American Steel Production Has Fallen to Pre-Tariff Levels
The debate is over. Trump's steel tariffs failed.

Former President Donald Trump's decision to impose huge new tariffs on imported steel came with an explicit promise about resurrecting the American steel industry.
"We're bringing it all back," Trump told reporters in May 2018 as he ordered the placement of 25 percent tariffs on nearly all steel imported into the United States. In exchange for making steel prices "a little bit more expensive," Trump believed the tariffs would boost domestic production "like it used to be in the old days when we actually had steel," he said in August of that same year. And when campaigning for reelection a year later, he was eager to claim credit for taking the steel industry from "dead" to "thriving."
But nearly six years after those tariffs were announced, government data show that America's annual steel output has fallen below the level recorded in 2017—the last full year before Trump's tariffs were imposed.
America produced 80 million metric tons of raw steel in 2023, according to new data from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), which tracks the annual output of iron, steel, and other industrial commodities. That's down from 80.5 million metric tons of steel produced in 2022.
Both figures ring in below the 81.6 million metric tons that were poured out of American steel mills in 2017.
The USGS data show that Trump's tariffs may have helped goose domestic steel production in the first few years after they were implemented. Production rose to 86.6 million metric tons in 2018 and 87.8 million metric tons in 2019, before cratering in 2020 as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Production bounced back in 2021, as American steel mills produced 85.8 million metric tons of raw steel that year.
Those modest gains in the immediate aftermath of the tariffs seem to have faded away over the past two years—despite President Joe Biden's unwillingness to remove the Trump tariffs, which have hammered steel-consuming industries and have added to inflation.
That pattern—a short-term boost in production followed by a decline later—is exactly what economists would expect to happen after tariffs are imposed, wrote Ed Gresser, a former assistant U.S. trade representative and vice president and director for trade and global markets at the Progressive Policy Institute.
Gresser noted that large new tariffs typically create a four-stage chain of events: First, an increase in prices; then, a shift toward domestic production as buyers try to avoid paying the new tax; next, a decline in consumption by domestic industries that consume the tariffed product as they fall behind competitors elsewhere in the world; and finally, that decline in domestic demand rebounds onto the protected producers who see fewer orders for their products—in this case, steel.
When the Commerce Department formally announced Trump's tariffs in 2018, it waved away concerns about the last step in that process.
"If a reduction in imports can be combined with an increase in domestic steel demand" that would result from military and infrastructure spending, then the Trump tariffs "will enable U.S. steel mills to increase operations significantly in the short-term and improve the financial viability of the industry over the long-term," the department predicted.
That plainly hasn't happened. The short-term boost provided by the tariffs has faded and the artificially higher price of steel that American industries (and consumers) now must pay appears to be sapping demand for steel.
The two-year decline in steel output (during a period of robust economic growth, too) makes it easy to assess the Trump steel tariffs as their sixth birthday approaches. There is no need to weigh the benefits of the tariffs against their costs—even though the costs overwhelm the benefits—and no need to be distracted by the theoretical debates about how tariffs supposedly improve American national security.
Tariffs were supposed to resurrect the steel industry. Instead, America now produces less steel than it did before the tariffs were imposed. The debate is over. Trump's steel tariffs have failed.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
All that proves is that the tariffs weren't high enough. Right?
Ask Biden, he kept them, right?
You should be praising him for that.
Pour sarc.
You think everyone who hates you adores Trump. Pour another one.
I think that if you attacked people who were critical of the tariffs when Trump was president, but don't defend the tariffs while Biden is president, then you're an unprincipled hack who was defending the man, not the policies. That translates into adoration for Trump.
No, it proves that labor unions, like federal government employees, demand defined benefit six figure income pensions. Why are 401ks good enough for almost all of the country, except for those two groups. I can understand those that put their lives on the line, cops, military. Otherwise, these demands destroy industries.
shouldn't you be at ... cnn?
I know it. That Adam Smith guy was such a doofus. The fuck did he know? The wealth of nations comes from using subsidies and tariffs to maximize exports while minimizing imports. He was against all of that. If he was alive today he'd be a leftist with TDS.
Pour, pour, sarc.
It seems you're complaining that facts have a liberal bias.
no I'm openly complaining about Eric's anti-T bias. facts can be used to prove anything.
Is it a fact that steel production has fallen since Trump's tariff?
Is it a fact that Trump said he'd bring back US steel production?
it's a fact Eric looks for anti-T things to write about and then posts them for critique.
Is it a fact that Biden continued the tariffs? Let's see, Trump: 2 years, Biden: 3 years. Gee, why are they still called Trump's tariffs?
Actually, Biden and the EU (as I linked below) agreed to suspend them back in 2021 and he extended that suspension in 2023.
So I don’t get it - are the tariffs active or not? That seems relevant.
Economics has TDS.
the author has TDS. he has a plethora of economic misery topics from the last three years of federal intervention to write about but chooses to rag on the last guy every time. like cnn.
Honey-Trump don't care! He's just Biden his time until he can wreak more havoc on the economy and blame someone else. And Biden don't care neither! Anything outside the next ice cream cone is beyond his ken.
The reality is that Trump is overall pretty dumb. I will not say that he doesn’t have intellectual capacity, but rather there is no evidence he uses that capacity.
"Trump's steel tariffs have failed." concludes the article.
I beg to correct that!!!
Trump's steel tariffs have failed, EXCEPT in that shit SUCCESSFULLY garnered the votes of red-meat-hungry know-nothing Trumpanzees!!!
True.
How many votes do you suppose he got from steel tariffs?
Quite a few considering how many people bought, and still defend, his Make Amerka Grate Again protectionist economic bullshit.
You’re not gonna go into steel unions, right? Six figure defined benefit pensions versus every (other) laborer, worker or business owner that has defined contribution plans.
It’s now political suicide to criticize labor unions. The duopoly political parties will continue to schtick for votes and destroy industries.
I'm sure he got their support with his protectionist promises. However I'm sure they were greatly outnumbered by people not in the industry who believed his debunked protectionist economic rhetoric.
You don’t think his other MAGA policies wouldn’t have already got there votes?
“Make Amerka Grate Again”
Oh, very clever sarc! Did you coin that yourself?
Weren’t the tariffs removed in 2021? Why yes, yes they were (for the EU at least). https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden-extends-eu-steel-aluminum-tariff-exemption-2-years-2023-12-28/
And is the Biden administration looking to add more burdensome regulation to steel manufacturing? Why yes, yes it is. https://subscriber.politicopro.com/article/eenews/2024/01/23/looming-steelmakers-regs-to-test-biden-admin-priorities-00137211
I’m not making a value judgement on the tariffs (though I view them generally as consumption taxes which, in my mind, are definitionally more moral than income taxes), but it seems a bit disingenuous to say they failed when they were in place for less than three years and to use shrinkage in an industry that more than likely has a lot to do with American regulations.
I’m not making a value judgement on the tariffs (though I view them generally as consumption taxes which, in my mind, are definitionally more moral than income taxes)
There is a difference between tariffs for revenue and protectionist tariffs. This is a protectionist tariff.
it seems a bit disingenuous to say they failed when they were in place for less than three years
You just said the exemption was only for European steel. Cheaper steel from China was still subject to the tariffs.
to use shrinkage in an industry that more than likely has a lot to do with American regulations.
It's an axiom of economics that when things become more expensive, people buy less and/or look for substitutes. Tariffs made steel more expensive, so people bought less. Hence shrinkage in the industry.
Fucking economics has TDS. If it wasn't so leftist it would say Trump's tariffs helped.
There is a difference between tariffs for revenue and protectionist tariffs. This is a protectionist tariff.
I know there’s a difference between them. But in the end they both are essentially consumption taxes. That’s all I was saying there.
You just said the exemption was only for European steel. Cheaper steel from China was still subject to the tariffs.
Eric’s argument was “Trump tariffs didn’t work” he didn’t bother to mention that not all of the tariffs were still in place, thus a disingenuous argument. And 4 years into Biden’s presidency, if those Chinese tariffs haven’t been reduced (especially while the EU ones were) shouldn’t they be his?
It’s an axiom of economics that when things become more expensive, people buy less and/or look for substitutes. Tariffs made steel more expensive, so people bought less. Hence shrinkage in the industry.
The tariffs were on imports, making THEM more expensive, so I’m not sure how you square that with US manufactured steel production going down. Unless there were other factors that continued to make US manufactured steel more expensive than the imported steel (as of last year, this was demonstrably true for my company as far as importing light gauge steel). You know, like regulations, labor costs, taxes, and stopping the construction of additional mills. Which was again my other point.
I’ll ignore your last sentence as it doesn’t apply to me or my post.
Thanks for the calm and reasoned debate.
he didn’t bother to mention that not all of the tariffs were still in place, thus a disingenuous argument.
Depends on the quantity steel we’re talking about, as well as the price. I don’t have the facts in front of me, but if EU steel was comparable in price to American steel, while Chinese steel was much cheaper, then eliminating the tariff on EU steel wouldn’t have much of an effect. If not much EU steel was imported compared to Chinese steel, again eliminating the tariff on EU steel wouldn’t make much of a difference.
And 4 years into Biden’s presidency, if those Chinese tariffs haven’t been reduced (especially while the EU ones were) shouldn’t they be his?
By that reasoning Obamacare became Trumpcare somewhere around 2020.
The tariffs were on imports, making THEM more expensive, so I’m not sure how you square that with US manufactured steel production going down.
The hope was that people would ignore the price increase, keep using the same amount, but instead buy it from American producers. And as the article says that happened. Until, responding to the increased cost, people started using less. That meant less purchased from US manufactures.
Thanks for the calm and reasoned debate.
Same to you but more of it.
By that reasoning Obamacare became Trumpcare somewhere around 2020.
I would agree with you on that if he hadn’t tried to get it repealed only to be thwarted by RINO’s like John McCain. To my knowledge Biden hasn’t done anything to remove the Chinese tariffs and if memory serves, reason had an article about him keeping them.
I did a little research and it looks like there's a little more to the story. What I came up with says that the tariffs require a four-year review and Biden, rather than rescinding them, decided to wait for the review. It was expected to be done last year, but it's still in progress. Still, in my mind anyway, they're Trump's tariffs. He's the one who made a big deal about starting a trade war, and is campaigning on making it a lot worse.
It’s an axiom of economics that when things become more expensive, people buy less and/or look for substitutes.
I note two exceptions, Veblen goods and Giffen goods.
If American steel were really crappy and cheap, then it might be a Giffen good, hence violating the axiom. I will defer to DesigNate and Randy Sax on the subject of the quality of American steel.
The worst part about importing, at least for us, is having to get samples tested to make sure that they actually used the correct coating during galvanization and the steel being the right yield strength.
In my limited experience, the American steel is good quality.
... "Trump tariffs, which have ... added to inflation."
Ordinary supply and demand would explain the new equilibrium in steel prices even in the presence of rock-solid money. Inflation (always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon) could contribute to steel price changes in either direction, depending on substitution effects.
Please don't conflate inflation with changes in price/cost.
That's not 100% true. Inflation means that overall prices are rising. That doesn't include market fluctuations because they go up and down. Tariffs can contribute to inflation by increasing prices of a good and things made from it. Like steel.
DId anyone really look?
Steel production was going up until 2020.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/209343/steel-production-in-the-us/
"" In the period of consideration, steel production in the United States fluctuated considerably. In particular, the production level decreased from 87.8 million in 2019 to 72.7 million metric tons in 2020 due to the narrowing down effects of the coronavirus pandemic on the American metal industry. The following year, the manufacturing level rose to 85.8 million metric tons before declining to 82 million in 2022.""
i see reading the entire article was too hard for you, as you raced to find a little something to use as confirmation bias instead. they talk about this in the article:
"That pattern—a short-term boost in production followed by a decline later—is exactly what economists would expect to happen after tariffs are imposed, wrote Ed Gresser, a former assistant U.S. trade representative and vice president and director for trade and global markets at the Progressive Policy Institute."
the tariffs generally do create a short term bump in the industry being protected... a boost that goes away once the market responds and the fluctuations are over. production going up before going back down does not mean they worked, that is just how tariffs always fail. the benefits are always temporary until people are able to adjust to them.
Covid fucked everything up and it's affects must be considered.
if you read thee article.... you would know that they had been.
Eric,
Weren't those the same tariffs that the Steelworkers Unions were begging Obama to implement?
Those were the same tariffs that Trump gave the Steelworkers Unions and they castigated him for it.
Yes those were the same tariffs that Biden exempted the EU from.
Then we can throw in the drop in manufacturing due to the COVID scam, causing less use of steel.
From someone who actually works in the steel industry, we would never use metric tons to measure output. US short tons only.
Yeah – CME uses short tons as well for domestic steel contracts. But if you’re using the same units consistently in your argument, it doesn’t matter which you’re using..
are you saying the people who report these numbers don't know how to convert units so they can compare different markets? seriously, what is your point?
His point is: From someone who actually works in the steel industry, we would never use metric tons to measure output. US short tons only.
Stop acting like a dick.
still not seeing any point there. if we had some reported numbers that used liters, would the fact that we use gallons mean a fucking thing?
American Steel Production Has Fallen to Pre-Tariff Levels
The debate is over. Trump's steel tariffs failed.
Apparently, to Reason, everything can be explained as a relationship between just two variables! It's the kind of simplistic reasoning we expect from a 17 year old socialist.
I would note also that Trump's steel tariffs did not apply to many countries, so their purpose was really to shift supply chains, not necessarily to increase US steel production.
LOL... So the summary is that they did work but just didn't work well enough to cover up for the Biden Administrations super-spending infrastructure bill.
i think the summary is that you don't know how to read.
But were the steel tariffs ironclad?
No but they did galvanize a response from offshore producers.
Much as I'd like to blame Trump for one of the few policies I disliked of him, all this did was restore steel import policy to what it's been most of the time since before I was born.
The steel industry in the US has long deserved to be euthanized. Dead. Killed. Buried.
It refused to modernize its plants after WW2, allowing Japan and Europe to get huge competitive advantages. It screamed "unfair competition!" and for the first time in a century Democrats decided to become protectionist in order to keep steelworkers from defecting to the other party.
Ronald Reagan, at heart a free trader, agreed to subsidize the steel industry so they could modernize -- three decades after the Europeans. The biggest US steel maker took the subsidies and bought an oil company. I am not committed to making this up.
Donald Trump has returned the Republican Party to its protectionist roots. All corporate welfare is good as long as it is in industries that support Republicans. This differs from Mussolini in degree but not in principle. And anyone disagreeing with the policy is not putting America First.
Joe Biden's biggest policy failure was not ending the Trump tariffs on day one in office. Actually he should have reduced all tariffs to one percent. And people wonder why we have inflation.
Hopefully Biden will get re elected as he at least isn't going to INCREASE tariffs. And then get a free trader back in the WH in 2029.
Nothing says American like demolishing homeland production. /s
I’m curious what you think America is going to trade for Japan and Europe steel? Human sh*t?
Here's an idea that isn't completely STUPID. Why not eliminate domestic taxes?
National economic goals should always be to become a net exporter on what is a natural national resource. It makes sense that if you can produce cotton, that you would be a net exporter of cotton AND/OR related products down the line, like cotton textiles.
Where an industry doesn’t exist nationally that is established elsewhere but it would actually make you competitive because there’s less travel from natural resource to finished product (vs exporting cotton to England and importing cotton textiles from England), tariffs are an excellent way to protect an industry in infancy. However, tariffs hinder exporting because who wants to trade with a country embargoing your own goods? The goal is to get production going to compete in price with the foreign country and then remove the tariff. Now that you are producing enough and have a more efficient production stream, you are globally competitive and can export.
Of course, there’s always other factors that get involved. Like for some reason, southern cotton growers preferred getting high prices from an established English textile market instead of the US government forcing them to sell at a discount to a brand new textile mill. And hated the export embargo that limited their options.
Or regulations that stymie production in other ways, making it impossible to become competitive with overseas markets, preventing any ability to export. And then MORE regulation and pickpocketing by forced payments to predatory unions and draconian minimum wage laws that make you unable to compete with even the increased cost in importing from overseas.
The goal of American policy is not to be a next exporter. It doesn’t even seem to be the goal to be a domestic producer. And judging by import/export statistics, this bears out.
https://www.statista.com/chart/18356/net-importers-and-exporters/
Also something I failed to mention that effects export is other governments subsidizing their industry or utilizing labor in inhumane ways - like slavery or slave wages.