Mixed reactions as Biden blocks takeover of US Steel by Japan’s Nippon Steel

A drone view shows Gary Works, the largest integrated steel mill in the US, which is operated by US Steel, in Gary, Indiana, on December 12, 2024. (REUTERS)
Short Url
Updated 04 January 2025
Follow

Mixed reactions as Biden blocks takeover of US Steel by Japan’s Nippon Steel

  • Biden cites national security as reason for blocking sale of the US' third largest steel company
  • Companies call decision a ‘violation of due process’, steelworkers union praises it as a good move

WASHINGTON/TOKYO: US President Joe Biden blocked Nippon Steel’s proposed $14.9 billion purchase of US Steel on Friday, citing national security concerns, dealing a potentially fatal blow to the contentious plan after a year of review. The deal was announced in December 2023 and almost immediately ran into opposition across the political spectrum ahead of the Nov. 5 US presidential election. Both then-candidate Donald Trump and Biden vowed to block the purchase of the storied American company, the first to be valued at more than $1 billion. US Steel once controlled most of the country’s steel output but is now the third-largest US steelmaker and 24th biggest worldwide.
“A strong domestically owned and operated steel industry represents an essential national security priority and is critical for resilient supply chains,” Biden said. “Without domestic steel production and domestic steel workers, our nation is less strong and less secure.” Nippon, the world’s fourth-largest steelmaker, paid a hefty premium to clinch the deal and made several concessions, including a last-ditch gambit to give the US government veto power over changes to output, but to no avail.
In a statement, Nippon and US Steel blasted Biden’s decision, calling it a “clear violation of due process” and a political move, and saying they would “take all appropriate action” to protect their legal rights.
Pittsburgh-based US Steel had warned that thousands of jobs would be at risk without the deal.
US Steel CEO David Burritt said late on Friday the company planned to fight Biden’s decision, which he termed “shameful and corrupt.” He added that the president had insulted Japan and also refused to meet with the US company to learn its point of view.
“The Chinese Communist Party leaders in Beijing are dancing in the streets,” Burritt added.
The United Steelworkers union, which opposed the merger from the outset, praised Biden’s decision, with USW President David McCall saying the union has “no doubt that it’s the right move for our members and our national security.”
White House spokesperson John Kirby defended the decision.
“This isn’t about Japan. This is about US steelmaking and keeping one of the largest steel producers in the United States an American-owned company,” Kirby said, rejecting suggestions the decision could raise questions about the reliability of the US as a partner. Nippon Steel has previously threatened legal action if the deal was blocked. Lawyers have said Nippon Steel’s vow to mount a legal challenge against the US government would be tough.
The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States spent months reviewing the deal for national security risks but referred the decision to Biden in December, after failing to reach consensus.
It is unclear whether another buyer will emerge. US Steel has reported nine consecutive quarters of falling profits amid a global downturn in the steel industry. US-based Cleveland-Cliffs, which previously bid for the company, has seen its share price fall to the point where its market value is lower than that of US Steel.
Shares of US Steel closed down 6.5 percent at $30.47 on the New York Stock Exchange.
A spokesperson for President-elect Trump, who also vowed to block the deal, did not immediately comment on Friday.

Key Asia ally
Japanese industry and trade minister Yoji Muto expressed disappointment over Biden’s decision, saying it was both difficult to understand and regrettable.
“There are strong concerns from the economic circles of both Japan and the US, and especially from Japanese industry regarding future investments between Japan and the US, and the Japanese government has no choice but to take this matter seriously,” he said in a statement. Japan is a key US ally in the Indo-Pacific region, where China’s economic and military rise and threats from North Korea have raised concerns in Washington. In November, Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba urged Biden to approve the merger to avoid marring efforts to improve economic ties, Reuters exclusively reported.
US Steel and Nippon Steel had sought to assuage concerns over the merger. Nippon Steel offered to move its US headquarters to Pittsburgh and promised to honor all agreements in place between US Steel and the USW. A source familiar with the matter said this week that Nippon Steel had also proposed giving the US government veto power over any potential cuts to US Steel’s production capacity, as part of its efforts to secure Biden’s approval.
Nippon Steel faces a $565 million penalty payment to US Steel following the deal’s collapse, which is set to prompt a major rethink of the Japanese company’s overseas-focused growth strategy.
With the acquisition of US Steel, Nippon Steel aimed to raise its global output capacity to 85 million metric tons a year from the current 65 million, nearing its long-term goal of taking capacity to 100 million tons.
“The Nippon deal would have increased the ability to have more competition for domestic steel,” said Chester Spatt, a finance professor at Pittsburgh’s Carnegie Mellon University. “The deal could have potentially created a competitive advantage, and we should have encouraged it.”
Democrats in Congress praised Biden’s decision. Senator Sherrod Brown said the deal “represented a clear threat to America’s national and economic security and our ability to enforce our trade laws.”
Jason Furman, who was an economic adviser to President Barack Obama, said Biden’s claim that Japan’s investment in an American steel company was a threat to national security was “a pathetic and craven cave to special interests that will make America less prosperous and safe. I’m sorry to see him betraying our allies while abusing the law.”


Trump cuts India tariffs as Modi ‘agrees’ to stop buying Russian oil

Updated 13 sec ago
Follow

Trump cuts India tariffs as Modi ‘agrees’ to stop buying Russian oil

  • US will impose an 18 percent tariff on Indian goods, down from the earlier 50 percent punitive levy
  • Withdrawal from Russian oil may affect India’s relations with BRICS, expert says

NEW DELHI: The US and India have announced reaching a trade agreement after months of friction, with President Donald Trump saying that Prime Minister Narendra Modi had “agreed” to halt purchases of Russian oil.

In August, Trump accused India, which imports most of its crude oil, of funding Moscow’s war in Ukraine and subjected it to a combined tariff rate of about 50 percent on most of the exports.

Following a call with Modi on Monday, Trump took to social media to say that he would cut with immediate effect US levies on Indian goods to 18 percent after Modi “agreed to stop buying Russian Oil, and to buy much more from the United States and, potentially, Venezuela.”

At the same time, India, Trump wrote, would “reduce their Tariffs and Non Tariff Barriers against the United States, to ZERO,” committing to buy “over $500 BILLION DOLLARS of US Energy, Technology, Agricultural, Coal, and many other products.”

Modi confirmed the agreement on social media, saying: “Made in India products will now have a reduced tariff of 18 percent,” without commenting on Russian oil or duty-free imports of American goods.

When the US announced its punitive tariffs last year, India quickly moved forward with free trade negotiations with other countries — signing a deal with Oman and finalizing negotiations with New Zealand and the EU.

While the agreements were expected to partially offset the loss of exports to the US, economists did not expect they would immediately mitigate it, as shifting supply chains takes time.

The newly announced agreement with the US will therefore offer short-term relief for Indian exporters — especially of textiles, gems, jewelry and marine products — who were facing the threat of a market exit.

“In that case, the trade deal with the US is a welcome step. It provides short-term relief, allowing India to continue exporting to the US without being forced to exit the US market and diversify with a huge transition cost,” said Anisree Suresh, geoeconomics researcher at the Takshashila Institution.

“However, one shouldn’t look at it as a comprehensive long-term trade deal like the one India signed with the EU. The unpredictability of the Trump administration remains a major concern, regardless of whether there is a trade deal with the US ... India cannot treat this deal the same as other FTAs, as it is limited in scope and subject to reversal.”

When the US imposed its punitive tariffs on India, about 66 percent of total Indian exports were subject to that rate. Overall, India recorded a negative margin of 19.5 percent, meaning its exports were taxed more heavily than those of its competitors.

“From that point of view, Indian goods will have a larger market over there. However, there’s a problem when we talk about a 0 percent tariff on the US,” said Prof. Arun Kumar, a development economist.

“The US will be able to export a lot more to India, and therefore it will affect our production within the economy. And that will be a setback, so while exports may rise, the internal economy may actually suffer because of this decrease in tariffs on American goods. And especially if it affects agriculture.”

The sudden withdrawal from India’s partnership with Russia may not have a serious economic impact but politically could affect New Delhi’s relations, also with other countries, especially those from BRICS — a grouping that besides India and Russia includes also Brazil and China, and is the most powerful geopolitical forum outside of the Western world.

“You can always substitute Russian oil with some other oil, but I think it’s more of a strategic question, because India and Russia have had long-standing relationships, and if we bend to US pressure and reduce purchases from Russia, then it will affect in future also our relationship with Russia, because we will not be seen as a stable ally,” Kumar said.

“BRICS nations will not trust India very much in the future ... and that’s what Trump wants. He wants to disrupt BRICS. That’s what he has been doing right since the beginning to divide nations and deal with them individually.”