BRUSSELS, Oct. 22, 2026 – Global exporters are competing for European industrial orders as tariffs, volatile energy costs, weak industrial demand and the European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) reshape procurement decisions. The latest official trade releases also show why changes in headline import values cannot be linked to CBAM without detailed work by product and country of origin.
Eurostat’s Oct. 16 release, covering August 2026, reported EU imports from outside the bloc at €228.0 billion, up 18.2% from €192.9 billion a year earlier. The EU’s monthly external trade deficit widened to €25.2 billion, compared with €7.5 billion in August 2025.
These figures cover all merchandise imports rather than only goods subject to CBAM. Energy and machinery movements contributed to changes in the overall trade balance, which limits the use of aggregate totals as evidence for shifts in carbon-border-exposed imports.
Aggregate import growth and partner shares
China supplied €53.1 billion of EU imports in August, up 19.7% year on year. Imports from Türkiye reached €7.3 billion, an increase of 0.7%, while imports from India totalled €6.0 billion, up 18.3%.
The partner figures refer to total merchandise trade, including products outside CBAM’s scope. Customs values represent monetary amounts rather than physical tonnage or embedded emissions, so growth from a supplier does not automatically mean that supplier gained share in a specific covered product market.
A carbon-relevant comparison requires product-level customs data, consistent origin definitions and a clear separation between goods already covered by CBAM and downstream products proposed for inclusion.
CN-code precision for steel and aluminium
For covered steel products, analysts must aggregate the eight-digit Combined Nomenclature (CN) codes listed in Annex I. The approach also requires consistent reporting definitions and a distinction between existing covered products and proposed downstream additions.
For aluminium, unwrought metal classified under CN 7601 cannot be combined indiscriminately with fabricated products classified under other headings. A weighted average customs price in euros per tonne also depends on comparable import values and net mass.
A robust comparison should include the latest month, the preceding month, the corresponding month a year earlier and year-to-date figures to separate sustained change from short-term volatility. For each country of origin, it should report shares of extra-EU import tonnage and value, changes in those shares in percentage points, changes in tonnes and implied customs unit values.
Goods originating in Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Switzerland require separate treatment because they benefit from relevant exemptions under the applicable CBAM framework. Broad Harmonized System chapter statistics can provide context but cannot replace an auditable product-level calculation.
Flat-steel competition and limits of historical totals
Historical trade data show a contested European flat-steel import market. EUROFER’s European Steel in Figures 2026, using 2025 trade data, put EU imports of flat steel products at approximately 23.1 million tonnes.
Within that total, Türkiye supplied 3.28 million tonnes, or 14.2%, while South Korea supplied 3.24 million tonnes, or 14.0%. These figures cover a broader group of finished flat products rather than a CN8-filtered total of CBAM-covered imports.
The historical totals also do not establish market shares for October 2026. Product-group totals from earlier periods cannot be used directly to determine current competitive positions of individual exporters under the definitive carbon-border regime.
Inventory effects, safeguards and unit value interpretation
In its Oct. 1 market outlook, EUROFER reported that EU steel imports declined 5% in the first half of 2026 after an exceptional surge in late 2025. EUROFER also reported exports fell 20%.
The reversal may reflect inventory accumulation ahead of the definitive CBAM phase, but it is also consistent with weak steel demand, trade safeguards, price movements and logistics constraints. Assigning the change to a single cause would require shipment-timing and product-level evidence.
Certain comparisons between countries are further complicated by where processing takes place. Steel slab imported from one country and converted into a finished product in another may acquire a different non-preferential origin from that of its precursor.
Customs unit values also require careful interpretation because they can change due to different product grades, alloy content or delivery terms rather than shifts in underlying pricing pressure.
Cusoms origin versus shipping routes
The distinction between customs origin and shipping route becomes important when suppliers use distribution centres within the EU or neighbouring countries. A shipment invoiced through an intermediary does not automatically take on that intermediary’s country of origin.
An assessment needs the reported partner-origin field, applicable non-preferential origin rules, the relevant import regime and any applicable exemptions. Treating a redistribution hub as the producing country can distort national market shares and lead to incorrect conclusions about which exporters gain business.
A reproducible approach should document the data-extraction date, exact CN8 selection, monthly coverage, provisional-data flags and the formula used to calculate unit values.
An increase in a supplier’s share from 10% to 12% represents a gain of two percentage points rather than a 20-percentage-point increase. Rising customs value alongside declining tonnage indicates change in value per unit or product mix rather than necessarily greater physical market penetration.
Sourcing decisions before definitive CBAM evidence
The commercial test for European buyers sourcing from Serbia, Montenegro, Türkiye, India, China and Ukraine increasingly combines competitive delivered prices with reliable emissions data and predictable supply.
In 2026 these factors may influence procurement decisions before definitive evidence of a CBAM-driven market-share shift becomes available. Establishing CBAM’s competitive effects requires analysis at CN-code level with consistent treatment of physical volumes, customs values, product origin and applicable exemptions.
The latest aggregate trade figures provide context for changes in the European import market but do not establish a ranking of CBAM winners and losers.