Xylenes

SINGAPORE (ICIS)–As China steps up efforts to meet its dual carbon targets, hydrogen is becoming a practical and strategic tool to cut emissions from the country’s highly carbon-intensive cement industry. Cement industry under carbon pressure From hydrogen as substitute to carbon utilization for new value Five-year window open for low-carbon pilots Cement accounts for around 13-14% of China's total carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, ranking it the third-largest industrial source after power and steel. Facing mounting pressure from both international carbon regulations and domestic policy, China can tap hydrogen as a promising route toward meaningful emissions reductions. China’s cement industry is estimated to have emitted about 1.20 billion tonnes of CO2 in 2023, down for a third straight year. Emissions stood at 1.23 billion tonnes of CO2 in 2020, when China’s cement clinker output peaked at 1.58 billion tonnes, and cement output hit 2.38 billion tonnes, according to China Building Materials Federation. Around 60% of this comes from the chemical reaction when limestone is heated to make clinker, a process that is difficult to change in the short term due to raw material constraints. Another 35% comes from fossil fuels combustion to generate heat for clinker production, which is a key substitution target. As of March 2025, China's national ETS (Emissions Trading Scheme) expanded to include cement, alongside steel and aluminum, hence, the cement sector is also now fully exposed to carbon pricing. However, despite policy urgency, due to technical and equipment retrofitting complexities, the sector has moved slowly. The next five years will represent a pivotal window to scale pilot projects and validate decarbonization pathways. TWO ROUTES: CLEANER COMBUSTION & CARBON USE Hydrogen can help reduce emissions from cement mainly in two ways: fossil fuel substitution and carbon utilization. Fuel substitution with hydrogen is the immediate decarbonization leverage. Hydrogen can directly replace coal or gas in kilns. Its high calorific value and zero-carbon combustion profile make it an ideal fuel. However, because of its weak flame radiation and explosion risk, hydrogen is usually mixed with other fuels in current tests. European players lead the change: Cemex, a leading global building materials manufacturer, completed hydrogen retrofits at all its European cement plants by 2020, targeting a 5% CO2 reduction by 2030. Heidelberg Materials, another cement giant actively exploring hydrogen applications, achieved 100% net-zero fuel operation at its UK Ribblesdale plant in 2021, using a mix of 39% hydrogen, 12% meat and bone meal, and 49% glycerin. Another option is to combine CO2 capture from kiln exhausts with renewable hydrogen to synthesize e-methanol or e-methane. E-methanol and e-methane are synthetic fuels made by combining captured CO2 with renewable hydrogen using renewable electricity. LafargeHolcim, as one of the largest cement producers in the world, has multiple hydrogen decarbonisation projects across Europe. It is leading with its HyScale100 project in Germany, which aims to install electrolyzers at its Heide refinery, and combine electrolyzed hydrogen with CO2 from its Lägerdorf plant to produce e-methanol starting 2026. This model not only reduces emissions but also builds links across industries to create a circular carbon economy. CHINA: FROM POLICY PUSH TO PILOT PROJECTS Policy support is gaining momentum in China. The 2024 Special Action Plan for Cement Energy Saving and Carbon Reduction aims to raise alternative fuel use to 10% by 2025, explicitly naming hydrogen. The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) sets out a 2030 goal to commercialize low-carbon kilns using hydrogen. Amid the decarbonization policy signals, China’s major cement producers are also stepping up: The Beijing Building Materials Academy of Scientific Research (BBMA) under Beijing Building Materials Group (BBMG) completed China’s first industrial trial in December 2024 using >70% hydrogen in calcination. Anhui Conch Cement Company used 5% hydrogen in pre-calciners, cutting 0.01 tonnes of CO2 per tonne of clinker, albeit with an added cost of yuan (CNY) 32.7/tonne. Tangshan Jidong Cement is building a full hydrogen supply chain in partnership with China National Chemical Engineering. Hydrogen is also being produced on-site using waste heat from clinker kilns to power electrolysis – a promising approach to localize supply and enhance energy efficiency. CHALLENGES STILL AHEAD Despite policy and pilot momentum, commercialization hydrogen use in China’s cement sector still faces barriers. Renewable hydrogen costs are too high for wide use. Studies suggest it would need to fall below $0.37/kg to be cost-effective in cement under carbon trading. Hydrogen is hard to store and transport, and its flame instability requires kiln retrofits and safety systems. China also lacks unified national technical standards for using hydrogen in cement, slowing adoption. Hydrogen may not yet be ready for mass rollout, but it is clearly part of the future of cement in China. As production costs fall, carbon markets grow, and hydrogen technologies mature, hydrogen could become a real driver of change in one of China’s hardest-to-decarbonize sectors. Insight article by Patricia Tao

10-Jun-2025

SINGAPORE (ICIS)–China's exports to the US are expected to rebound in June as exporters ramp up frontloading efforts before the 90-day trade truce between the two global economic superpowers expires in August. China May exports to US shrink 34.5% year on year China's imports from the US fall by 18.6% US-bound freight rates from China remain elevated Despite the tariff rollback in mid-May, US-bound exports fell by 34.5% year on year in May to $28.8 billion, a sharper decline than the 20.9% fall recorded in April, official data showed on 9 June. "The boost from the US tariff rollback should be more significant in June, as it might take a couple of weeks to restore the logistics network that was disrupted by what had nearly become a US-China trade embargo," Japan's Nomura Global Markets Research said in note. "This could be because, as bilateral trade collapsed in April amid exceptionally high tariffs imposed by the two countries, many container ships for US-China shipping lanes were re-routed to other lanes." A 90-day trade truce between China and the US was agreed on 12 May but ongoing negotiations face threats from slow rare-earth shipment approvals. US tariffs on Chinese goods were at 30% from 14 May to 12 August, while China levies 10% duties on US imports. The sharp recovery in container bookings and freight rates also indicate an incoming rebound in US-bound exports in June, according to Nomura. "The temporary trade truce will provide room for exports to strengthen in June-August before the momentum reverses with payback from the strong frontloading to-date," said Ho Woei Chen, an economist at Singapore-based UOB Global Economics & Markets Research. China’s imports from the US fell by 18.6% year on year to $10.8 billion in May, a steeper decline than the 13.9% fall recorded in April, "perhaps due to similar issues with near-term shipping capacity", Nomura noted. As a result, the US share in China’s total exports fell further to 9.1% in May from 14.7% for the whole of 2024. Following substantial export contraction and a less severe import decline, China’s trade surplus with the US decreased further to $18.0 billion in May from $20.5 billion in April. OVERALL EXPORT GROWTH SLOWS China's overall exports fell by 4.8% year on year to $316.1 billion in May, slowing from the 8.1% growth in April. Imports fell by a steeper rate of 3.4% year on year to $212.9 billion in May, from the 0.2% contraction in April. China’s overall trade surplus increased 25% year on year to $103.2 billion in May. Export growth to its largest market, ASEAN, which is also widely viewed as a major rerouting pathway for Chinas’ US-bound shipments, slowed to 14.8% year on year in May from 21.1% in April. This was mainly a result of base effects, as growth of exports to ASEAN surged to 24.8% year on year in May last year from 13.0% a month earlier, Nomura noted. Among ASEAN countries, Vietnam and the Philippines took in higher volumes of Chinese exports in May. China’s exports to the EU, Canada and Australia improved in May, as exporters shifted to developed markets other than the US. "The acceleration of exports to other economies has helped China's exports remain relatively buoyant in the face of the trade war," Lynn Song, chief economist for Greater China at Dutch banking and financial information services firm ING said in a note. EXPORTS IN MAJOR CATEGORIES MIXED IN MAY China’s ships and semiconductors registered solid double-digit export growth, while shipments of motor vehicles and auto parts also picked up. Demand for chips, in particular, continued to benefit from the pause in US tariffs on technology products such as smartphones, computers, and semiconductors. However, exports of rare earth materials shrunk sharply, and products such as handbags, footwear, toys, and furniture declined due to a drop in US demand. US-CHINA TRADE TALKS RESUME Following a rapid re-escalation in late May, trade tensions between the US and China eased on 5 June following a phone call between US President Donald Trump and China President Xi Jinping. It set the stage for a new round of dialogue between their top trade officials in London this week. Ahead of the trade talks, China reportedly approved temporary export licenses to rare earth suppliers of the top three US automakers, as Trump claimed Xi agreed to restart the flow of rare earth minerals. "As US and China resumed trade negotiations this week, China's Commerce Ministry confirmed that it has granted approval to some applications for the export of rare earths which will likely lead to a recovery in rare earth exports in June," UOB's Ho said. "Following the Phase 1 trade deal in 2020, we think an eventual trade deal this time would likely commit China to reduce its trade surplus with the US by increasing its US imports," she said. While the baseline tariff rate for China is likely to be raised, the two countries may find common ground on the Trump administration's concerns regarding China's involvement in the fentanyl trade, according to Ho. "This could potentially lead to a removal of the 20% fentanyl-related tariff, in the optimistic scenario. Thus, it is conceivable that the “final” US tariff rate on imports from China may settle between 30% to 60%." CONTAINER FREIGHT RATES ON THE RISE US-bound freight rates have remained elevated, while growth in weekly container throughput dropped to 1.3% year on year on 8 June from 10.2% a week earlier, which "dims the outlook of China’s overall exports", Nomura said. The China Containerized Freight Index (CCFI), which tracks average shipping prices from China's 10 major ports, rose 3.3% week on week as of 6 June, it said. This included a 1.6% increase to Europe and a 4.1% rise to the US East Coast. In contrast, the Ningbo Container Freight Index (NCFI), tracking outbound container shipping costs, eased 0.4% week on week on 6 June, according to Nomura. Specifically, it saw a 9.1% decline to the US West Coast and remained unchanged for the US East Coast during the same period. Internationally, the Freightos Baltic Index (FBX), reflecting spot rates for 40-foot containers across 12 global trade lanes, surged by 52.3% week on week on 6June, "indicating a significant jump in global shipping costs", Nomura said. Focus article by Nurluqman Suratman Please also visit US tariffs, policy – impact on chemicals and energy Thumbnail image: Containers pile up at Longtan Container Terminal of Nanjing Port in Nanjing City, Jiangsu Province, China, on 9 June 2025. (Costfoto/NurPhoto/Shutterstock)

10-Jun-2025

LONDON (ICIS)–Here are some of the top stories from ICIS Europe for the week ended 6 June. Europe HDPE spot dragged sub-€1,000/tonne by US offers as US Q1 imports ride highSpot prices for high-density polyethylene (HDPE) in Europe have fallen below €1,000/tonne as local buyers receive highly discounted US offers against a backdrop of high imports from the US in the first quarter of 2025 and gaping spreads between the regions. Higher tariffs on Russia embolden European producers to lift nitrate pricesEmboldened by the European Parliament’s decision to go ahead with higher import duties on Russian fertilizers, nitrate producers in Europe have raised prices despite strong objections from the farming community. Europe pharmaceutical IPA slightly softer, stable demand despite peak seasonEuropean spot pricing for premium pharmaceutical grade isopropanol (IPA) has softened slightly, while prices for technical and cosmetic grades are stable amid steady conditions. European paraxylene contract price for April, May settles following contentious negotiationsEurope paraxylene (PX) contracts for April and May have been finalized in a double settlement. LyondellBasell enters exclusive talks for Europe asset divestmentsLyondellBasell has entered into exclusive talks with an industrial investor for the sale of four European production sites, slightly over a year after launching a review of its asset base in the region. Asia-Europe shipping prices jump on US-China trading windowContainer prices for Asia cargoes to Europe jumped sharply week on week amid a general surge in freight costs as players look to lock down shipments from China to the US during the pause in reciprocal tariffs between the countries. Limited demand for Europe PET mitigates impact of higher freight ratesDemand for European polyethylene terephthalate (PET) has been blighted by poor weather conditions, economic apathy and significant import arrivals. LyondellBasell Europe divestment assets had lost money for years – CEOThe assets LyondellBasell has entered exclusive talks to sell to private equity investor AEQUITA had been cash negative on average to the company over the last five years, with CEO Peter Vanacker welcoming a “clean exit” from the businesses.

09-Jun-2025

SINGAPORE (ICIS)–Tariff concerns and ample supply continue to exert pressure on petrochemical markets in both Asia and the Middle East, with regional demand staying weak, with consumption in India unlikely to pick up until September. Aromatics trade flows shift amid tariff uncertainty Monsoon season weighs on India demand GCC producers upbeat on Syria AROMATICS UNDER PRESSURE AMID TARIFFS In the aromatics market, supply is expected to be tight as increased tariff uncertainties continue `to disrupt traditional trade flows. Mixed xylene (MX) and downstream paraxylene (PX) were in steep backwardation, where in spot prices are higher than futures prices, amid freight constraints and high US demand. Benzene, which closely tracks falling crude prices, continued to underperform its aromatics peers. Benzene from South Korea has not been flowing into the US and were mostly going into China, market sources said. South Korea is a major exporter of aromatics products. Its overall petrochemical shipments in May declined by 20.8% year on year, weighed down by sharp falls in upstream crude prices. For solvent grade mixed xylenes, South Korea exported last month an estimated 50,696 tonnes, of which around 27% was destined for the US, according to ICIS data on 2 June. Strong exports to the US coincide with the start of the summer driving season in the northern hemisphere, when demand for octane boosters like MX and toluene, which goes into gasoline blending, picks up. This strong US gasoline demand expectation is supporting the supply tightness, despite weaker downstream activity in China. Asia’s aromatics tightness is likely to persist through June-August, as market participants adapt to tariff policies and freight cost pressures from front-loading following a trade war truce between the US and China. The US’ 90-day suspension on “reciprocal” tariffs on most countries except China ends on 9 July. A potential escalation of the US-China trade war after the 90-day truce could intensify uncertainties, though a resolution might stabilize flows by late Q3. For shipping, market players are expecting freight rates to start to drop again in July-August. MONSOON ONSET DEPRESSES INDIA PLASTICS DEMAND Prices for plastics in India are under pressure from the monsoon season, as well as more supply coming from China, market sources said. This year’s monsoon season, which typically runs from June-September, arrived eight days early and is projected to bring above-average rainfall, said the India Meteorological Department (IMD) on 24 May. During India’s monsoon period, manufacturing activity tends to moderate, especially the packaging sector as well as the food and beverage sector, weakening end-product demand. Concurrently, domestic supply is ample, pushing down prices for Indian polyethylene (PE), polypropylene (PP), high-density polyethylene (HDPE) and low-density polyethylene (LDPE). But post-monsoon season from September, demand is likely to pick up as agriculture and construction sector activity rises and the harvesting season commences. The festive season, which includes the Diwali (Hindu Festival of Lights) running from 18-23 October, is likely to increase demand for end-products such as plastics, hence, boost production leading to the holiday. Demand for chemicals such as PE, PP and PVC and synthetic rubbers is expected to improve after September. India’s strong domestic consumption would shield it from the US-China tariff war, whose impact on the south Asian nation’s petrochemical trades is mostly on sentiment and not on actual demand. China, however, has tried to push more material to India with cut prices amid the US-China trade war, as domestic demand in the world’s second-largest economy remained weak. The country is already redirecting PE and PP to Africa and India to offset reduced US access. But this offsetting has eased temporarily due to freight costs more than doubling in recent weeks. GCC SEES RENEWED OPPORTUNITY IN SYRIA In the Middle East, Syria is opening up following a regime change and the consequent lifting of sanctions by both the US and EU. A cargo of wheat arrived at the Syrian port of Tartous for the first time in around 11 years, according to news reports. The opening of Syria’s market – after years of civil war and international sanctions – bodes well for GCC petrochemical producers. The GCC bloc consists of Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the UAE. Suppliers are looking to increase their trades with Syria, as converters in the country begin running their plants at higher rates, with the possibility of new plants to be built. On 29 May, the Syrian government inked a $7 billion strategic Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with a consortium of companies led by Qatar’s UCC Holding to develop power generation projects. More such agreements, particularly as trade increases, could pave the way for increased demand in the country for chemicals and chemical products, after civil war disrupted life in Syria since 2011. Focus article by Jonathan Yee Additional reporting by Aswin Kondapally, Nadim Salamoun, Jasmine Khoo, Samuel Wong, Melanie Wee, and Angeline Soh. Thumbnail image: At Qingdao Port in east China's Shandong Province, 4 June 2025. (Shutterstock)

09-Jun-2025

MUMBAI (ICIS)–Indian specialty chemicals producer Black Rose Industries and Japan's Koei Chemical are conducting a joint feasibility study on building a specialty amines project in India. As part of the project, Black Rose will set up manufacturing facilities for the amine products while Koei Chemical will provide its proprietary technology for the production facilities, the company said in a bourse filing on 30 May. “The parties are expecting to enter into definitive agreements and will proceed with the construction and installation of plant facilities once the overall feasibility is established,” it added. Black Rose plans to set up the amine manufacturing facility at its chemicals complex at Jhagadia in the western Gujarat state, a company source said, but did not provide information regarding the product mix at the new plant or the project cost. “We are excited to enter the field of specialty amines which play an important role for the future growth of the chemical industry in India,” Black Rose chairman Anup Jatia said. Black Rose currently operates acrylamide and polyacrylamide plants at its Jhagadia complex. Acrylamide is used in the production of polymers, wastewater treatment, and food processing while polyacrylamide is used in pulp and paper production, agriculture, food processing, mining, among others.

05-Jun-2025

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colorado (ICIS)–Uncertainty surrounding tariffs is tempering what could be a recovery in US demand for polypropylene (PP), executives at Braskem said on Wednesday. Uncertainty about the final makeup of tariffs and their effects on end markets have caused consumers and companies to delay purchases, said Alexandre Elias, vice president, PP, North America and Europe, Braskem. Elias made his comments in an interview with ICIS on the sidelines of the annual meeting of the American Chemistry Council (ACC). Companies are reluctant to build inventories and make investments – especially industrial PP customers that have long investment cycles, Elias said. TARIFFS HAVE COUNTERVAILING EFFECTS ON AUTOAutomobiles are one of the main end markets for PP, and the tariffs have had mixed effects on production, contributing to the uncertainty of PP demand from the sector. The US has imposed tariffs on imports of automobiles and auto parts, which could ultimately stimulate local production and PP demand. Prior to those tariffs, consumers splurged on automobiles to beat the tariffs. All of that pre-buying lowered inventories of US autos, said Bill Diebold, vice president – commercial, Braskem America, polyolefins. US producers will ultimately replenish those inventories, which will further increase auto output and PP demand. On the other hand, consumer confidence has fallen after the introduction of the tariffs and that tends to slow demand growth for automobiles and other durable goods that are made with PP. Chinese restrictions on shipments of rare earth magnets could cause some automobile companies to shut down production within weeks if they cannot find workarounds, according to an article from the Wall Street Journal, a business publication. The US recently increased its tariffs on imports of steel and aluminium to 50% from 25%, which would increase production costs for US automobiles and potentially make them less affordable. The future of the tariffs themselves is uncertain because the US frequently changes the rates. It could impose new tariffs, and the courts could rule that the US lacks authority to impose them under a key provision. The interactions of all of these variables make it difficult to forecast PP demand from the US automobile industry, Elias said. PP DEMAND REMAINS FLAT YEAR ON YEARIn the US, PP demand is up in Q2 versus Q1 but flat year on year, Diebold said. Similarly demand improved in Q1 versus Q4, the latter of which was a challenging time for the US market, Diebold said. Packaging, another major end market for PP, remains strong. PP is enjoying a boost from a wave of product substitutions, Elias said. Over the years, many polystyrene (PS) processors have switched to PP because of its price. Many of those substitutions have played out, but a smaller wave is now taking place. That said, uncertainty could be capping the potential of product substitutions from other processors. LPG RESTRICTIONS TO CHINA COULD ALTER PP TRADE FLOWSGlobal trade flows of PP could change significantly if the US restricts exports of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) to China. China relies heavily on US LPG shipments to provide feedstock for its large fleet of propane dehydrogenation (PDH) units, which produce on-purpose propylene. The US already has imposed restrictions on exports of ethane to China, which would disrupt a few ethane crackers in the country. If trade tensions rise, it could expand the restrictions to cover LPG. Global markets got a taste of the ramifications of restricted LPG shipments earlier this year when China increased tariffs on US imports by triple digits. Had China maintained those increases, Chinese propylene production would likely fall, according to ICIS. China could still procure LPG from exporters from other parts of the world, but that would increase costs and make some production uncompetitive. Lower Chinese propylene production would have a cascading effect. It could lower domestic production of PP and cut down on Chinese exports to other parts of Asia. That, in turn, could allow domestic Asian producers to sell more material locally, allowing them to be less aggressive about exporting PP, Elias said. "This could have a significant impact on trade flows globally," Elias said. In fact, restrictions on US LPG shipments to China would likely have a bigger effect on PP trade flows then actual tariffs on the resin. So far, the introduction of US tariffs has had little direct effect on US PP, because the market is relatively balanced. In 2023 and 2024, apparent consumption was about 85% of total production in the US, according to the ICIS Supply and Demand Database. Braskem does have an option to export PP from a terminal in Charleston, South Carolina, but this terminal functions more as a way to take advantage of arbitrage opportunities and leverage its PP plants in North America, Elias said. As an option, it has worked well. LITTLE NEED FOR NEW PROPYLENE CAPACITYBraskem relies on third parties for propylene for its PP plants in the US. So far, there is no need for Braskem to build its own propylene capacity, Elias said. The US is long in propylene, as illustrated by the global competitiveness of its exports, he said While Braskem has relied on propylene imports from Canada, trade tensions between it and the US have eased. Were trade tensions to resume and cause an increase in tariffs, Braskem could manage around it, Elias said. The ACC Annual Meeting runs through Wednesday. Focus article by Al Greenwood Thumbnail shows a product made with PP. Image by Shutterstock.

04-Jun-2025

SAO PAULO (ICIS)–Braskem has firmly denied it was preparing polyethylene (PE) price increases for June in anticipation of antidumping duties (ADDs) on US and Canadian imports, with a spokesperson at the Brazilian petrochemicals major calling such claims "absolutely unfounded". In a phone interview with ICIS, the spokesperson also rejected suggestions Braskem had already communicated potential price rises for June on expected ADDs. The spokesperson later confirmed on Friday that Braskem's PE prices would roll over in June from May. The proposal to implement ADDs on PE was brought forward in 2024 by Braskem, who is the sole PE producer in Brazil. The company has had to grapple with higher production costs than peers in North America, where natural gas-based ethane is widely available and has allowed a revival in polymers manufacturing. "The idea that we were putting up prices for May or for June based on a supposed decision regarding ADDs is absolutely unfounded. Braskem is not the one who sets the price: as the market knows, Braskem sets its prices accordingly to competitive market conditions rather than predetermined strategies," said the spokesperson. The company's representative also deemed necessary to distinguish between general import duties, which affect all countries importing into Brazil, and ADDs, which in this case would only target two countries, if Gecex finally deems PE from US and Canada contravened free trade rules. "For this particular case, it would not be the case that all imports would be affected – only the imports that are from the US," concluded the spokesperson. PE imports from the US and Canada represented in 2024 around 75% of all of Brazil's PE imports, according to the ICIS Supply and Demand Database. BUSY WEEK ENDS WITH A ROLLOVERBrazil's policymakers and polymers players leave behind a busy week in which political decisions get mixed with business planning, irremediably affected by the low operating rates at most Brazilian and Latin American chemical plants. Hit by abundant and lower-priced imports, Brazil's chemicals plants operating rates stand at around 60-65%, according to trade group Abiquim, which represents producers. Braskem's statement on Friday sought to clarify several points of the many published this week about Brazil's trade policy, but mostly the claim by market players that Braskem had already decided to increase prices on expectations of ADDs being imposed on US material. It stressed that any future price adjustments would not be related to antidumping measures, "because they are not in place", and argued it was not aware yet of what way June pricing would go. It has been an intense week for trade policymakers, with the foreign trade committee Gecex sharply increasing ADDs on US PVC from 8.2% to 43.7%, despite the US being only the second largest supplier to Brazil, well behind Colombia. Meanwhile, Gecex postponed without explanation a meeting where it was expected to decide on imposing ADDs on PE imports from the US and Canada, planned for 29 May but rescheduled last minute, leaving Brazil's PE market in uncertainty. Latin America has been one of the most vulnerable regions hit by the global petrochemicals oversupply and low prices. As around half of Brazil and the wider region chemicals demand is covered by imports, it is global prices that dictate the domestic pricing policies – a quintessential 'price-taker' status. After a considerable list of protectionist measures have been implemented in Brazil, fears among importers about rising input costs and overall national inflation rates are increasing. Small and large manufacturers up and down the country, which depend on imports for their production, will now face higher bills due to higher import tariffs on several chemicals as well as several ADDs in place for petrochemicals. However, Abiquim has said the measures' influence on inflation would be minimal, adding they are sensible when taking into consideration that they would in part cushion the nation's beleaguered chemicals producers from even lower operating rates or, in the worst-case scenario, plant closures. Additional reporting by Bruno Menini

30-May-2025

HOUSTON (ICIS)–The US can maintain nearly all the plastic and chemical tariffs it imposed this year after an appeals court granted on Thursday the government's request to stay the judgment of a lower court. The stay will remain in place while the case is under consideration by the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Earlier, the US lost a judgment over its tariffs in the US Court of International Trade. That lower court ruled that the president exceeded its authority when it imposed tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). These IEEPA tariffs included nearly all of the duties that the US imposed in 2025 on imports of commodity plastics and chemicals. Had the appeals court rejected the government's request for a stay, then the US would have had 10 calendar days to withdraw the tariffs it imposed under IEEPA. The tariffs covered by the ruling include the following: The 10% baseline tariffs against most of the world that the US issued during its so-called Liberation Day event on 2 April. These include the reciprocal tariffs that were later paused. The US issued the tariffs under Executive Order 14257, which intended to address the nation's trade deficit. The tariffs that the US initially imposed on imports from Canada under Executive Order 14193. These were intended to address drug smuggling. The US later limited the scope of these tariffs to cover imported goods that do not comply with the nations' trade agreement, known as the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). The tariffs that the US initially imposed on imports from Mexico under Executive Order 14194. These were intended to address illegal immigration and drug smuggling. Like the Canadian tariffs, these were later limited to cover imported goods that did not comply with the USMCA. The 20% tariffs that the US imposed on imports from China under Executive Order 14195, which was intended to address drug smuggling. Because the appeals court granted the government's request for a stay, the US can maintain the IEEPA tariffs. The ruling did not cover sectoral tariffs imposed on specific products like steel, aluminium and auto parts, and it does not cover the duties that the US imposed on Chinese imports during the first term of US President Donald Trump. IMPLICATIONS OF THE RULINGIf the ruling is upheld by the higher courts, it could bring some imports of plastics and chemicals back to the US while lowering costs of other products. While the US has large surpluses in many plastics and chemicals, it still imports several key commodities. US states that border Canada import large amounts of polyethylene (PE) and other plastics from that country because it is closer than the nation's chemical hubs along the Gulf Coast. Other significant imports include base oils, ammonia, polyethylene terephthalate (PET), methylene diphenyl diisocyanate (MDI), methanol and aromatics such as benzene, toluene and mixed xylenes (MX). RULING COULD REDIRECT CHINESE EXPORTS OF PLASTIC PRODUCTSThe IEEPA tariffs of the US caused countries to redirect exports of plastics and chemicals to other markets, particularly to Europe. The result depressed prices for those plastics and chemicals. If the ruling holds, some of those exports could return to the US and reduce the quantity of exports arriving in Europe. The IEEPA tariffs had a similar effect on the plastic products exports by China. Those exports were redirected to other countries, especially southeast Asia. These redirected shipments flooded those countries with plastic goods, displacing local products and lowering domestic demand for the plastics used to make those products. If the ruling is restored by higher courts, then it could direct many of those shipments back to the US, although they would unlikely affect shipments of auto parts. Those shipments are covered by the sectoral tariffs, and the court ruling did not void those tariffs. RULING REMOVES BASIS FOR RETALIATORY TARIFFS AGAINST US PLASTICS, CHEMSChina had already imposed blanket tariffs in retaliation to the IEEPA tariffs the US imposed on its exports. China unofficially granted waivers for US imports of ethane and PE, but those for liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) were still covered by the duty. China relies on such imports as feedstock for its large fleet of propane dehydrogenation (PDH) units, which produce on-purpose propylene. If upheld, the ruling could restore many of those exports and improve propylene margins for those PDH units. The EU was preparing to impose retaliatory tariffs on exports of nearly every major commodity plastic from the US. Other proposals would cover EU imports of oleochemicals, tall oil, caustic soda and surfactants from the US. Canada also prepared a list of retaliatory tariffs that covered US imports of PE, polypropylene (PP) and other plastics, chemicals and fertilizers. If the ruling holds, it would remove the basis for the proposed tariffs of Canada and the EU as well as the existing ones already imposed by China. RULING WOULD NOT ELIMINATE THREAT OF FUTURE TARIFFSEven if the higher courts uphold the ruling and bars tariffs under IEEPA, the US has other means to impose duties that are outside of the bounds of the ruling. Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. Such tariffs would be limited to 15%, could last for 150 days and address balance of payment deficits. Tariffs imposed under the following statutes would require federal investigations, which could delay them by several months. Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930. The president can impose tariffs of up to 50% against countries that discriminate against US commerce. Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which addresses unfair trade practices. This was the basis on the tariffs imposed on many Chinese imports during the peak of the trade war between the two countries. Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, which addresses imports with implications for national security. Trump used this provision to impose tariffs on steel and aluminum. The US has started Section 232 on the following imports: Pharmaceutical and active pharmaceutical ingredient (APIs) – Section 232 Semiconductors and semiconductor manufacturing equipment – Section 232 Medium and heavy-duty trucks, parts – Section 232 Critical minerals – Section 232 Copper – Section 232 Timber and lumber – Section 232 Commercial aircraft and jet engines – Section 232 Ship-to-shore cranes assembled in China or made with parts from China – Section 301 Shipbuilding – Section 301 The case number for the appeal is 2025-1812. The original lawsuit was filed in the US Court of International Trade by the plaintiffs VOS Selections, Genova Pipe, Microkits, FishUSA and Terry Precision Cycling. The case number is 25-cv-00066. Thumbnail Photo: A container ship, which transports goods overseas. (Image by Costfoto/NurPhoto/Shutterstock) Visit the ICIS Topic Page: US tariffs, policy – impact on chemicals and energy

29-May-2025

HOUSTON (ICIS)–The US delay of its proposed 50% tariffs on EU imports will still leave its polymers vulnerable to retaliatory tariffs. The new deadline is 9 July. For US exports, the EU has already drafted a list of targets for retaliatory tariffs, part of its second round of €95 billion in tariffs on US imports. A full list of all the proposed imports can be found here. This is on top of the first round of €21 billion in tariffs on US imports. A full list of all the proposed imports can be found here. In all, the EU could impose tariffs on nearly every major polymer from the US, including polyethylene (PE), polypropylene (PP), polystyrene (PS), polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and polyethylene terephthalate (PET). The EU is also considering tariffs on US imports of surfactants, fatty acids, fatty alcohols, and tall oil, a feedstock used to make renewable diesel, sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) and renewable naphtha. The following table lists some of the many plastics and chemicals proposed on the EU's second round of tariffs. CN CODE DESCRIPTION 28151200 sodium hydroxide "caustic soda" in aqueous solution "soda lye or liquid soda" 29053926 butane-1,4-diol or tetramethylene glycol [1,4-butanediol] having a bio-based carbon content of 100% by mass 29091910 tert-butyl ethyl ether (ethyl-tertio-butyl-ether, etbe) 29152100 acetic acid 29153200 vinyl acetate 29291000 isocyanates 32061100 pigments and preparations based on titanium dioxide of a kind used for colouring any material or produce colorant preparations, containing >= 80% by weight of titanium dioxide calculated on the dry matter (excl. preparations of heading 3207, 3208, 3209, 3210, 3212, 3213 and 3215) 32061900 pigments and preparations based on titanium dioxide of a kind used for colouring any material or produce colorant preparations, containing < 80% by weight of titanium dioxide calculated on the dry matter (excl. preparations of heading 3207, 3208, 3209, 3210, 3212, 3213 and 3215) 34023100 linear alkylbenzene sulphonic acids and their salts 34023990 anionic organic surface-active agents, whether or not put up for retail sale (excl. linear alkylbenzene sulphonic acids and their salts, and aqueous solution containing by weight 30-50% of disodium alkyl [oxydi(benzenesulphonate)]) 34024100 cationic organic surface-active agents, whether or not put up for retail sale 34024200 non-ionic organic surface-active agents, whether or not put up for retail sale (excl. soap) 34024900 organic surface-active agents, whether or not put up for retail sale (excl. soap, anionic, cationic and non-ionic) 34025010 surface-active preparations put up for retail sale (excl. organic surface-active preparations in the form of bars, cakes, moulded pieces or shapes, and organic surface-active products and preparations for washing the skin in the form of liquid or cream) 38030010 crude tall oil 38030090 tall oil, whether or not refined (excl. crude tall oil) 38170050 linear alkylbenzene 38170080 mixed alkylbenzenes and mixed alkylnaphthalenes, produced by the alkylation of benzene and naphthalene (excl. linear alkylbenzene and mixed isomers of cyclic hydrocarbons) 38231100 stearic acid, industrial 38231200 oleic acid, industrial 38231300 tall oil fatty acids, industrial 38231910 fatty acids, distilled 38231930 fatty acid distillate 38231990 fatty acids, industrial, monocarboxylic; acid oils from refining (excl. stearic acid, oleic acid and tall oil fatty acids, distilled fatty acids and fatty acid distillate) 38237000 fatty alcohols, industrial 38260010 fatty-acid mono-alkyl esters, containing by weight => 96,5 % of esters "famae" 38260090 biodiesel and mixtures thereof, not containing or containing < 70 % by weight of petroleum oils or oils obtained from bituminous minerals (excl. fatty-acid mono-alkyl esters containing by weight >= 96,5 % of esters "famae") 39013000 ethylene-vinyl acetate copolymers, in primary forms 39019080 polymers of ethylene, in primary forms (excl. polyethylene, ethylene-vinyl acetate copolymers, ethylene-alpha-olefins copolymers having a specific gravity of < 0,94, ionomer resin consisting of a salt of a terpolymer of ethylene with isobutyl acrylate and methacrylic acid and a-b-a block copolymer of ethylene of polystyrene, ethylene-butylene copolymer and polystyrene, containing by weight <= 35% of styrene, in blocks of irregular shape, lumps, powders, granules, flakes and similar bulk forms) 39021000 polypropylene, in primary forms 39023000 propylene copolymers, in primary forms 39029010 a-b-a block copolymer of propylene or of other olefins, of polystyrene, ethylene-butylene copolymer and polystyrene, containing by weight <= 35% of styrene, in blocks of irregular shape, lumps, powders, granules, flakes and similar bulk forms 39029020 polybut-1-ene, a copolymer of but-1-ene with ethylene containing by weight <= 10% of ethylene, or a blend of polybut-1-ene with polyethylene and/or polypropylene containing by weight <= 10% of polyethylene and/or <= 25% of polypropylene, in blocks of irregular shape, lumps, powders, granules, flakes and similar bulk forms 39031100 expansible polystyrene, in primary forms 39031900 polystyrene, in primary forms (excl. expansible) 39032000 styrene-acrylonitrile copolymers "san", in primary forms 39033000 acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene copolymers "abs", in primary forms 39039090 polymers of styrene, in primary forms (excl. polystyrene, styrene-acrylonitrile copolymers "san", acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene "abs", copolymer solely of styrene with allyl alcohol, of an acetyl value of >= 175 and brominated polystyrene, containing by weight >= 58% but <= 71% of bromine, in blocks of irregular shape, lumps, powders, granules, flakes and similar bulk forms) 39041000 poly"vinyl chloride", in primary forms, not mixed with any other substances 39042100 non-plasticised poly"vinyl chloride", in primary forms, mixed with other substances 39042200 plasticised poly"vinyl chloride", in primary forms, mixed with other substances 39051200 poly"vinyl acetate", in aqueous dispersion 39051900 poly"vinyl acetate", in primary forms (excl. in aqueous dispersion) 39052100 vinyl acetate copolymers, in aqueous dispersion 39052900 vinyl acetate copolymers, in primary forms (excl. in aqueous dispersion) 39053000 poly"vinyl alcohol", in primary forms, whether or not containing unhydrolyzed acetate groups 39061000 poly"methyl methacrylate", in primary forms 39071000 polyacetals, in primary forms 39072911 polyethylene glycols, in primary forms 39072920 polyether alcohols, in primary forms (excl. bis(polyoxyethylene) methylphosphonate and polyethylene glycols) 39072999 polyethers in primary forms (excl. polyether alcohols, polyacetals and copolymer of 1- chloro-2,3-epoxypropane with ethylene oxide) 39073000 epoxide resins, in primary forms 39074000 polycarbonates, in primary forms 39075000 alkyd resins, in primary forms 39076100 poly"ethylene terephthalate", in primary forms, having a viscosity number of >= 78 ml/g 39076900 poly"ethylene terephthalate", in primary forms, having a viscosity number of < 78 ml/g 39079110 unsaturated liquid polyesters, in primary forms (excl. polycarbonates, alkyd resins, poly"ethylene terephthalate" and poly"lactic acid") 39079190 unsaturated polyesters, in primary forms (excl. liquid, and polycarbonates, alkyd resins, poly"ethylene terephthalate" and poly"lactic acid") 39079980 polyesters, saturated, in primary forms (excl. polycarbonates, alkyd resins, poly"ethylene terephthalate", poly"lactic acid", poly"ethylene naphthalene-2,6-dicarboxylate" and thermoplastic liquid crystal aromatic polyester copolymers) 39089000 polyamides, in primary forms (excl. polyamides-6, -11, -12, -6,6, -6,9, -6,10 and -6,12) 39091000 urea resins and thiourea resins, in primary forms 39092000 melamine resins, in primary forms 39093100 poly"methylene phenyl isocyanate" "crude mdi, polymeric mdi", in primary forms 39094000 phenolic resins, in primary forms 39095010 polyurethane of 2,2'-"tert-butylimino"diethanol and 4,4'-methylenedicyclohexyl diisocyanate, in the form of a solution in n,n-dimethylacetamide, containing by weight >= 50% of polymer 39095090 polyurethanes in primary forms (excl. polyurethane of 2,2'-"tert-butylimino"diethanol and 4,4'-methylenedicyclohexyl diisocyanate, in the form of a solution in n,ndimethylacetamide) Source: EU CN CODE DESCRIPTION 39011010 linear polyethylene with a specific gravity of < 0,94, in primary forms 39011090 polyethylene with a specific gravity of < 0,94, in primary forms (excl. linear polyethylene) 39012010 polyethylene in blocks of irregular shape, lumps, powders, granules, flakes and similar bulk forms, of a specific gravity of >= 0,958 at 23°c, containing <= 50 mg/kg of aluminium, <= 2 mg/kg of calcium, of chromium, of iron, of nickel and of titanium each and <= 8 mg/kg of vanadium, for the manufacture of chlorosulphonated polyethylene 39012090 polyethylene with a specific gravity of >= 0,94, in primary forms (excl. polyethylene in blocks of irregular shape, lumps, powders, granules, flakes and similar bulk forms, of a specific gravity of >= 0,958 at 23°c, containing <= 50 mg/kg of aluminium, <= 2 mg/kg of calcium, of chromium, of iron, of nickel and of titanium each and <= 8 mg/kg of vanadium, for the manufacture of chlorosulphonated polyethylene) 39014000 ethylene-alpha-olefin copolymers, having a specific gravity of < 0,94 , in primary forms 39081000 polyamides-6, -11, -12, -6,6, -6,9, -6,10 or -6,12, in primary forms Source: EU

27-May-2025

LONDON (ICIS)–US President Donald Trump has warned of plans to impose a  50% tariff on imports from the EU starting on 1 June. In a post on the Truth Social platform, which is owned by Trump, on Friday, the US President said negotiations with the EU “were going nowhere” and said the bloc “has been very difficult to deal with”. “Their powerful Trade Barriers, Vat Taxes, ridiculous Corporate Penalties, Non-Monetary Trade Barriers, Monetary Manipulations, unfair and unjustified lawsuits against Americans Companies, and more, have led to a Trade Deficit with the US of more than $250,000,000 a year, a number which is totally unacceptable,” the post on social media read. Trump went on to stipulate that no tariff would be applied if the product was built or manufactured in the US, but did not clarify how this would pertain to raw materials higher up the value chain. As a net importer, the repercussions for the European chemicals industry may be cushioned from direct tariffs, although this could have more of an impact for certain products like benzene or paraxylene (PX). The EU has declined to respond to the latest announcement. On 9 May, the EU launched a public consultation to determine which US products should be subject to levies, including many chemicals and plastics. The consultation is scheduled to remain open until 10 June, as the EU Commission also consults on restricting certain EU steel scrap and chemical products worth €4.4bn to the US. A 50% duty is an escalation from the previous 20% tariff announced by President Trump on 2 April, when levies of varying degrees were applied to most international trading partners, including a 10% baseline rate for the majority of countries. Tensions between the US and EU eased after a 90-day pause was agreed in early April to allow time for discussions to pave the way for a deal palatable to both parties. Since the initial announcement, the US secured a deal with the UK, with a 10% tariff for auto parts (down from 27.5%), keeping the previously announced baseline 10% rate in place. In exchange, the US will have increased access to UK chemicals, ethanol, and beef markets. The US also agreed a 90-day pause with China on 12 May, allowing Chinese imports to the US to be subject to a 30% tax instead of the 145% tariff, with US goods to China held at a 10% rate instead of 125%. thumbnail photo source: Shutterstock

23-May-2025