India's Retaliatory Measures Against EU Steel Tariffs

India has informed the World Trade Organization (WTO) of its decision to impose retaliatory measures against the European Union's (EU's) steel tariffs. These tariffs, which were initially introduced in 2018 as provisional safeguard measures to protect EU steel producers from global overcapacity and a surge in exports, were extended until June 2026. After years of bilateral discussions with the EU failed to resolve the issue, India now seeks to take action, potentially affecting the trade relationship between the two economic regions.

Background

The EU's safeguard measures were first imposed in 2018 on 26 categories of steel products in response to high global steel overcapacity, with particular concern over surging Chinese steel exports routed through Asian countries. These measures took the form of tariff-rate quotas (TRQs), imposing an additional 25% duty on steel imports exceeding quota limits. Initially set to expire in June 2021, these measures were extended to June 2024 and later prolonged to June 2026.

Under WTO rules, safeguard measures are limited to a maximum of eight years, giving the EU until June 2026 to legally impose such duties. However, India has opposed these extensions, citing that the measures have already been deemed inconsistent with WTO norms by a dispute settlement panel.

Impact on Indian Exports

Over the five-year period from 2018 to 2023, the safeguard measures have significantly impacted India's steel exports, particularly to the EU market. Key facts:

• India’s cumulative trade losses have been estimated at $4.4 billion due to the tariffs.
• The EU has collected $1.1 billion in duties on Indian steel imports during this period.

Indian steel manufacturers, including both large and small firms, have faced significant barriers to entry in the EU market, resulting in a loss of competitiveness. This has created a ripple effect throughout India's steel supply chain, impacting not only producers but also related industries like logistics and raw material suppliers. The Indian steel sector's reliance on global exports, with the EU being a major market, further magnifies the impact of these tariffs.

India’s Retaliatory Measures

In response, India is proposing retaliatory tariffs on select EU-origin products, equivalent to the duties collected by the EU. While India has not specified which products will be targeted, the WTO filing suggests that the tariff imposition will match the $1.1 billion collected by the EU. These measures could affect various EU industries, from high-tech goods to consumer products, depending on which sectors India chooses to target. The retaliatory tariffs are a significant escalation of the trade conflict, reflecting India's determination to counteract what it views as an unfair trade practice.

India has emphasized that it reserves the right to impose these retaliatory tariffs immediately and adjust both the products and tariff rates depending on the circumstances. By taking a measured approach, India leaves the door open for continued negotiations but signals its willingness to take decisive action if necessary.

Economic and Strategic Implications

1. For the Indian Steel Industry: The EU is one of India’s major steel export markets. The imposition of tariffs on Indian steel since 2018 has not only reduced market access but also undermined India's competitiveness in an increasingly protectionist global steel market. India's retaliatory measures could, in theory, provide leverage for reopening negotiations with the EU, but there is a risk of further trade disruptions if the situation escalates. Indian steel producers will need to explore alternative markets or diversify their product offerings to mitigate the long-term effects.
2. For India-EU Relations: While both regions are significant trading partners, the trade spat over steel could harm broader economic relations. In recent years, the EU and India have made attempts to strengthen ties, particularly through the proposed Free Trade Agreement (FTA) negotiations. However, this tariff dispute may hinder progress in such negotiations, especially if both parties are unable to find a mutually agreeable solution.
3. For Global Trade Dynamics: The extension of safeguard duties by the EU is reflective of the broader trend toward protectionism in global trade, especially in the steel industry. With global overcapacity and demand imbalances in steel markets, trade tensions between major economies are becoming more frequent. As global demand for steel fluctuates, India and other nations will continue to face challenges in navigating protectionist policies.
4. Possible Outcomes: Resolution through Bilateral Engagement: If India’s retaliatory measures lead to renewed negotiations, there is potential for a revised arrangement that would lift or relax the steel tariffs. This would benefit both economies by stabilizing trade. Escalation and WTO Intervention: Should retaliatory measures be implemented without a resolution, the situation may escalate to formal dispute resolution through the WTO. Both sides risk further economic damage, particularly in industries directly affected by any new tariffs.

Conclusion

India's decision to impose retaliatory measures against the EU's steel tariffs marks a turning point in the ongoing trade dispute between the two regions. With cumulative trade losses reaching $4.4 billion, India is justified in seeking relief through equivalent tariff imposition. However, the move also carries risks, including the potential for further deterioration in India-EU trade relations and harm to sectors beyond steel.

As both nations remain key players in global trade, the resolution of this dispute will require careful negotiation to balance the interests of their respective industries. The outcome of India's retaliatory measures will not only impact the steel sector but could also influence future global trade dynamics, especially regarding the use of safeguard measures under WTO rules.

?