Displaying items by tag: Tax

Armenia: The Committee on Economic Affairs of the National Assembly has approved a fourfold increase on cement import duty, in a bid to protect domestic producers from cheaper Iranian imports, according to Arminfo News. Cement production in Iran is reportedly cheaper due to state subsidies and low energy prices, and is exported in large volumes to neighbouring countries, including Armenia. The new duty intends to create equal competition in the sector. According to the State Revenue Committee, cement imports to Armenia rose by 72% year-on-year to 436,000t in 2024.

Vietnam: The government has reduced cement clinker export tax from 10% to 5%, effective from 19 May 2025 to the end of 2026. The 10% rate will be reinstated on 1 January 2027.

The Ministry of Finance said the temporary measure is an effort to help local manufacturers adjust production and reduce their inventory amid falling demand. Only 77% of Vietnam’s 122Mt/yr cement capacity is currently in use, with 34 out of 92 lines suspending operations in 2024. Cement and clinker exports fell by 5% to 29.7Mt in 2024, with revenues down by 14% year-on-year to US$1.14bn. Clinker exports alone were valued at US$301m.

Demand for heavy building materials in the UK dropped in the first quarter of 2025, with ready-mix concrete sales reaching a new 60-year low.¹ In an update last week, the UK’s Mineral Products Association (MPA) attributed the decline to existing economic headwinds, compounded by global trade disruptions, reduced investor confidence and renewed inflationary pressures.

Major infrastructure projects – including the HS2 high-speed railway in the English Midlands, the Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant in Somerset and the Sizewell C nuclear power plant in Suffolk – failed to offset delays and cancellations by cash-strapped local councils to roadwork projects. Residential construction, meanwhile, is ‘slowly but steadily’ recovering from historical lows, amid continuing high mortgage rates since late 2024.

The most interesting part of the MPA’s market appraisal was its warning of ‘new risks emerging in the global economy.’ These concern the new tariffs raised by the US against its import partners. The possible consequences, the MPA says, imperil the UK’s supply chains, construction sector and growth.

Of particular immediacy is the threat of imports into the UK from countries that previously focussed on the US market. The MPA said that the industry ‘cannot compete’ against increased low-cost, CO₂-intensive imports. It named Türkiye, which sends around 6.9Mt/yr of cement and clinker to the US, as a key threat. Türkiye became subject to the blanket 10% ‘baseline’ tariff on 2 April 2025.

The MPA probably didn’t have a particular company in mind when it said this. However, it bears noting that Turkish interests gained a share of UK cement capacity in October 2024, when Çimsa acquired 95% of Northern Ireland-based Mannok. Besides the Derrylin cement plant (situated on the border between Fermanagh, UK, and Cavan, Ireland), Mannok operates the Rochester cement storage and distribution facility in Kent, 50km from London. The facility currently supplies cement from Derrylin to Southern England and the Midlands. It could easily serve as a base of operations for processing and distributing imported cement and clinker from further afield.

Meanwhile in South West England, Portugal-based Cimpor is building a €20 – 25m cement import terminal in the Port of Bristol. The company is subject to 20% tariffs on shipments to the US from its home country. Its parent company, Taiwan Cement Corporation, is subject to 32% US tariffs from Taiwan.

But the plot thickens… On 8 May 2025, the UK became the first country to conclude a trade agreement with the US after the erection of the new tariff regime, under which the US$73bn/yr-worth of British goods sold in the US became subject to a 10% tariff.² The latest agreement brought partial relief for an allied sector of UK cement: steel. 180,000t flowed into the US from the UK in 2024.³ In 2024, the UK exported 7120t of cement and clinker to the US, up by a factor of 10 decade-on-decade from just 714t in 2014, all of it into two US customs districts, Philadelphia and New York City.⁴

In what may be one of the first true ‘Brexit benefits,’ UK cement exporters now ‘enjoy’ a US tariff rate half that of their EU competitors, notably those in Greece. Like the UK’s more modest volumes, Greece’s 1.82Mt/yr-worth of cement and clinker exports stateside also enter via the US’ eastern seaports, at New York City, Tampa and Norfolk. Given the overlaps in ownership between the Greek and UK cement sectors, it is conceivable that optimisation of cement export flows across Europe may already be under discussion.

On 6 May 2025, the UK and Indian governments announced a trade deal that will lift customs duties on almost all current Indian exports to the UK. UK MPs are still seeking clarifications as to whether this will include industrial products that might be dumped.⁵ Theoretically, the threat from an oversupplied and fast-growing cement industry like India’s could be existential to the UK cement industry.

As the UK invests heavily in its future, including with the HyNet Consortium, imports pose a major threat. Given enough time, the UK could develop a leading position in the decarbonisation space. Will it have enough time? Existential threats certainly add a sense of jeopardy.

References
1. Mineral Products Association, ‘Weak start to 2025 for building materials sales amid growing economic headwinds,’ 6 May 2025, www.mineralproducts.org/News/2025/release16.aspx

2. HM Government, ‘UK overseas trade in goods statistics November 2024,’ 16 January 2025, www.gov.uk/government/statistics/uk-overseas-trade-in-goods-statistics-november-2024/uk-overseas-trade-in-goods-statistics-november-2024-commentary

3. UK Steel, ‘US 25% tariffs on UK steel imports come into effect,’ 12 March 2025, www.uksteel.org/steel-news-2025/us-25-tariffs-on-uk-steel-imports-come-into-effect

4. United States Geological Survey, ‘Cement in December 2024,’ January 2025, https://d9-wret.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/assets/palladium/production/s3fs-public/media/files/mis-202412-cemen.pdf

5. Welsh Liberal Democrats, ‘UK-Indian Trade Deal: Government Refuses to Answer Whether it Has Conceded on Cheap Indian Steel Imports,’ 6 May 2025, www.libdems.wales/news/article/uk-indian-trade-deal-government-refuses-to-answer-whether-it-has-conceded-on-cheap-indian-steel-imports

Pakistan: The Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) has introduced a new valuation mechanism for collecting sales tax on cement, effective 1 May 2025. Under the revised approach, the FBR will use the average national retail price of cement as reported in the Pakistan Bureau of Statistics' (PBS) weekly Sensitive Price Index (SPI). Average prices will be calculated just before the 1st and 16th of each month, with the values used to calculate taxes for the approximately two-week periods that begin on the corresponding dates.

FBR officials said the decision aims to prevent under-invoicing practices within the cement sector by aligning the taxable value with officially reported retail prices.
By using PBS data as the benchmark, the FBR expects to streamline sales tax collection and reduce revenue leakage in the cement supply chain.

President Trump said he was going to do it… and he did. The US announced tariffs on most imports on 2 April 2025 that took effect from 5 April 2025. So, once again, we ask what the consequences of this might be upon the cement sector.

Table 1: Estimated burden of US tariffs on selected countries importing cement based on 2024 data. Source: Based on USGS data.

Global Cement Magazine Editorial Director Robert McCaffrey posted a similar table to the one above on LinkedIn on 4 April 2025. It applies the new import tariffs to the value of imported hydraulic cement and clinker to the US in 2024 as reported by the United States Geological Survey (USGS). As such it gives us a starting idea of how the new tariffs might change what happens in 2025. For an idea of the volumes of cement imported to the US in recent years refer to the graph in GCW695.

However, a couple of key caveats were pointed out by commentators to that LinkedIn post. Marty Ozinga noted that the values from the USGS are customs values. Crucially, he said that the tariffs will be charged upon the FOB value of cement at the point of origin and not on the transport costs. This is significant because the cost of moving the cement can sometimes be more than half the total values reported in the table for certain countries. Another commentator wanted to make it clear that tariffs on imports are imposed upon the supply chain and are paid somewhere along it, typically by end users, rather than the originating country. Elsewhere, the feeling was very much one of waiting to see what would happen next and how markets would reorder.

Taken at face value, the first takeaway from Table 1 is that the variable tariffs disrupt the competitiveness of the importers. Any importer from a country with the lowest rate, 10%, now has an advantage over those with higher ones. Türkiye seems to be the obvious winner here as it was both the largest importer of cement in 2024 and it has the lowest rate. Vietnam appears to be a loser with a massive 46% rate. Canada and Mexico may have problems with a 25% tariff but how their cement gets to the US market may make a big difference as Ozinga mentions above. And so it goes down the list. What may be significant is how the order of the importers further down the list changes. For example, Algeria has a 30% rate compared to Egypt’s 10%. Both nations exported a similar volume of cement to the US in 2024.

The first casualty of the last week has been market certainty. The US announced the tariffs and stock markets slumped around the world. They started to revive on 8 April 2025 as the US government made more reassuring noises about trade talks but this was dampened by renewed fears of a US - China trade war. The orthodox economic view is that the US tariffs are increasingly likely to cause a recession in the US in the short term regardless of whether they have a more positive effect on the longer one. This view can be detected in former PCA economist Ed Sullivan’s latest independent report on the US economy. He acknowledged the fairness argument the US government has made, but warned of stagflation.

On the US construction market, prices look set to rise in areas that previously relied on imports or are near to them. Cement companies in the US should be able to sell higher volumes as some level of domestic production outcompetes imports. The sector produced 86Mt in 2024 and has a capacity of 120Mt/yr giving it a utilisation rate of 72%. It imported 20 - 25Mt of cement in 2024. One sign of this happening might be renewed investment in local capacity through upgrades, new lines and even new plants. However, a recession would reduce overall consumption. On the equipment side, there is likely to be a similar readjustment between local and foreign suppliers. Certainly, if the tariffs stick around then more non-US companies may be tempted to set up local subsidiaries and /or manufacturing bases if conditions permit. For example, note JCB’s doubling in size this week of a plant it is building in Texas. One interesting situation might occur if a US cement company wants to build a new production line. All the likely suppliers, at present at least, appear to be based outside of the US.

Finally, despite everything, Holcim declared this week that it had completed a $3.4bn bond offering ahead of the impending spin-off of Amrize in the US noting “strong investor interest in the future company.” It wants to shore-up confidence ahead of the creation of the new company at some point in the first half of the year. Holcim’s CEO said previously that he didn’t expect any blowback from tariffs as the company was a local business in the US. What may be worth watching for is whether the current disruption to stock markets causes any delays to the creation of Amrize.

The current situation with the tariffs is prompting a rapid-revaluation of the US construction market and the wider economy. US-based building materials companies look set to benefit but there may be disruption along the way. Foreign companies supplying the sector may well experience sharp changes in circumstances depending on how tariffs reorder supply chains. Prices for end-users look set to rise. We live in interesting times.

For Ed Sullivan’s take on the US cement sector read his article in the May 2025 issue of Global Cement Magazine

Boral announced this week that it had secured around US$15m from the Australian government towards decarbonisation upgrades at its Berrima cement plant in New South Wales. The funding will go towards the company’s own investment in a kiln feed optimisation project. A new specialised grinding circuit and supporting infrastructure at the site is intended to increase the proportion of alternative raw materials (ARM) from 9% to 23% to decrease the amount of limestone the kiln uses. The use of more ARMs should also enable the unit to reduce its energy intensity. Boral plans to use ARMs including granulated blast furnace slag, steel slag, cement fibre board, fly ash and fine aggregates from recycled concrete. Commissioning and full operation of the changes are scheduled for 2028.

The Berrima plant officially opened its last set of changes, including a chlorine bypass unit, in December 2024. This was done to allow the plant to reach a thermal substitution rate (TSR) of 60% by the end of 2027. At the end of 2024 the company said it had a TSR of 30% having risen by 20% from 2023. Another similar decarbonisation project at the plant is a carbon capture and storage demonstration pilot trial involving the recarbonation of construction and demolition waste.

Parent company SGH said in its annual report for 2024 that Boral was continuing to advocate for a carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) to prevent carbon leakage and that it had taken part in the ongoing government review on the issue. This lobbying was visible earlier in March 2025 when the Cement Industry Federation (CIF) publicly addressed the government on the issue ahead of its next budget. It asked that carbon leakage be addressed in the form of an import tax to protect the local cement and lime sector. Cement and lime imports from Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam and Japan are particularly seen as an issue. The government review into carbon leakage started in 2023 and is due to report back at some point in 2025, most likely after the parliamentary election in May 2025.

Another big sector news story to note is the ongoing acquisition of the cementitious division of the Buckeridge Group of Companies (BGC) by Cement Australia that was revealed in December 2024. Unsurprisingly, the European Commission (EC) approved the deal in late March 2025. Cement Australia’s parent companies Holcim and Heidelberg Materials are headquartered in Europe, but the EC concluded that the planned transaction was unlikely to dampen competition in Europe. The verdict of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) is likely to be far more telling. It closed taking submissions on the proposed deal in late February 2025 and plans to release an update in May 2025.

The ACCC’s market inquiries letter reported that Cement Australia wants to run BCG Cement. However, under the acquisition proposal, BGC Quarries and BGC Asphalt will be acquired and operated by a new 50:50 joint venture between Holcim and Heidelberg Materials, which will operate as a production joint venture in respect of aggregates. Holcim and Heidelberg Materials have suggested taking four ready-mixed concrete (RMC) plants each in the greater Perth area. Finally, one RMC plant at Wangara could be divested due to the close proximity of existing plants run by Holcim and Heidelberg Materials. Whether this is what actually happens remains to be seen.

Finally, Holcim flagged-up Australia this week as one of the regions it intends to derive ‘profitable growth’ from after the planned spin-off of the US business. This approach is in line with the hunt by the big building materials companies for new growth markets as the cost of merger and acquisition activity in the US has risen. CRH, for example, bought a majority stake in AdBri in mid-2024. Further merger and acquisition activity in the cement sector in Australia seems less likely given its relative small size. Yet the higher economic growth forecast for the country compared to Europe is likely to keep multinationals interested.

Australia: The Australian government’s ‘unwillingness’ to impose a carbon levy on imported cement, lime and clinker is threatening decarbonisation efforts and could cost up to 1400 jobs, according to the Financial Review.

The Cement Industry Federation, which represents local producers Adbri, Boral and Cement Australia, has said that the absence of a carbon levy on imports from countries with less robust climate commitments paved the way for the offshoring of local manufacturing, a process known as ‘carbon leakage’.

It said “Not addressing the issue of carbon leakage in a timely manner will be detrimental to Australian cement and lime manufacturing and could lead to the unnecessary loss of key Australian cement and lime facilities."

Imports currently account for over 40% of domestic clinker consumption and originate largely from southeast Asia. In 2023, an energy expert was appointed by the government to assess the feasibility of an Australian carbon border adjustment mechanism, with a final recommendation expected to be delivered in 2024. However, only an interim report was released in November 2024, with the final advice now reportedly due after the election in May 2025.

The Pacific Cement Corporation (PACEMCO) held a groundbreaking ceremony this week officially ‘reopening’ its cement plant in Surigao City. The revival of the plant has been supported by investments by San Miguel Corporation (SMC). Various dignitaries attended the event including John Paul Ang, the chief operating officer of SMC, the mayor of Surigao City mayor and the governor of Surigao del Norte.

The plant has been closed since 2014 due to financial problems. At the time, Global Cement reported that the cement plant stopped operations in May 2014 after the Surigao del Norte Electric Cooperative cut its power supply for unsettled debts worth at least US$0.5m. PACEMCO was originally set up in 1967 and the plant had a production capacity of 0.22Mt/yr via one production line in 2014.

Earlier in March 2025 the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) was keen to highlight the efforts that Taiheiyo Cement Philippines (TCP) is making towards supporting the country's infrastructure capacity. Company executives met with the DTI and revealed plans including building a distribution terminal in Calaca, Batangas with the aim of targeting the Luzon market. This follows the construction of a new US$220m production line at TCP’s San Fernando plant in Cebu in July 2024.

Both announcements follow the implementation in late February 2025 of a provisional tariff on cement imports. The DTI started investigating imports in the autumn of 2024 and later decided to initiate a ‘preliminary safeguard measure’ following the discovery of a “causal link between the increased imports of the products under consideration and serious injury to the domestic industry.” The tariff takes the form of a cash bond of US$6.95/t or US$0.28/40kg bag of cement. It will be in place for 200 days, to mid-September 2025, while the Philippine Tariff Commission conducts a final investigation. The two main countries that will be affected are Vietnam and Japan. A large number of countries are exempt from the tariff including, notably, China and Indonesia. Both of these two countries were larger sources of imports to the Philippines during the five-year period the DTI is investigating. However, imports from these places have declined since 2021 and 2023 respectively.

Graph 1: Import of cement to the Philippines, 2019 - 2024. Source: Department of Trade and Industry.

A preliminary report by the DTI published in late February 2025 outlines the reasons for the provisional tariff. In summary it found that imports rose from 2019 and 2024 and the share of imports increased also pushing down the domestic share of sales. In the view of the report, the domestic cement sector experienced declining sales, production, capacity utilisation, profitability and employment for each year apart from 2021. One point to note is that the imports were split roughly 50:50 between local and foreign companies. Local company Philcement, for example, was the largest importer for cement to the Philippines from 2019 to 2024. In its statement to the DTI it said that it had invested in manufacturing the processing sites in the country. It argued that overprotection of the market discouraged competition and might not be aligned with the economic goals of the country.

Last time Global Cement Weekly covered the Philippines (GCW669) in July 2024 it looked likely that the government would take further action on imports. This has now happened on a temporary basis but it looks likely that it will become permanent. Recent investment announcements from local producers such as PACEMCO and TCP may be coincidental but they suggest a tentative confidence in the local sector.

Bangladesh: The Bangladesh Cement Manufacturers Association (BCMA) has requested that the National Board of Revenue (NBR) lower an import tax on clinker to US$1.7/t. The lobbying is taking place ahead of the upcoming budget for the 2025 – 2026 financial year, according to the Financial Express newspaper. The association also expressed concern that a 10% duty was levied on limestone imports, but it expects this to be relaxed in the upcoming budget. The BCMA has urged the NBR to simplify customs regulations and impose a tariff system on value-added tax (VAT) calculations.

India: The Tamil Nadu government will impose a mineral-bearing land tax of US$1.82/t on limestone under the Tamil Nadu Mineral Bearing Land Tax Act 2024. This tax, payable in advance on mineral dispatch, is in addition to existing royalty charges. The announcement follows Karnataka’s recent decision to levy US$0.29/t on limestone mined.

The tax will raise production costs for cement producers in the region, particularly affecting Ramco Cements, which has 52% of its clinker capacity in Tamil Nadu, and Dalmia Bharat, which has 23%. Other Indian cement producers are less affected, with UltraTech Cement only holding 4% capacity in the area, and ACC 2%. This could mean that the cost increase is passed on to consumers, raising the price of cement.