South Korea’s Auto Sector Faces Tariff Threats Amid U.S. Trade Realignments

Economic

Summary:

As the U.S. reduces auto tariffs for Japan and potentially the EU, South Korea risks losing its competitive edge in its most critical export market unless it negotiates similar terms...

Tariff Disparities Threaten Korean Automakers in the U.S.

South Korea’s auto industry is sounding the alarm over potential disadvantages stemming from U.S. trade negotiations. Following Washington’s recent agreement to cut import tariffs on Japanese cars from 27.5% to 15%, and with the European Union also pursuing a similar deal, Seoul now faces mounting pressure to secure equal footing or risk significant losses in its top auto export market.

The United States remains one of the largest destinations for South Korean vehicles. According to market research firm JATO Dynamics, approximately 1.25 million South Korean vehicles were sold in the U.S. in 2024, representing 7.7% of total sales higher than Japan’s 6.1% and Europe’s 5.1%. Despite the volume, the existing trade dynamics now risk being upended by shifting tariff policies.

The Fragile Edge of Price Competitiveness

Historically, South Korea has benefited from the Korea–U.S. Free Trade Agreement (KORUS FTA), which exempted its vehicles from the baseline 2.5% tariff imposed on most imported cars. In contrast, Japan and the EU were subject to that rate. This 2.5% differential allowed South Korean manufacturers such as Hyundai and Kia to maintain a competitive price edge estimated to be around 5% cheaper than equivalent Japanese or European models.

However, with the U.S. now lowering tariffs on Japanese vehicles and potentially extending the same to the EU, South Korea risks facing a “tariff reversal.” In such a scenario, the very advantage that once gave Korean cars a foothold in the U.S. market may erode, especially if Seoul fails to negotiate reduced rates of its own.

Limited U.S. Production Increases Exposure

Unlike Japan, which has invested heavily in U.S.-based production to insulate itself from tariff risks, South Korea continues to rely primarily on direct exports. This makes Korean automakers particularly vulnerable to tariff hikes. The higher the duties, the more costly Korean vehicles become in comparison to competitors with a larger U.S. manufacturing footprint.

In contrast, European auto exports are often concentrated in luxury segments aimed at high-income consumers, who are less price-sensitive. Korean vehicles, by comparison, generally target cost-conscious buyers. Any increase in tariffs would directly undercut the value proposition of Korean brands in the mass-market segment.

Macroeconomic Implications for Korean Exports

The potential consequences extend beyond individual automakers. In the first half of 2025, automobiles and auto parts made up 32% of South Korea’s total exports to the U.S. A meaningful drop in vehicle sales would likely weigh on overall export performance, potentially widening the trade imbalance and dampening GDP growth.

Professor Heo Yoon of Sogang University emphasized that any erosion of tariff advantage could nullify the long-term benefits of the KORUS FTA. If the U.S. rewards Japan and the EU for their commitments such as Japan’s increased rice imports and expanded U.S. investments without extending similar terms to Korea, Seoul may be forced into reactive negotiations to preserve market access.

Strategic Trade Diplomacy Now Critical for Korea

South Korea stands at a critical juncture in preserving its automotive export dominance in the U.S. market. The country’s earlier advantage under the KORUS FTA is at risk of being neutralized by bilateral deals made with its competitors. Without urgent and strategic engagement with Washington, South Korean automakers may face higher tariffs that compromise both their market share and pricing strategy.

In a sector that underpins a significant portion of Korea’s export economy, this is more than a commercial concern it is a test of trade diplomacy and economic resilience in an increasingly protectionist global trade environment.

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

You understand and acknowledge that there is a high degree of risk involved in trading. Following any strategies or investment methods may lead to potential losses. The content on the site is provided by our contributors and analysts for information purposes only. You are solely responsible for determining whether any trading assets, securities, strategy, or any other product is suitable for investing based on your own investment objectives and financial situation.

Add to Favorites

Gerik

Economic

Commodity

Steel Surplus Builds as Strategic Interests Override Market Logic

In the face of swelling global overcapacity, steel production continues unabated worldwide. A simple market correction would suggest cutting back. But as the symbolic and strategic value of steel linked closely to economic power and national security remains deeply entrenched in state policy, no major steel-producing nation is willing to retreat.

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) estimates that global steel overcapacity could hit 721 million tons by 2027. This excess threatens profitability across the industry, yet state-supported production, particularly from China, continues to drive supply beyond demand.

Steel as National Identity and Industrial Backbone

Steel is not just a commodity it is viewed by governments as an indispensable material underpinning both infrastructure and defense. From high-rise buildings and household appliances to tanks and fighter jets, steel’s presence in modern life and warfare makes it a strategic resource.

In Europe, concerns about self-sufficiency have been amplified by geopolitical shifts. The U.K.’s Business and Trade Secretary, Jonathan Reynolds, described steel in April as central to Britain’s industrial might and global status. The move to protect the country’s last two blast furnaces through emergency legislation underscores steel’s enduring political significance.

Elisabeth Braw of the Atlantic Council notes that while no nation can produce everything domestically, steel is one of the few materials governments insist on securing at all costs.

China’s Dominance Distorts Global Markets

China’s state-backed steel boom has distorted global trade. Operating massive mills with minimal environmental regulation and government subsidies, China now produces more steel than the rest of the world combined. As domestic growth slows, Chinese producers are pushing excess supply into global markets at increasingly competitive prices.

This has led to a collapse in global prices at times making steel cheaper than bottled water per kilogram and has forced layoffs across Europe’s steel industry. In 2023, 18,000 jobs were eliminated and 9 million tons of capacity were shut across the European Union.

The influx of cheap Chinese steel undermines profit margins and diverts capital away from investments in low-carbon technology, hindering the EU’s climate goals. European governments are caught between maintaining industrial competitiveness, protecting jobs, and accelerating decarbonization efforts.

Trade Barriers and the Domino Effect of Protectionism

Governments have responded with tariffs and sanctions to defend their domestic industries. The EU has implemented trade penalties to curb Chinese dumping, but steel continues to reach its market often rerouted through third countries like South Korea and Japan.

U.S. protectionism under President Trump has intensified pressure. In March, a 25% tariff on steel imports was reinstated. By June, it doubled to 50%, threatening European producers with further market contraction. Tata Steel, for example, warned that such tariffs could render its products too expensive for key clients like Ford, Chrysler, and Caterpillar.

These trade barriers don’t only reduce export opportunities they prompt producers from other regions to redirect their exports toward Europe, intensifying internal competition and threatening the viability of European mills.

Tata Steel IJmuiden: A Microcosm of Industry Stress

Tata Steel’s facility in IJmuiden, the Netherlands the second-largest steel plant in Europe has managed to stay operational, but not unscathed. Set across a vast site equivalent to 1,100 football fields, the plant has faced lawsuits over toxic emissions and is under pressure to adopt green steelmaking technologies.

Yet, switching to greener methods such as hydrogen-based electric arc furnaces may increase costs by 30–60%, according to industry estimates. Meanwhile, Tata has already shed 1,600 jobs this spring to cut costs, reflecting the tension between environmental reform and economic survival.

Green Transition Stalled by Market Pressures

While steel produced with lower emissions is technically feasible, the financial burden of clean transition technologies is a major constraint. Investment in decarbonization becomes even harder as falling steel prices erode margins and public subsidies remain limited.

With 12% of Tata’s revenue tied to U.S. markets, and customers already absorbing the initial 25% tariff, the looming 50% rate could jeopardize long-standing supply chains.

The global steel sector illustrates a stark contradiction: an oversupplied market coexisting with relentless production driven by strategic imperatives. National interests, employment concerns, and defense priorities prevent rational supply-side corrections. As a result, overcapacity grows, prices fall, and international trade becomes increasingly contentious.

While decarbonization offers a path forward, it requires investment levels that are incompatible with the current economic conditions in the sector. Until nations resolve the tension between industrial sovereignty and market logic, the steel glut and its economic consequences will likely persist.

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Gerik

Cryptocurrency

Digital Currency Emerges as a Strategic Bypass to Sanctions

Amid tightening Western sanctions since Russia’s military escalation in Ukraine in 2022, a new financial workaround may be gaining traction. The introduction of a digital currency named A7A5 earlier this year has opened an alternative payment channel for Russian individuals and businesses, potentially undermining international efforts to isolate Moscow from the global financial system.

According to a recent report by The Kyiv Post citing AFP, Western intelligence and financial watchdogs suspect A7A5 could become a linchpin in Russia’s strategy to sustain cross-border transactions despite being largely cut off from systems like SWIFT and facing asset freezes and investment bans.

A7A5: Ruble-Backed, Domestically Anchored, Legally Elusive

The stablecoin A7A5 is pegged to the Russian ruble and is reportedly backed by deposits at Promsvyazbank, a state-aligned financial institution already sanctioned for its connections to the Russian military. This ruble-pegging provides a critical distinction: unlike USD-pegged tokens such as Tether’s USDT, A7A5 operates outside Western financial oversight, making it less vulnerable to regulatory freezes.

The coin is traded on the Kyrgyzstan-based exchange Grinex. Kyrgyzstan’s crypto regulatory landscape is notably more permissive and less influenced by Western financial authorities, offering a degree of operational shelter for digital assets linked to Moscow’s interests. Project director Leonid Shumakov stated that Kyrgyzstan was deliberately chosen for regulatory insulation and freedom from "economic pressure."

Shift in Strategy After Major U.S. Tether Clampdown

Earlier this year, U.S. authorities pressured Tether to freeze $28 million worth of USDT held in wallets belonging to Garantex, a major Russian crypto exchange. That freeze and the subsequent global enforcement action that shut down Garantex delivered a major blow to Russia’s earlier attempts to use USD-based stablecoins for international payments.

According to data from Global Ledger, millions of dollars were swiftly moved from USDT into A7A5 just before the crackdown suggesting Russian actors anticipated enforcement actions and shifted capital to less regulated alternatives.

Elise Thomas from the UK-based Centre for Information Resilience described this move as a “wake-up call” for Moscow, pushing the Kremlin to accelerate the creation of its own digital currency infrastructure beyond the reach of U.S.-linked platforms.

Scale of Adoption and Governance Behind A7A5

Despite being operational for less than six months, A7A5 is already holding approximately $150 million in assets. While this amount is modest relative to global cryptocurrency markets, its symbolic value and technical potential are far more significant. Experts caution that while A7A5 is not illegal in itself, its use by sanctioned individuals or institutions could reintroduce such actors into global financial flows through less visible paths.

The entity behind A7A5, known as the A7 group, is linked to Ilan Shor a Moldovan-born oligarch and politician currently residing in Russia. Investigations revealed shared infrastructure between A7A5’s digital operations and websites affiliated with Shor’s political movements, pointing to a convergence of financial technology and political influence.

Shor has already been sanctioned by the UK and EU for allegedly meddling in Moldova’s 2024 presidential election and referendum on EU accession. The European Union has accused him of working in alignment with Kremlin objectives to destabilize Moldova’s pro-European trajectory.

A Hybrid of Financial Sovereignty and Political Influence

A7A5’s development exemplifies Russia’s broader shift toward financial sovereignty amid isolation. Unlike traditional cryptocurrencies that fluctuate with market speculation, A7A5 offers a predictable ruble-pegged mechanism with institutional backing. Its primary value lies in regulatory invisibility rather than innovation allowing transactions to flow beneath the detection threshold of Western compliance frameworks.

At the same time, the coin's links to sanctioned political actors suggest that A7A5 may not merely serve economic purposes but also act as a geopolitical tool. The shared infrastructure between financial platforms and political movements implies a deliberate strategy to blend financial independence with influence operations.

A7A5 as an Emerging Node in Sanctions Evasion Infrastructure

While A7A5 has yet to gain wide usage, its architecture, affiliations, and rapid accumulation of capital indicate its growing relevance as part of Russia’s counter-sanctions playbook. The coin’s structure offers a blend of legal ambiguity and geopolitical insulation that could be replicated by other sanctioned states seeking to insulate themselves from Western financial coercion.

Its trajectory will depend on how aggressively Western governments move to monitor and regulate ruble-linked digital assets, and whether global crypto exchanges particularly those in neutral or pro-Russian jurisdictions become active participants or passive enablers in this evolving landscape. For now, A7A5 stands as both a technical experiment and a geopolitical signal: that Moscow is adapting, and doing so beyond the reach of traditional financial governance.

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Gerik

Economic

U.S. Demand Propels Vietnam’s Electronics Export Surge

Vietnam’s electronics and computer hardware sector has achieved a historic leap, with export revenue reaching $47.7 billion in the first six months of 2025 an impressive 40% increase year-on-year. At the center of this surge is the U.S. market, which alone accounted for $18.5 billion in imports from Vietnam during the same period, representing a 65.7% growth compared to 2024. In June alone, U.S. imports from this sector rose by nearly 78%, contributing almost $4 billion.

This development reaffirms the United States as the largest and most dynamic export destination for Vietnam’s electronics, which have now overtaken smartphones to become the country’s top export product by value.

Electronics Dominate Vietnam’s Export Portfolio

According to customs data, electronics including computers and related components make up 21.56% of Vietnam’s total export turnover. This figure places the category far ahead of traditional strongholds such as garments, footwear, and agricultural products. Notably, electronics exports to the U.S. account for more than 26% of all Vietnamese shipments to that market, making it the single largest product category exported to America.

Vietnam’s total goods exports to the U.S. in the first half of 2025 reached nearly $71 billion, with a trade surplus of around $62 billion. This reflects a strong export position, amplified by Vietnam’s ability to quickly mobilize supply chains and seize the opportunity created by the 90-day tariff suspension under the Trump administration.

Vietnam Rises to Fifth Globally in Electronics Export

From accounting for only 4.8% of total exports in 2011, Vietnam’s electronics share has expanded steadily, surpassing 10% in 2015 and continuing its upward trajectory. This growth is not merely proportional it reflects a fundamental shift in Vietnam’s economic structure toward high-tech manufacturing.

As of 2025, Vietnam ranks as the fifth-largest exporter of electronics and computer components globally, trailing only behind major powerhouses like China, the U.S., South Korea, and Japan.

Foreign Investment Fuels Production and Global Integration

The sector’s success is closely tied to massive foreign direct investment from global technology leaders. Multinational corporations such as Samsung, LG, Intel, Canon, Foxconn, Pegatron, Compal, and Luxshare have poured billions into building large-scale manufacturing hubs across Vietnam.

These investments have positioned Vietnam as a critical node in the global electronics value chain, with vertically integrated supply systems and high-volume assembly lines. Vietnam’s competitive advantage lies in its ability to provide skilled labor, stable production conditions, and strong government support for export-oriented manufacturing.

Economic Signals Show Continued Growth Potential

Economic indicators suggest this momentum is not temporary. The sustained increase in foreign currency spending on machinery and essential input imports points to the continued expansion of Vietnam’s export infrastructure. The ongoing rebound in manufacturing, coupled with robust demand from key markets, could push Vietnam’s annual electronics exports toward the $100 billion mark if current trends hold.

Vietnam’s electronics industry has transformed from a modest contributor into the cornerstone of its export economy. With strong performance in 2025 and aggressive expansion from global tech firms, Vietnam is no longer just a manufacturing alternative it is becoming a dominant player in the world’s high-tech ecosystem. As the U.S. deepens its reliance on Vietnamese electronics, and as regional giants like China and Japan ramp up their procurement from Vietnamese firms, the country stands poised to challenge even higher rungs of the global electronics export ladder.

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Kevin Du

Economic

Clarification of the tariff situation allows markets to restore old ties and turn their attention to economic events. Yes, investors remain concerned about the potential US–EU trade agreement ahead of the August 1st deadline and ongoing negotiations between Washington and Beijing. However, the focus will shift to the packed economic calendar, which will take centre stage.

The releases of US GDP data for the second quarter and labour market data for July will be the highlights of the week, as will the FOMC meeting. Bloomberg experts do not expect a cut in the federal funds rate, but there may be two dissenters in the Fed. Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman have made it clear that they are not opposed to an immediate rate cut.

After GDP fell into negative territory in the first quarter, Trading Economics expects the indicator to grow by 2.5% in the second quarter thanks to a recovery in net exports. It seems that the US economy is not going to fall off a cliff. However, slowing employment and rising unemployment could be warning signs of a slowdown. As a result, stock indices and the dollar are at risk of going on a roller coaster ride.

Source: FxPro

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Gerik

Economic

Russia-Ukraine Conflict

Ukraine Seeks Major Defense Partnership with U.S.

In a bold announcement signaling Kyiv’s growing role as a defense manufacturer, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky stated that the country has reached a preliminary agreement with U.S. President Donald Trump for a prospective sale of Ukrainian unmanned systems worth between $10 and $30 billion. This declaration reflects a new strategic direction in Ukraine’s defense posture shifting from arms recipient to potential arms supplier.

Zelensky framed the arrangement as part of a broader “big deal” between Washington and Kyiv. In this proposed structure, Ukraine would sell domestically developed drones to the U.S. while simultaneously purchasing American-made weapons systems. This two-way agreement suggests a deepening interdependency in military logistics and signals Ukraine’s ambition to scale up its participation in the global arms economy.

Oversight by Ukraine’s National Security Leadership

To ensure compliance and transparency, oversight of the contracts will be coordinated by high-ranking Ukrainian officials, including Rustem Umerov, Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council; Defense Minister Denys Shmyhal; and presidential advisor Oleksandr Kamyshin. The composition of this supervisory group reflects the strategic weight Ukraine assigns to the agreement and its intent to institutionalize high-level accountability.

Since the beginning of its war with Russia in 2022, Ukraine has aggressively accelerated its development of unmanned systems across multiple domains air, land, and sea. These systems are not only deployed in national defense but are also now positioned as export commodities. A prominent goal for 2025 includes the production of 30,000 long-range drones, a dramatic scale-up that places Ukraine among the top contenders in drone manufacturing globally.

Kyiv is also negotiating arms co-production agreements with several European countries, including Denmark, Norway, and Germany, as part of its broader strategy to externalize manufacturing. According to Zelensky, an initial framework with Denmark has already been reached, reflecting confidence in international industrial partnerships.

Innovation in Weaponized Drone Technology

Ukraine’s emerging military technology includes hybrid systems that blur the line between drones and missiles. Notable prototypes such as the Palianytsia and Peklo (meaning “Hell”) have attracted interest for their high-precision, long-range capabilities. These drone-missile hybrids are positioned as cost-effective alternatives to conventional cruise missiles and have become symbols of Ukraine’s innovative adaptation under wartime pressure.

Their battlefield efficacy was recently demonstrated in the unprecedented “Spiderweb” operation in June, when Ukraine launched a complex drone strike deep into Russian territory, targeting four airbases. This attack was widely regarded as a technological and tactical breakthrough in asymmetrical warfare.

Implications for U.S.-Ukraine Strategic Alignment

The drone deal proposal suggests a shift in the U.S.-Ukraine defense dynamic. Rather than remaining solely a recipient of U.S. military aid, Ukraine is positioning itself as a high-value defense partner with advanced battlefield experience and indigenous technological capability. For the U.S., the deal may represent a means to supplement drone inventories and support an ally’s defense economy without overextending its own manufacturing capacity.

Furthermore, the transactional nature of the deal drones in exchange for U.S. arms may offer the Trump administration a more politically palatable path to maintaining support for Ukraine without direct financial outlays. This development marks a possible evolution in Western defense assistance, driven more by mutual defense-industrial benefit than purely security aid.

Ukraine’s potential $30 billion drone sale to the United States, if finalized, would mark a significant inflection point in the country’s military-industrial strategy. As Kyiv leverages battlefield-tested innovation, expanding export infrastructure, and strategic diplomacy, it aims to redefine its role within the global arms market. While the proposed deal is still in early stages, it signals a broader realignment of Ukraine’s defense identity from aid-dependent to co-equal supplier in global security architectures.

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Gerik

Economic

Regulatory Scrutiny Intensifies as Fuel Supply Plunges

Russia’s Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS) has opened a formal investigation into a petroleum division of Gazprom following a steep decline in fuel supplies to the domestic exchange market. The probe centers on suspicions that the company may have deliberately restricted sales of gasoline, specifically the widely used Ai-92 and Ai-95 grades, thereby fueling an artificial shortage during a period of peak seasonal demand.

Between May 20 and June 27, Gazprom’s sales of Ai-92 gasoline on the St. Petersburg International Mercantile Exchange dropped by 74%, while Ai-95 volumes declined by 50%. This coincided with the onset of the summer travel and harvest season a period traditionally marked by heightened transportation demand raising concerns of potential market manipulation.

Fuel Price Surge Raises Red Flags

The FAS has emphasized that such abrupt supply cuts in high-demand months risk undermining market stability and may constitute a breach of competition laws. The timing of the shortfall has intensified public backlash, as consumers face soaring fuel costs at the pump. This aligns with broader inflationary pressures in Russia, where fuel price hikes have emerged as a politically sensitive issue.

Russian regulators had already issued a formal warning to Gazprom on June 17, requesting justification for the volume reductions from two of its key production facilities in Surgut and Astrakhan. These sites are critical to domestic supply continuity. Authorities demanded an explanation within ten days, according to sources from RBC and Gazeta.ru.

Exchange-Based Pricing Under Strain

The current fuel pricing system in Russia, structured around transparent exchange-based mechanisms, is designed to ensure regular supply and prevent speculative distortions. This system relies heavily on consistent participation from major producers like Gazprom. A sudden withdrawal from the market by such players undermines pricing integrity and restricts liquidity, which can exacerbate inflationary dynamics.

In this context, the investigation into Gazprom serves not only as a regulatory response but also as a signal to the broader energy sector that no firm, regardless of its size or state affiliation, is exempt from obligations to stabilize the domestic market.

Kremlin Considers Export Restrictions

Facing mounting pressure, the Russian government is reportedly reviewing the option of imposing new restrictions on gasoline exports to prioritize local supply. This potential shift in policy reflects the dual challenge of maintaining price stability while balancing state revenue from fuel exports. With the harvest season approaching and summer transport demand rising, failure to act could further erode public confidence.

Economic commentators in Russian media have interpreted the investigation as more than just a technical enforcement action. Many view it as a calculated move to reassure the public while delivering a warning to major shareholders: the pursuit of export profits cannot come at the expense of domestic energy security.

The situation also underscores a broader tension within Russia’s economic model, where state-aligned enterprises must navigate the competing imperatives of global market competitiveness and domestic welfare assurance. In Gazprom’s case, its dual identity as a profit-driven entity and a quasi-public utility has drawn it into the center of this policy dilemma.

The unfolding investigation highlights a complex causal relationship between corporate supply strategies, regulatory enforcement, and inflation control in Russia’s fuel market. While the probe may yield short-term corrective measures, the longer-term solution likely hinges on structural reforms to ensure transparent and equitable distribution of critical resources. For now, Gazprom’s operations are under intense scrutiny, and the government’s next steps will be closely watched for their impact on both domestic consumers and international energy markets.

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites