CBAM certificate exemption debate exposes EU steel and aluminium fault lines

Assofermet

European metals companies are intensifying calls for a CBAM certificate exemption as the carbon border regime nears full implementation. The demand for a temporary CBAM certificate exemption reflects deep concern that missing benchmark values and default parameters could destabilise trade in steel and aluminium. Without clarity on CBAM certificate obligations, EU importers are being asked to place orders blind, with no way to predict final embedded carbon costs.

Importers warn of blind CBAM exposure and supply risk

Assofermet argues that a CBAM certificate exemption is needed for imports cleared from 1 January 2026 until several months after default values are published. The association stresses that the absence of final CBAM benchmarks forces buyers to commit to steel and aluminium imports today without knowing future certificate prices. As a result, many traders see the current framework as an unacceptable risk, especially for long-lead contracts and financially constrained small and mid-sized firms.

The proposed CBAM certificate exemption would cover a transition window of up to five months after the release of default values. During this period, importers would not need to surrender CBAM certificates, allowing them to honour existing supply contracts and avoid sudden cost shocks. However, policy uncertainty remains high, as Brussels continues to refine CBAM methodologies, rules for recognising third-country carbon prices, and the interaction with free ETS allocations. Meanwhile, downstream users fear that simultaneous measures, including “melted and poured” origin rules and potential extensions of steel and aluminium safeguards, could combine with CBAM to sharply reduce available import volumes.

Downstream steel users fear a pincer movement on competitiveness

Metals distributors and processors warn that CBAM certificate obligations, when combined with new safeguards, risk forming a regulatory pincer on the EU manufacturing base. Assofermet says the current steel and metals action plan prioritises primary producers while overlooking the needs of re-rollers, processors and trading firms that depend on diverse import flows. If imports drop too sharply, many downstream players could face supply gaps, higher input costs and further margin compression in an already weak economic environment.

A parallel warning comes from steel distributors who highlight a surge in imports of steel-intensive finished goods that fall outside current trade defence instruments and CBAM coverage. Products such as drive axles, electric motor components, fabricated assemblies and metal furniture embed significant steel content but enter the EU under less restrictive regimes. Industry groups argue this asymmetry accelerates deindustrialisation: raw and semi-finished steel face tight controls and rising costs, while finished imports gain a competitive edge. Many therefore call not only for targeted CBAM certificate exemption windows, but also for broader reform to extend CBAM and trade defence tools to steel-containing goods with high import growth and proven steel intensity.

The Metalnomist Commentary

The struggle over CBAM certificate exemption shows how climate policy can collide with industrial realities when timelines and technical details are misaligned. Unless benchmarks, default values and scope definitions are finalised quickly, the EU risks pushing critical downstream manufacturers into supply insecurity just as it needs them to invest in green technologies. A more calibrated rollout, including temporary exemptions and better coverage of steel-intensive finished goods, will be essential to protect both decarbonisation goals and Europe’s industrial backbone.