The United States imposes steel and aluminum tariffs on national security grounds. Under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, the Commerce Department found in 2018 that imports threatened to weaken the domestic industries the country relies on for defense and critical infrastructure, and the President acted. The stated aim is to keep enough U.S. steelmaking and smelting running, measured as a sustained 80% capacity utilization. Supporters and critics disagree on the trade-off.
Key Takeaways
- Steel and aluminum tariffs rest on a Section 232 national security finding.
- The stated target is a sustained 80% capacity utilization.
- Supporters cite recovering utilization; critics cite higher input costs.
- Coverage grew to derivatives to prevent circumvention.
The Legal Test Behind the Tariffs
Section 232 lets the President adjust imports when Commerce finds they “threaten to impair” national security. The statute tells Commerce to consider the close relation between the nation’s economic welfare and its security, so the health of an industry can count. In 2018 the tariffs were set at 25% on steel and 10% on aluminum. A 1976 Supreme Court decision, discussed by CRS in its review of the 2026 tariff ruling, recognized that Section 232 allows monetary measures on imports.
The Case For and Against
| Question | What supporters point to | What critics point to |
|---|---|---|
| Is capacity recovering? | Steel utilization rose from about 72.3% (2017) to about 77.2%; aluminum from about 39% to about 50.4% (Commerce, 2026) | Aluminum remains far below the 80% goal after eight years |
| Are imports falling? | In 2025, steel article imports fell 21% and aluminum 5% by value (CRS) | Lower imports can mean higher costs for U.S. manufacturers that use metal |
| Who pays? | Domestic producers gain pricing room to invest | Buyers of steel and aluminum inputs, and their customers |
| Trading partners? | Pressure to address global overcapacity | Retaliation, such as Canada’s tariffs on U.S. steel and aluminum |
Figures are from Proclamation 11021 and the Congressional Research Service. We present both sides without taking a position.
Why the Tariffs Expanded to Derivatives
Tariffs on raw metal alone can be sidestepped by importing products made from it. That is why the program grew from metal articles to more than 400 derivative product codes in 2025 and, from April 2026, to duties on the full value of those products. The government’s reasoning is to prevent circumvention; critics argue it pushes the cost onto a much wider range of manufacturers.
Why It Matters to EV Charger Buyers
Steel and aluminum show up in charger housings, pedestals, mounting hardware and cabinets. Understanding the national security basis helps explain why these tariffs have outlasted several changes of policy, and why buyers should plan for them rather than wait them out. Our guides on US customs for EV chargers and OEM unit cost drivers show how duty flows into landed cost. EVDANCE, a Shenzhen manufacturer since 2011 with its own factory, can provide material data for every model in our product range. Rates and rules here are as of October 2026; confirm the current proclamation and HTS notes before you ship.
Frequently Asked Questions
When did steel and aluminum tariffs start?
In March 2018, at 25% on steel and 10% on aluminum. Both rose to 50% in June 2025.
Why is copper now included?
A separate 2025 Section 232 investigation found copper imports threatened national security; copper tariffs began August 1, 2025.
Are steel and aluminum tariffs about trade deficits?
Not formally. Section 232 tariffs rest on a national security finding, unlike tariffs based on trade imbalances.
Related Reading
- Importing EV Chargers Into the US: Customs, HTS and Section 301
- What Drives the Unit Cost of an OEM EV Charger
- Who Makes EV Chargers?
- FOB vs DDP: How to Import EV Chargers From China Without Surprises
