The United States hosted the Ministerial Forum on Global Steel Excess Capacity (GFSEC) in Milwaukee on Wednesday (September 30), where forum members reached a consensus on the new “Milwaukee Framework.” This agreement aims to address global steel excess capacity through measures such as reducing market-distorting subsidies, strengthening trade remedies, and tracing the sources of steel.
This agreement signifies that the United States is further pushing its policy direction to address steel excess capacity towards multinational coordinated actions. China was a focus of attention as a non-member economy in this official information. U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer explicitly invited like-minded partners to take similar measures.
According to data from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), as of the third quarter of 2025, 54% of global steel excess capacity is attributed to China.
The GFSEC Ministerial Statement additionally points out that, in terms of asset size, typical Chinese steel enterprises receive subsidies, tax incentives, and below-market-rate loans approximately 15 times higher than typical steel enterprises in other regions, with China’s steel subsidy rate nearly doubling since 2019.
GFSEC is an international forum consisting of 28 major steel-producing economies, aiming to cooperate in dealing with global steel excess capacity and unfair competition issues.
Per the “Milwaukee Framework,” GFSEC members first pledge to constrain their subsidy policies to reduce and eliminate government support measures that may contribute to global steel excess capacity. The framework also allows members to take trade measures against steel from excess capacity sources.
Members are also committed to enhancing anti-dumping, countervailing, and safeguards investigations, with the possibility for authorities to initiate cases proactively when necessary; in appropriate circumstances, other trade measures can also be taken against steel and steel-containing products from global excess capacity sources.
Furthermore, the framework calls for strengthening the tracing of steel actual sources, preventing steel from being transshipped through third countries to evade tariffs and other trade protections by collecting data on “melting and casting countries” and exchanging trade information.
GFSEC data shows that since 2016, of the 68 anti-dumping or countervailing measures taken against China by members that are still in effect, 28 cases have exhibited a similar “suspicious trade pattern”: China’s exports to GFSEC members significantly decrease, while exports to non-GFSEC economies increase, and subsequently, these economies increase exports of similar products to GFSEC members.
Greer stated, “If like-minded partners adopt similar policies, they can hold accountable countries that exacerbate the global steel excess capacity issue.”
He expressed that the United States looks forward to working with other GFSEC members to implement the “Milwaukee Framework,” take effective measures to address excess capacity and its effects, and restore a fair global competitive environment.
Poland’s Minister of Finance and Economy, Andrzej Domanski, who attended the meeting, stated, “We see that China indeed provides significant subsidies to its steel production and exports.” He mentioned that this is a concern for Poland and many EU countries.
OECD data further indicates that in 2025, there were 75 new anti-dumping and countervailing investigations initiated globally, with 27 targeting China, accounting for over one-third of the total and significantly higher than other countries.
GFSEC ministers also requested to extend the forum’s term for another three years and revise its scope of responsibilities to include the implementation, monitoring, and subsequent expansion of the “Milwaukee Framework.”
The GFSEC Ministerial Statement’s attachment lists various data focusing on China’s steel subsidies, capacity, and export issues. It notes that with domestic steel demand stagnating in China, producers are redirecting more production to overseas markets to offset the decline in domestic sales.
In 2025, China’s steel exports reached a record 131 million metric tons, a 153% increase from 2020, surpassing the EU’s total steel production that year.
Chinese steel companies are also adding approximately 70 million metric tons of capacity overseas, mainly concentrated in Southeast Asia and Africa; in cross-border steel investments by China, at least 70% involve a state-owned enterprise.
GFSEC points out that the average capacity of investment projects involving Chinese state-owned enterprises is 3.3 million metric tons, higher than private enterprise projects with 2.4 million metric tons, indicating that state-owned enterprises’ overseas investment scale is typically larger. Official documents suggest that such state-owned enterprise activities could serve as a channel for Beijing to promote the expansion of overseas steel capacity.
GFSEC also highlights that between 2026 and 2028, global steel demand is projected to increase by only 34 million metric tons, while steelmaking capacity could increase by as much as 139 million metric tons. OECD estimates that the additional capacity by 2028 is equivalent to around a 5.7% increase compared to 2025; in contrast, the annual average growth rate of global steel demand is approximately 0.9% until 2030.