In this article, South African Iron and Steel Institute (Saisi) secretary-general Charles Dednam writes that South Africa should seek to establish a growing, competitive steel value chain, but this requires fair competition at the border and accountable performance throughout the domestic industry.

South Africa needs a steel policy that sustains competitive primary production, strengthens downstream manufacturing and protects the industrial employment supported by both. Treating these objectives as competing interests overlooks the interdependence of the steel value chain.

Saisi recognises that downstream industries account for the overwhelming majority of direct employment in the metals and engineering sector. The Steel and Engineering industries Federation of Southern Africa (Seifsa) reported in January 2024 that about 90% of the sector’s 362 871 jobs were downstream, with the balance upstream. That employment profile reinforces the importance of competitive steel inputs, reliable supply and a functioning domestic production base.

However, comparing direct employment upstream and downstream does not, on its own, establish the economic contribution of primary steelmaking. Steel production is capital-intensive, while fabrication and manufacturing generally employ more people across a wider range of activities. The policy question is how these activities can reinforce one another – not which part of the value chain should survive at the expense of the other.

PRIMARY STEEL ENABLES MANUFACTURING BEYOND THE MILL GATE
A competitive domestic steel industry provides a platform for fabrication, construction, engineering, automotive production, mining equipment and infrastructure development. Its contribution must, therefore, be assessed not only by employment inside steelworks, but also by the production, investment and industrial capabilities it helps sustain.

Local production can provide manufacturers with supply options, technical collaboration and access to products suited to South African applications. These benefits depend on producers delivering competitive commercial terms, consistent quality, reliable lead times and the grades customers require. Domestic production cannot be defended independently of those obligations.

Seifsa has highlighted the wider economic consequences of contraction in the sector, citing an employment multiplier of six and an induced economic multiplier of 2.7. These are sector-wide measures, not evidence that every primary steel job automatically creates six downstream jobs. Nevertheless, they demonstrate why the consequences of industrial decline extend beyond the employees directly affected.

TRADE PROTECTION MUST BE ASSESSED AGAINST ITS TIMING AND RESULTS
The existence of several trade instruments today does not mean that equivalent protection existed throughout the period in which the industry experienced injury.

South Africa’s steel protection developed in stages:

•Late 2015 and 2016: Ordinary customs duties were introduced across important steel product categories. These provided meaningful support; ArcelorMittal South Africa's (AMSA’s) 2016 interim results attributed part of its sales-volume improvement to the introduction of 10% import duties.

•July 2024: A provisional 9% safeguard was introduced on certain hot-rolled flat steel products. The investigation covered July 2020 to June 2023, during which imports of the products concerned reportedly increased by 105%.

•May 2025: A definitive safeguard on specified hot-rolled steel products took effect at 13% for its first year.

•March 2026: Definitive anti-dumping duties were implemented on specified hot-rolled flat products from China, Japan and Taiwan, following the International Trade Administration Commission of South Africa's (Itac’s) determination of dumping and material injury to the Southern African Customs Union industry.

This chronology matters. Relief introduced after injury has accumulated cannot be treated as though it had protected production, investment and employment throughout the preceding years.

It also does not follow that earlier measures had no effect. The appropriate assessment is whether each intervention arrived in time, addressed the relevant trade distortion, covered the products and origins responsible, and was effectively enforced.

The cumulative application of ordinary duties, safeguards and anti-dumping measures must similarly be evaluated product by product. These instruments address different circumstances; their practical effect depends on the applicable tariff classification, origin, exporter, implementation date, exclusions and rebate provisions. A headline total is not a substitute for that assessment.

IMPORTS CONTINUE TO CAPTURE A SUBSTANTIAL SHARE OF DEMAND
Saisi’s current assessment projects that imports will account for about 45% of South Africa’s primary steel market in 2026, with import penetration in flat steel well above 50%.

These estimates point to a market in which imports remain a substantial source of supply notwithstanding the trade measures in place. They warrant a detailed assessment of the interaction between import pricing, domestic supply performance, demand conditions and the effective coverage of protection.

Rising import penetration must not automatically be attributed to unfair trade. Some imports meet legitimate requirements for products or specifications not available locally. Others may replace domestic supply during production interruptions. These categories must be distinguished from imports that displace available, competitive domestic production.

Equally, substantial and persistent import penetration cannot be reconciled with a simple assumption that the existence of duties has insulated local producers from international competition.

SOUTH AFRICA’S PRIMARY STEEL INDUSTRY EXTENDS BEYOND ONE PRODUCER
South Africa’s flat carbon steel production base includes AMSA’s Vanderbijlpark operations, Scaw Metals and Columbus Stainless.

Columbus has manufactured carbon steel alongside stainless steel since the supply disruptions of 2020. In November 2024, it reported cumulative carbon steel production of almost one-million tonnes in slab, coil and plate, while also identifying Scaw Metals’ additional hot-rolled coil manufacturing capacity.

These producers do not necessarily supply identical grades, dimensions or volumes. Nevertheless, the development of additional domestic production means that steel trade policy cannot accurately be presented solely as support for one company.

The relevant assessment must consider the domestic industry, competition between suppliers, product availability and the needs of steel users.

GLOBAL EXCESS CAPACITY PLACES THE ENTIRE VALUE CHAIN UNDER PRESSURE
South Africa’s challenges are unfolding against an increasingly distorted international steel market.

The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development's (OECD’s) 'Steel Outlook 2026' projects global steelmaking excess capacity of 745-million tonnes by 2028. It also reports that Chinese steel exports reached a record 131-million tonnes in 2025, an increase of 153% from 2020.

The consequences extend beyond primary steel. The OECD identifies exports of steel-intensive downstream products as another channel through which excess capacity affects manufacturing in other countries. South African fabricators can therefore face competitive pressure both through their steel inputs and through imported finished products.

Protecting the competitiveness of the value chain requires attention to both.

ENFORCEMENT DETERMINES WHETHER REMEDIES WORK
Published duties are only one part of an effective trade response.

The OECD has warned that circumvention and trade diversion undermine steel trade measures internationally, including through third-country processing and re-exporting, or product modifications intended to place goods outside the scope of duties.

In South Africa, suspected misdeclaration, under-invoicing, incorrect origin declarations and circumvention require coordinated, evidence-based investigation. These practices must not be assumed in every low-priced transaction, but credible warning signs must receive an effective response.

Saisi calls for stronger cooperation between the South African Revenue Service, Itac, the Department of Trade, Industry and Competition and industry to verify product classifications, specifications, origin and declared customs values.

Where duties are evaded, compliant importers, domestic steelmakers, manufacturers and the fiscus all have an interest in effective enforcement.

COMPETITIVE SUPPLY AND FAIR TRADE MUST ADVANCE TOGETHER
Saisi supports a balanced programme that:

•Ensures timely investigations and implementation of justified trade remedies;

•Strengthens customs enforcement and addresses substantiated circumvention;

•Monitors domestic deliveries, imports, prices, product availability and capacity utilisation;

•Requires domestic producers to deliver reliable supply, consistent quality and competitive commercial terms;

•Provides prompt, workable access to rebates where required products are unavailable locally;

•Addresses electricity, logistics, municipal services and weak investment demand; and 

•Examines imports of fabricated and steel-containing products alongside primary steel imports.

Rebate provisions published in May 2026 already recognise the need for access to specified steel products where local supply is unavailable, subject to the relevant permit requirements. These mechanisms must operate predictably for legitimate users.

South Africa’s objective should be a growing, competitive steel value chain that retains industrial capability and expands employment. That requires fair competition at the border and accountable performance throughout the domestic industry.