Engineering plastics (POM, PBT)

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colorado (ICIS)–A new regulatory threat for the US chemical industry is emerging from the alignment of two wings of the nation's main political parties, which could use what critics describe as pseudoscience to adopt restrictive and unneeded policies. The two wings are what the American Chemistry Council (ACC) described as the one in the Democratic party aligned with nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and the one in the Republican party aligned with the MAHA movement. MAHA stands for Make American Healthy Again, and it is a motto coined by Robert Kennedy Jr, the secretary of the US Department of Health and Human Services. Short term, any new policies will likely arise in states because the current federal administration has imposed a high threshold for new regulations. POSSIBLE STATE-LEVEL THREATS FROM NEW HEALTH REGULATIONSWhile new regulations could arise on the state level, those policies could draw some inspiration from the federal government through the so-called MAHA Report issued by the US Department of Health and Human Services. The first pages of the report highlight "aggregation of environmental chemicals" as one of the four areas that could address what it described as a rise in childhood chronic diseases. The report includes a 12-page section entitled "the cumulative load of chemicals in our environment". Instead of recommending policy, the MAHA report calls for more research in the following chemistries: Per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). These are used to make fluorochemicals and fluoropolymers Microplastics Fluoride salt added to water to prevent tooth decay Phthalates that are used to make plasticizers Bisphenols that are used to make polycarbonate (PC) and epoxy resins Pesticides, herbicides and insecticides. The report mentioned glyphosate and atrazine The report also singled out the following classes of chemicals, as shown in the following table: Heavy Metals Waterborne Contaminants Air Pollutants Industrial Residues Pesticides Persistent Organic Pollutants Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals Physical Agents Source: US Department of Health and Human Services It must be noted that the report explicitly rejects the EU's REACH regulatory system. Even if the report did propose new regulations, they would have to reach a high threshold. The administration of US President Donald Trump said it will require 10 federal regulations to be removed for every new one introduced. However, a new administration could adopt regulations based on the report after Trump's term of office ends in four years. US states do not have to wait for Trump to leave office to adopt regulation that address the issues raised in the report. Already, the states of Florida and Utah have banned fluoride from public water. CHEM INDUSTRY ALREADY RESEARCHING CONCERNS RAISED BY REPORTThe ACC stressed that it supports making the nation healthy. "Everyone supports that. We support it," American Chemistry Council (ACC) CEO Chris Jahn said. He made his comments on the sidelines of the ACC Annual Meeting. With that in mind, the two share the same goals. "We look forward to working with them to make sure that we keep everyone safe, especially children," Jahn said. Moreover, he said the ACC has conducted research on many of the report's concerns, and research is its main call for action. The ACC said its Long-Range Research Initiative (LRI) is focused on ways to assess chemicals for safety. It has also invested in research in microplastics, Jahn said. The federal government already addresses many of the report's concerns under its agencies, such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Jahn said. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates food contact and food contamination. As it stands, Jahn said the chemical industry is the most heavily regulated manufacturing sector, and its regulatory burden has doubled in the past 20 years. Regulation is appropriate, but it must be risk-based, science-based and fact-based, Jahn said. "Sound science and sound process leads to sound regulation." NEW REGULATIONS ON HOLD WITH NEW PRESIDENTThe surge of new regulations that characterized the term of the previous president has ended with Trump's inauguration, but that was expected because it happens every time a new president takes office, Jahn said. "They freeze everything in place so they can evaluate what's in the queue, so there's nothing new there. Every president does that." As the administration gets settled in, it may need to adopt new regulations to achieve policy goals. If the administration does propose new regulations, the ACC has proposed existing rules it could purge and that would count multiple times in meeting the 10-rule threshold. One such regulation is the plastics significant new use rule (SNUR), Jahn said. "We've given them a list of over 30 regulations that they could take a fresh look at," Jahn said. "We have plenty of suggestions and opportunities for them to address the 10 for one." The ACC Annual Meeting ran through Wednesday. Insight article by Al Greenwood Thumbnail image: Texas flag. (Source: Westlight)

05-Jun-2025

LONDON (ICIS)–Senior Editor for Recycling, Matt Tudball, discusses the latest developments in the European recycled polyethylene terephthalate (R-PET) market, including: Majority of June deals heard so far rollover from May UK flake talks on going Some signs of lower interest for colourless flake EU Commission's DG Environment confirms only EU-origin waste currently suitable for Single Use Plastics Directive 25% target

05-Jun-2025

LONDON (ICIS)–The European Commission has confirmed to ICIS that only recycled polyethylene terephthalate (R-PET) produced using plastic waste in the EU can currently count towards the 25% recycled content target set out under the Single Use Plastics Directive (SUPD). In an email to ICIS, a spokesperson for the Directorate-General for Environment (DG-ENV) stated that the 25% target laid out in the SUPD can ‘only be achieved using post-consumer plastic waste generated from plastic products that have been placed on the EU market’. This expands on Point 4 of Implementing Decision 2023/2683 having regard to Directive (EU) 2019/904 (the SUPD), which states: 'Post-consumer plastic waste needs to be understood as waste generated from plastic products that have been placed on the market.'  The confirmation from the Commission clarifies what many R-PET market participants had already assumed – but not necessarily confirmed – that the 25% target can only be reached by using waste that has come from within the EU. It therefore rules out the use of plastic waste or material produced from plastic waste that has been placed on a market outside the EU. FUTURE CHANGESThe Commission confirmed that it is currently preparing an implementing act, planned for Q4 2025, that will extend the calculation, verification and reporting methodology to cover all recycling technologies, including chemical recycling. This will repeal and replace the existing act and contains a broader definition of ‘recycled plastic’ which will be the same as the Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) and will cover recyclates ‘stemming from post-consumer plastic waste generated from plastic products that have been placed on markets outside of the EU’. Article 7 of the PPWR sets out the 30% recycled content target for PET bottles by 2030, in which paragraph 3(a), among other things, states that recycled content shall be recovered from post-consumer plastic waste that: “…has been collected within the Union pursuant to this Regulation or the national rules transposing Directives 2008/98/EC and (EU) 2019/904, as relevant, or that has been collected in a third country in accordance with standards for separate collection to promote high-quality recycling equivalent to those referred to in this Regulation and Directives 2008/98/EC and (EU) 2019/904, as relevant.” R-PET market participants have welcomed the clarification although there are concerns that bringing the SUPD in line with the PPWR – in terms of allowing recycled produced from waste placed on markets outside of the EU – will open up the European market to cheaper imports of recycled material. The Commission is currently drafting the methodology for calculation and verification of the PPWR’s recycled content targets due in December 2026.

04-Jun-2025

SINGAPORE (ICIS)–Click here to see the latest blog post on Asian Chemical Connections by John Richardson. Is the petrochemicals industry really a free market? Or have we been telling ourselves a comforting fiction? As we sift through margins, P&Ls, and operating rates to predict a recovery, we might be asking the wrong questions. Let’s rewind to 2014. While China’s state media signalled a major push toward self-sufficiency in petrochemicals, many Western analysts dismissed it — seeing China through the lens of profit maximisation. But I was told way back in 2000 that China’s strategy had just as much to do with jobs and economic value creation as with profits. Fast forward to today: polyester fibres, , polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film and bottle grade resins, purified terephthalic acid (PTA), styrene and polypropylene (PP),— China is nearly or completely self-sufficient in these markets. The drivers? National security, supply certainty, and industrial policy. And it’s not just China. Middle East investments — underpinned by cheap feedstocks, state ownership, and now oil demand substitution — follow similar, non-market logic. If key players haven’t been led by market signals alone, what happens next? Despite the deepest downturn in petrochemical history — likely to stretch into 2028 — new capacities keep rising. Not from those chasing short-term profit, but from those with long-term, state-backed agendas. Just a modest rise in China’s PP operating rates above the ICIS base case assumption could flip China into being a net exporter by 2027. The trade war may play a role here, as it has increased supply security concerns. True, there are more private petrochemical companies in China than ten years ago. But this latest wave of investment is more state-owned-enterprise-led than the previous one. And private companies can also benefit from local and central government support Saudi investments in refinery-to-petrochemicals will persist. More ethane crackers in the Middle East will be built. China’s plant-build costs are often 50%+ lower than the U.S., thanks to relentless innovation support. So… what does this mean for producers operating on pure market terms? Can they survive, let alone thrive, in a landscape shaped by strategic ambition rather than shareholder return? Your thoughts are welcome. Let’s start the conversation. Editor’s note: This blog post is an opinion piece. The views expressed are those of the author, and do not necessarily represent those of ICIS.

04-Jun-2025

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colorado (ICIS)–A clearer picture on the ultimate level of US tariffs could lead to a surge in pent-up demand for chemicals and plastics, said the CEO of Dow. “As we saw with COVID-19, the more people sit on the sidelines, the more there’s a build-up or a pent-up desire to do something… demand is going to come. And when it comes, it tends to bounce back in a big fashion,” said Jim Fitterling, CEO of Dow, in an interview with ICIS. Fitterling spoke to ICIS on the sidelines of the American Chemistry Council (ACC) Annual Meeting. Tariff uncertainty has caused businesses to put projects and other investments on hold, he noted. “At the beginning of this year, I think everybody thought with the new administration [that] 2025 will be better than 2024. But as we sit here at the mid-point of 2025, I don’t think anybody’s predicting a big H2 spike [in demand],” said Fitterling. “It would be crazy for me to try to predict it right now, but if we can get some certainty around the tariffs and what the levels are going to be, and a feeling that ‘this is it’, we can go forward from here. The sentiment will turn more positive, and the markets move on sentiment,” he added. NAVIGATING TARIFFSDow is navigating the tariff environment well through an international trade operations team with decades of experience and great lines of communications in all markets, he noted. “We haven’t seen any dramatic impact on our ability to move product and sell product because of tariffs,” said Fitterling. However, the uncertainty has caused customers to pull back a bit, he added. “But I think more of that has been worked out and things are starting to flow, and you’re starting to see that people are realizing that they’re not just going to be able to absorb these tariffs. They're going to have to pass along [costs],” said Fitterling. “Some of these costs [are being passed along] and some product is continuing to move. [But] I would say people in general are still very cautious,” he added. The CEO cautioned that while the market may see greater clarity by July after the 90-day pause starting 9 April on higher levels of US reciprocal tariffs comes to an end, it could take longer. DOW PE EXPORTS MOVING ALONGMeanwhile, Dow’s exports of polyethylene (PE) from the US are running well, he said. “Everybody was expecting a big hiccup [in exports] in the month of April, but things moved relatively well. And of course, China never put tariffs on imports of plastics materials, even on the ethane [feedstock],” said Fitterling. On 24 April, an unofficial China proposed tariff exemption list of 131 US products worth around $46 billion, or 28% of total imports, including PE, along with other chemicals and key feedstock ethane, was circulated. Two weeks prior to this, ICIS began picking up on some China PE importers asking for previously canceled US PE orders to be reinstated for June arrival, noted Harrison Jacoby, director of PE at ICIS. “[China] didn’t put any tariffs on those because they need them, for their own manufacturing industry and to make the products that they turn around and re-export. It’s only logical,” he added. Interview article by Joseph Chang Front thumbnail photo of polyethylene pellets (Source: Shutterstock)

02-Jun-2025

SAO PAULO (ICIS)–Here are some of the stories from ICIS Latin America for the fortnight ended on 30 May. NEWS Brazil’s Braskem denies linking PE price increases to antidumping expectationsBraskem 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". Brazil postpones decision on US-Canada PE antidumping dutiesBrazil's foreign trade committee Gecex has postponed a meeting where it was expected to decide on imposing antidumping duties (ADDs) polyethylene (PE) imports from the US and Canada Brazil’s PVC prices could pick up on higher ADDs; Argentina and Colombia to benefitSome sources in the Brazilian polyvinyl chloride (PVC) market expect prices to rise between 10% and 15% in coming weeks after the government sharply increased antidumping duties (ADDs) on US material. Mexico announces definitive ADDs on imports of Chinese PETMexico has announced it will impose definitive antidumping duties (ADDs) on Chinese polyethylene terephthalate (PET) imports from 30 May 2025, according to official news from the China Trade Remedies Information website. Mexico protects domestic industry with revised $195/tonne duty on US caustic soda importsOn 29 May 2025, Mexico's Ministry of Economy published in the Official Gazette (DOF) the Final Resolution of its review of the countervailing duty on imports of liquid caustic soda from the US. Argentina’s manufacturing March output up 4.2%; Milei's party win in local election boosts cabinetArgentina’s manufacturing sectors output rose by 4.2% in March, year on year, below the overall increase in output in the economy at 5.6%, the country’s statistical agency Indec said this week. INSIGHT: Chile’s strong economic data yet to trickle down to chemicals and votersChile’s healthy growth in Q1 surprised on the upside this week, adding to earlier, better-than-expected indicators but all the positive news have yet failed to lift the chances of a governing party set to return to the opposition benches. LatAm’s chemicals faces severe truck driver shortage amid safety concernsLatin America's chemicals transportation sector is grappling with a severe driver shortage, an aging workforce, and mounting safety challenges that threaten regional supply chains, according to industry executives this week. Panama Canal faces capacity challenges as it explores new business modelsThe Panama Canal is working to develop new products and services for different client segments while managing capacity constraints that have affected operations, particularly following the severe drought impacts of 2024, an executive at the Panama Canal Authority (PCA) said. Brazil’s Braskem stock shoots up on reports billionaire Nelson Tanure aims to acquire Novonor stakeBraskem’s stock rose sharply in Friday trading after reports citing unnamed sources said Brazilian entrepreneur Nelson Tanure would be seeking to acquire Novonor’s controlling stake at the petrochemicals major. Brazil prosecutors sue China’s EV major BYD for slave labor, human traffickingBrazil’s Public Ministry of Labor (MPT) this week filed a civil action against Chinese automaker BYD and two contractors for allegedly subjecting 220 Chinese workers to conditions analogous to slavery and human trafficking. PRICING LatAm PP international prices increase in Chile, Peru on higher offers from AsiaInternational polypropylene (PP) prices were assessed as higher in Chile and Peru on the back of higher offers from Asia. LatAm PE prices unchanged, discussions shift to JuneDomestic and international polyethylene (PE) prices were unchanged across Latin American countries. Innova announces June PS price increase in BrazilInnova has announced a 10% price increase, excluding local taxes, on all grades of polystyrene (PS) sold in Brazil, effective 1 June 2025, according to a customer letter.

02-Jun-2025

HOUSTON (ICIS)–Here are the top stories from ICIS News from the week ended 30 May. Brazil’s PE market assumes ADDs on US, Canada material to be imposed from June Brazil’s polyethylene (PE) sellers this week are encouraging customers to bring forward purchases on the assumption that the government is to impose antidumping duties (ADDs) on US and Canadian material from June. US ethylene market braces for supply ramp-up as demand stays unsettled After a heavy turnaround season that began in January, the US ethylene market is preparing for a wave of fresh output that threatens to tip the sector back into oversupply as demand continues to face economic and trade policy headwinds. Brazil postpones decision on US-Canada PE antidumping duties Brazil's foreign trade committee Gecex has postponed a meeting where it was expected to decide on imposing antidumping duties (ADDs) polyethylene (PE) imports from the US and Canada. UPDATE: US trade court rules against Trump's emergency tariffs on global goods A US court ruled on Wednesday that the president cannot impose global tariffs under an emergency act, voiding all but the sectoral ones that the nation imposed against nearly every country in the world. INSIGHT: Court ruling to remove nearly all US chem tariffs imposed in 2025 A court ruling will leave the US some room to impose tariffs on imports of plastics and chemicals, but if it remains in place, it will eliminate virtually all the duties that the country imposed on those materials – opening the way for other countries to lift their retaliatory tariffs imposed on the nation's substantial exports of petrochemicals. Appeals court allows US to maintain chem tariffs 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. Tricon Energy emphasizes ability to pivot quickly in face of tariff volatility – CEO In an increasingly volatile and uncertain world with a constantly changing US tariff regime throwing fuel on the fire, agility to adjust and pivot is more important than ever for a global chemical distributor, said the CEO of US-based Tricon Energy.

02-Jun-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)–A US court ruled on Wednesday that the president cannot impose global tariffs under an emergency act, a judgment that would void many of the tariffs that the nation imposed in 2025 against nearly every country in the world. The administration of US President Donald Trump filed a notice that it was appealing the ruling. Under the judgment issued by the US Court of International Trade, the US has 10 calendar days to withdraw the following tariffs: – 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 the flow of illicit drugs. 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 the flow of immigrants and illicit drugs. 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 the flow of illicit drugs. The US imposed these tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which gives the president authority to take actions to address a severe national security threat. To justify the use of the IEEPA, Trump declared that the trade deficit, drug smuggling and illegal immigration constituted national emergencies. If the ruling stands, it would remove the tariffs that the US has imposed on many imports of commodity plastics and chemicals. By extension, the ruling would remove the threat of retaliatory tariffs that other countries could impose on the nation's substantial exports of polyethylene (PE), polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and other ethylene derivatives. The court's order does not cover the sectoral tariffs that the US has imposed on specific products such as steel and aluminium. In addition, it does not cover the Section 301 tariffs that the US imposed against Chinese imports during Trump's first term. These tariffs were intended to address unfair trade practices. RATIONALE BEHIND THE COURT'S JUDGMENTThe US constitution delegates the power to impose tariffs to congress. Although congress has delegated trade authority to the president, it had set clear limitations that allowed the legislature to retain the power to impose tariffs. The IEEPA does not delegate unbounded tariff authority to the president, the court said. "Any interpretation of IEEPA that delegates unlimited tariff authority is unconstitutional." The authority that congress delegated to the president under IEEPA is limited and does not include the power to impose any tariffs, the court said. COURT FINDS NO EMERGENCYEven if the president could impose tariffs under IEEPA, the trade deficit does not constitute an emergency, the court ruled. The US already has a statute to address trade deficits under Section 122. "Section 122 removes the president’s power to impose remedies in response to balance-of-payments deficits, and specifically trade deficits, from the broader powers granted to a president during a national emergency under IEEPA by establishing an explicit non-emergency statute with greater limitations," it said. In addition, the court found that drug trafficking and illegal immigration fail to meet the emergency threshold established under IEEPA. To meet that threshold, the emergency must have a substantial part of its source outside of the US and it must pose a threat to the nation's national security, foreign policy or economy. Also, the emergency must be unusual and extraordinary. The action that the president takes must deal directly with the threat. The court found that the tariffs fail to directly deal with drug trafficking and illegal immigration. While they may provide the US with leverage to negotiate agreements, such leverage does not meet the threshold of addressing the emergency at hand. The 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 shows containers, which are used in international trade. Image by Costfoto/NurPhoto/Shutterstock. Visit the ICIS Topic Page: US tariffs, policy – impact on chemicals and energy

29-May-2025

SAO PAULO (ICIS)–Brazil's foreign trade committee Gecex has postponed a meeting where it was expected to decide on imposing antidumping duties (ADDs) polyethylene (PE) imports from the US and Canada. The decision has created uncertainty in the country's PE market, which widely expected the ADDs to be implemented from June. In a note on its website, Gecex stated the “meeting will be rescheduled” but offered no further details. A spokesperson for Gecex said to ICIS it did not have any further information to offer. Gecex's meeting this week planned to discuss its investigation into allegations by Braskem, Brazil's sole PE producer, that US and Canadian producers are exporting PE to Brazil below fair market value. According to market sources, Braskem had already been communicating to customers price increases on the back of the expected ADDs. A Braskem spokesperson later confirmed on Friday that Braskem's PE prices would roll over in June from May. Earlier this week, Gecex increased ADDs on US polyvinyl chloride (PVC) from from 8.2% to 43.7%. Gecex is also investigating potential polyethylene terephthalate (PET) dumping from Malaysia and Vietnam, following ADDs proposals by Indorama and Alpek. The plastics transformation sector in Brazil said ADDs in place and those potentially implemented in the near future increase costs for all major thermoplastic resins, raising input costs for manufacturers. Meanwhile, the trade group representing producers Abiquim said the low operating rates across the country’s chemical plants were partly a result of unfair global competition, and fully supported ADDs being imposed on US and Canadian PE. Front page picture: Port of Santos in Sao Paulo, Latin America’s largest Source: Port of Santos Authority (recasts, adds paragraph 7 with comment from Braskem; clarifies last paragraph)

28-May-2025