Background: Europe is facing a structural supply crisis
The European aluminium industry is facing one of the most challenging periods in its recent history. European demand for aluminium continues to be driven by the needs of the automotive, construction, renewable energy, electrification, packaging and industrial processing sectors. At the same time, Europe’s primary aluminium production capacity has declined dramatically over the years, mainly as a result of high energy costs and increasingly unfavourable competitive conditions compared with non-European producers.
Europe is now structurally dependent on imports of primary aluminium. European demand amounts to approximately 13 million tonnes of aluminium per year, while domestic primary production is now only slightly above 0.9 million tonnes. The resulting primary aluminium deficit to be covered through imports therefore exceeds 85%.
This dependence is likely to become even more significant in an international context characterised by increasing competition for access to metal and growing and widespread geopolitical instability. The United States, in particular, has strengthened its ability to attract metal and raw materials through an increasingly aggressive trade policy. US tariffs on European aluminium have altered the balance of the global market and increased competitive pressure on European companies.
Against this background, Europe must consider access to aluminium supply as a fundamental strategic issue, and this concerns both primary and secondary aluminium.
On the one hand, Europe imports the vast majority of its primary aluminium requirements. On the other, more than 1.2 million tonnes of aluminium scrap collected in the EU, which represents the raw material for secondary aluminium production, are exported every year to non-European markets. This volume represents approximately 25% of Europe’s current recycling capacity.
This creates a paradoxical situation: Europe applies import tariffs to primary raw material, which it structurally lacks, while simultaneously exporting a significant share of the secondary raw material that could help reduce its dependence on aluminium imports.
1. The scrap issue
Since June 2025, FACE has been addressing the issue of aluminium scrap, identifying three main obstacles to the development of European recycling:
- the outdated classification of scrap and regulatory complexity;
- the growth in scrap exports and trade imbalances;
- the urgent need to strengthen European infrastructure for the collection, sorting and recycling of aluminium scrap.
FACE has particularly highlighted that an increasing share of higher-value scrap is being directed towards the United States and Asia, where operators can offer higher prices.
It is also important to stress that FACE’s position has never been limited to a request for restrictions on aluminium scrap exports. FACE has consistently emphasised the need for a balanced package of measures, including general measures such as support for SMEs across the value chain, administrative and regulatory simplification, lower energy costs and stronger support for research and innovation, together with:
- extraordinary and temporary measures targeted at scrap exports;
- revision of rules that hinder the use of scrap within the EU;
- recognition of aluminium scrap as a strategic raw material;
- development of advanced sorting and processing technologies;
- incentives for the use of post-consumer scrap.
FACE has also consistently made clear a fundamental principle: primary and secondary aluminium are interdependent, and access to low-carbon primary aluminium must be preserved.
For this reason, FACE reiterates its call on the EU to reduce trade barriers to verified low-carbon primary aluminium imports, while stressing that measures concerning scrap exports cannot, in the long term, replace access to competitively priced raw materials.
In December 2025, FACE updated and strengthened its position based on evidence collected from operators across the value chain, in response to the questions raised by the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre regarding aluminium scrap.
The companies involved confirmed the issues already highlighted in June: increasing exports, insufficient sorting and recycling infrastructure, outdated classifications and growing administrative complexity. In addition, companies reported increasing difficulties in accessing the raw material needed to maintain production continuity.
In light of these developments, the companies consulted by FACE expressed unanimous support for stronger safeguard measures, such as a high export duty or an export ban, always accompanied by investments and simplification measures aimed at strengthening European recycling capacity.
FACE’s position has therefore evolved in response to changing market conditions: from a temporary measure focused on the recycling issue to a request for more decisive intervention should the supply situation continue to deteriorate.
European scrap exports have now reached approximately 1.2 million tonnes per year, equivalent to around 25% of European recycling capacity.
Retaining scrap in Europe therefore means increasing the availability of secondary raw materials while simultaneously reducing pressure on the need to import primary aluminium.
2. The international context makes the issue even more urgent
Meanwhile, the international competitive environment has changed profoundly.
Global competition for aluminium and secondary raw materials is increasing. In particular, the US market has become increasingly attractive for European scrap. Price differentials and international trading conditions incentivise operators to direct towards the United States materials that could otherwise be used by the European value chain.
This phenomenon is particularly significant because scrap represents a strategic resource for a continent that has lost much of its primary production capacity.
The risk is that Europe may simultaneously lose primary production capacity and access to secondary raw materials. This is a vulnerability that requires a European strategy covering the entire aluminium supply chain.
3. The paradox of the European market: tariffs on primary aluminium and the loss of secondary aluminium
FACE has for years criticised the current configuration of EU trade policy.
Europe is heavily dependent on imports of primary aluminium, yet it maintains tariff barriers on the import of unwrought metal, with duties that can generate an additional cost of up to 6% and an estimated overall cost for European industry of approximately €1 billion per year.
At the same time, Europe allows a significant share of its own scrap to be exported to competing markets.
It is therefore necessary to avoid an approach that addresses the two issues separately. Europe needs an effective and coherent policy that simultaneously pursues two objectives: ensuring the availability of European scrap and ensuring access to international primary aluminium at the most competitive conditions possible.
4. FACE’s requests to the European Commission
– Scrap: retaining a strategic resource in Europe
FACE calls for:
- the introduction of effective and decisive measures on aluminium scrap exports, through a temporary and targeted export duty;
- the recognition of all forms of aluminium scrap as strategic raw materials;
- the simplification of rules relating to the classification, transport and processing of scrap;
- the review of environmental rules that hinder the use of scrap within the EU;
- support for investments in collection, sorting, processing and recycling infrastructure;
- the use of financial instruments and measures to reduce energy costs for SMEs across the value chain;
- the provision of European funding for the development of advanced sorting and refining technologies;
- incentives for the use of post-consumer scrap in European production.
– Primary aluminium: eliminate import tariffs
In parallel, FACE considers it essential to eliminate EU tariffs on imports of primary aluminium.
Europe no longer has sufficient primary production capacity to meet its own needs. Maintaining tariff barriers on the import of a raw material for which European industry is heavily dependent on external supply means artificially increasing production costs for European processors, particularly SMEs.
In a structurally deficit European market, the introduction of restrictions or generalised bans may have counterproductive effects if they are not accompanied by sufficient, reliable and competitive alternative sources of supply.
European trade policy should therefore clearly distinguish between:
- measures that are necessary for security, foreign-policy or sanctions-related objectives;
- restrictions that instead artificially reduce the availability of metal for European industry.
FACE has previously expressed serious concerns regarding proposals for bans or sanctions on primary aluminium, highlighting the risk of turning Europe into a “captive market” precisely as its dependence on imports approaches 90%.
The objective must be to avoid any restriction on access to aluminium that is not accompanied by an adequate alternative source of supply.
5. A single European sourcing strategy centred on SME competitiveness
The issue of aluminium supply is particularly important for European SMEs.
The downstream value chain consists of thousands of companies that process aluminium into components, alloys, products and semi-finished goods for the main European industrial sectors.
These companies cannot fully pass increases in raw material costs on to their customers and must compete with non-European producers that may benefit from more favourable sourcing conditions.
For this reason, every European policy concerning aluminium should also be assessed in terms of its impact on independent processors and SMEs.
Access to competitively priced raw materials is not merely a trade issue. It is a condition for maintaining production capacity, employment, industrial skills and investment in Europe.
FACE therefore believes that European aluminium policy must adopt a comprehensive and integrated approach.
Scrap, primary aluminium, energy, trade and industrial competitiveness are all part of the same challenge.
Only through an integrated strategy will Europe be able to strengthen industrial competitiveness, circularity, supply-chain resilience and its capacity to compete in the global aluminium market.