the enabling legislation on the
deal.
“Not everything, but a lot of them,” Lange told POLITICO’s Morning Trade
newsletter, saying that there was “some movement” on that front.
The enabling legislation, which would remove tariffs on U.S. industrial goods,
has been stalled for weeks in the EU chamber, as lawmakers balked at approving a
deal following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision last month to strike down
President Donald Trump’s original tariffs.
The Turnberry deal had set an “all-inclusive” tariff of 15 percent on most
goods. Trump quickly replaced that with a temporary 10 percent global duty.
With Trump’s threats to annex Greenland, cut off all trade with Spain, and his
military campaign against Iran further undermining any vestigial confidence on
the part of EU lawmakers that he will abide by his commitments, the path to
final approval of the Turnberry accord is both rocky and narrow.
NOT THE END OF THE ROAD
The next hurdle is holding a final plenary vote on the Turnberry deal, with
political groups in the European Parliament still divided.
Lange’s Socialists & Democrats, the Left, Greens and Renew are in favor of
scheduling it in April, arguing they still require clarity from Washington. The
center-right, pro-business European People’s Party (EPP) is pushing to hold it
next week, as currently scheduled.
A decision is expected this week. Political group chairs representing a majority
of MEPs would be needed to change the plenary agenda.
“We need to finish this in March because then we would have much more certainty
for everything. We have promises from the White House on steel and aluminum
derivatives,” said Željana Zovko, the EPP top negotiator on the file.
Lange is meanwhile due to fly — after the Trade Committee vote on Thursday — to
Washington and is expected to meet with Greer.
Only after the text is approved by the plenary can the European Parliament enter
negotiations with EU capitals and the European Commission on a compromise to
finally implement the deal.
BEYOND EU
People close to the White House say officials have spent weeks exploring ways to
streamline how the U.S. steel tariffs apply to downstream products that hit the
EU and other trading partners, following industry pushback after the list of
steel and aluminum derivatives expanded to cover hundreds of items last year.
The exchange between Greer and Lange marks the clearest signal yet that the
administration may adjust its approach to derivatives tariffs — changes that
could extend well beyond the EU.
But the Trump administration has not publicly confirmed any changes, or
clarified what that plan would entail.
“We are always examining ways to ensure our sectoral tariffs are most
effectively safeguarding our country’s national and economic security, but
unless announced by the Administration, discussion about tariff or derivative
adjustments is baseless speculation,” said a White House official.
Camille Gijs reported from Brussels and Ari Hawkins reported from Washington.
Max Griera contributed to this report.
LONDON — Brexit was “a colossal mistake” and the U.K. should rejoin the European
Union, Alexander Stubb said Tuesday.
But instead of waiting for that to happen, London and Brussels should work
together now to deepen their relationship in key areas such as defense and
intelligence sharing, trade and access to the single market, and technology and
innovation, the Finnish president said.
Speaking at the Chatham House think tank during a visit to London, he said the
chaotic state of the world in which the old, rules-based order no longer holds
should prompt a radical rethink of the EU-U.K. relationship.
“I think Brexit was a colossal mistake,” said former London student Stubb, who
has a British wife and children with dual nationality. “I am too diplomatic to
express exactly what I think about those who promoted Brexit during the
campaign, and those who still say that Brexit is a good thing … But I do think
it’s not only shooting yourself in the foot, but it’s like amputating your leg
without medical reason for doing it.”
Stubb said he recognized that British Prime Minister Keir Starmer did not aim to
rejoin the EU but argued that Brits and Europeans should be “pragmatic” now and
show flexibility on both sides.
Negotiations have been ongoing over moves toward deepening the partnership
between London and Brussels since Starmer’s Labour won power in 2024, but
progress has been held back over disagreements over youth mobility programs,
student fees and how much the U.K. should pay to take part in an arms investment
package.
“We need a U.K. voice in Europe. We really miss you guys,” Stubb said. “I should
probably express my view that it took you seven years to negotiate yourselves
out of the EU, it will take you seven years to regret it, and then seven years
to come back in. I hope.”
Stubb said British membership of the EU’s customs union should be possible,
alongside participation in the single market. Red lines during years of Brexit
negotiations meant the U.K. left both structures five years ago, under a bare
bones deal that Boris Johnson negotiated.
“We need to be super pragmatic,” he said, instead of Europeans thinking they
should “continue to punish” the U.K. for leaving the bloc. “Get out of the
mindset that the U.K. should not be a part of the customs union, or the U.K.
should not be a part of the internal market. Think about a flexible way of
dealing with it.”
More broadly, Stubb suggested the EU should reform its structures to allow more
flexibility in the way member countries work together, and work with states that
are not formal members of the EU.
He said Iceland is renewing its interest in becoming a member, he’d like to see
Norway join the bloc, and he joked to Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney that
Canada should also take a look at EU membership when the pair went running
together on Tuesday morning in London.
BRUSSELS — The European Parliament will hold a committee vote on the EU-U.S.
trade deal this week, top lawmakers decided on Tuesday, in a step that will be
met with relief in Washington.
Lawmakers from the Parliament’s trade committee will vote on Thursday on
legislation to scrap tariffs on U.S. industrial goods — representing the
backbone of the EU’s pledge in the trade deal reached at President Donald
Trump’s Turnberry golf resort in Scotland last summer.
Bernd Lange, chair of the trade committee, said Tuesday’s discussion had been
“quite smooth” and had achieved a broad understanding. “Therefore we will go for
the vote on Thursday,” he told POLITICO.
The decision unblocks a weeks-long deadlock, as EU lawmakers balked at approving
a deal that appeared at risk of unraveling. First, the U.S. Supreme Court in
February struck down most of the tariffs on which the Turnberry accord was
based. Then Trump’s threats to annex Greenland and slap an embargo on Spain
further soured sentiment.
Lawmakers from Socialists & Democrats, liberals and Greens have pushed for
reassurances from Washington before moving to a vote, while the center-right
European People’s Party (EPP) is adamant that the deal must be approved quickly
to avoid retaliation by Trump and bring stability to businesses.
“We have a big majority today,” said EPP negotiator Željana Zovko.
A date for a final plenary vote will be determined on Wednesday, said Lange,
adding that this could take place in March or April. Only then would the
European Parliament enter negotiations with EU capitals and the European
Commission on a compromise that would finally implement the deal.
Lange, a veteran German Social Democrat who is also the lead lawmaker on the
file, proposed new amendments to the legislation that won the backing of the
EPP.
He has said that his changes mainly included stronger language on the EU’s own
protections in case Washington fails to keep its side of the deal.
“Sunrise clause, and sunset, and suspension, and so on, some fine-tuning,” Lange
had told POLITICO on Monday.
Lange will travel to Washington after the vote on Thursday, and is expected to
meet Trade Representative Jamieson Greer on Friday, along with a delegation of
EU lawmakers.
LONDON — Trade Secretary Peter Kyle is expected to announce the U.K.’s steel
strategy at Tata Steel UK’s mill in Port Talbot on Thursday.
The strategy will set out new protections for Britain’s steel sector, slashing
quotas on imports of many products from overseas while raising duties outside
those caps to 50 percent, two people familiar with the announcement told
POLITICO.
“The tariff will be doubled to 50 percent in line with what the Europeans have
done, the Canadians have done, the Americans have done,” a senior business
representative familiar with the plans said. There will “be some exemptions” for
products British steelmakers don’t make, they added.
British officials have told both U.K. steel producers and downstream importers,
who use steel in everything from construction to automotive manufacturing, to
expect a 50 percent duty outside of new quotas in a move “likely to be similar
to the EU,” said a second industry figure.
Both industry figures were granted anonymity as they were not authorized to
speak publicly.
Last October, the EU announced plans to reduce its quotas on foreign steel
imports by almost half and levy a 50 percent tariff on goods exceeding the cap.
The move is part of an overhaul of so-called safeguard protections that expire
in both the EU and U.K., under World Trade Organization rules, at the end of
June.
The U.K.’s strategy setting out the future of the sector has been repeatedly
delayed. On Thursday, Kyle will set out a new scheme of trade protections to
replace the so-called steel safeguards scheme.
A Tata Steel UK executive told lawmakers in early February that the government
“had eight weeks to save the British steel industry” by shielding it with new
protectionist measures from a glut of cheap imports from countries like China.
Steel importers, however, are unlikely to get the full gamut of exemptions under
the scheme they had hoped for, said the second industry figure, noting they’re
“prepared for the worst.” The government will “jeopardize downstream
manufacturers if they make the import restrictions too prohibitive,” they said.
“There will be some exemptions, but not as many as they hoped for,” said the
senior business representative.
“This government has been crystal clear in committing to a bright and
sustainable future for steelmaking and steel jobs in the U.K., and we will
publish a steel strategy shortly setting out how we can achieve a sustainable
future for the sector,” said a government spokesperson.