March 03, 2026 | Reading time: 6 minutes
Since the beginning of 2026, CO₂ taxes have been levied on steel imports into the EU for the first time. Helge Langheim, Head of Foreign Trade Policy, Markets, and Statistics at Salzgitter AG, considers the CBAM to be necessary in creating climate protection incentives, not only for domestic producers but also for international competitors – despite criticism voiced concerning bureaucracy and potential loopholes.
Mr. Langheim, why is CBAM actually necessary?
The CBAM is necessary because the European steel industry is already required to pay CO2 charges through emissions trading. These levies are set to rise year on year in order to make the switch to low-carbon technologies worthwhile. Until now, imports have been exempt from these charges; from January 1, 2026, steel imports will also face CO2 charges of around €50-60 per tonne in instances where companies have their emissions data officially audited. If a producer fails to do so, the costs will be higher. For the first time, this will – at least in part – establish a level playing field, although there is still too much scope for the levy to be undercalculated or circumvented.
Where do you see scope for improvement?
In future, even more products will have to be subject to the CBAM. We also need rules to prevent circumvention. The EU Commission made proposals on this at the end of December, but they are not extensive enough. If the steel value chain is not subject to the CBAM with regard to essential goods, more finished products will be imported into the EU and our customers will lose out. At the same time, it shouldn’t be possible for companies to export low-carbon products to the EU while selling carbon-intensive products on their own domestic market, thereby making no real effort to reduce CO2 emissions. Furthermore, it is unclear how CO2 charges levied on exports can be eased in such a way that EU products remain competitive on global markets.
Critics complain that CBAM drives up costs and stands on shaky ground in legal terms. Is there any truth to this?
In some regards, we can understand this criticism as certain elements of the CBAM have been poorly implemented and many of the regulations are very complex. We have made numerous proposals to simplify the CBAM so as to increase its acceptance and effectiveness. The EU has decided to take every eventuality into consideration. The border adjustment must also be legally acceptable to the World Trade Organization (WTO). With all due respect, I consider the criticism to be exaggerated, as there was a two-year transition period and decarbonization cannot succeed if the CO2 price signal does not apply to imports.
What would you say to critics who argue that the CBAM is a protectionist tool?
The CBAM does not hinder trade - it makes it fairer and is intended to help achieve global and EU climate targets. Europe wants to continue its pioneering effort and aims to become climate neutral by 2050. However, if we want to manufacture in a more climate-friendly manner, while maintaining energy-intensive basic industries in the EU, we must combine emissions trading with the CBAM. This represents the most market-oriented and fairest approach. Other countries are currently examining whether they can introduce comparable systems. Concerns regarding trade conflicts solely due to border adjustment are therefore unfounded. It actually creates positive incentives to invest in climate protection now. All in all, the CBAM is paving the way for fair global competition conditions – securing Europe's industrial strength while protecting the environment at the same time.
Discover similar posts
CBAM: Green steel needs fair rules
Too bureaucratic, too expensive, too protectionist opine the opponents – not consistent enough counter the advocates: Criticism of the CO₂ compensation mechanism CBAM, which has been in place since the beginning of 2026, continues unabated. Find out here why the instrument nevertheless remains indispensable for preventing carbon leakage and driving the decarbonization of industry forward.
Read post
On the 1.5 °C pathway
Salzgitter AG is in the midst of the largest transformation in its history: This is how SALCOS® is driving the decarbonization of the steel industry.
Read postThe address of this article has been copied to your clipboard.