Will Section 232 steel tariffs remain substantially unchanged through 2026?

Q1 added derivative transformer tariffs to the Section 232 framework — that's a tariff expansion, not a contraction. Combined with melted-and-poured enforcement and imports at 2009 lows, the administration is actively deepening, not softening, its trade posture. The market's 'substantially unchanged through 2026' criterion is easily satisfied by the current trajectory. Remaining tail risk is political — a trade deal with a major exporter that carves out steel exemptions — but nothing in Q1 suggests that's in motion. Upgrade from baseline 82% to 87%.

The trajectory is clearly toward more enforcement. Fortress North America rhetoric around Canada, transformer derivatives added — all point to maintenance or expansion. Risk of material modification before Dec 31, 2026 looks lower now than at baseline. ~86%.

The question asks whether Section 232 remains substantially unchanged — current trajectory is toward expansion, which either way keeps the core 25% rate intact. The 20%-of-imports exemption threshold in resolution criteria is far from being breached. Probability ~88%.

Baseline was 82%. Q1 data strengthens rather than weakens the maintenance case — derivatives added, enforcement deepening. Upgrade modestly to 86%.

Maintenance through 2026 is now more likely than baseline suggested. Administration has shown no appetite for trade liberalization in steel. Transformer derivative additions are an active enforcement expansion. 85%.

The tariff regime is strengthening. Section 232 at 25% appears structurally locked for 2026. Tail risk only from sudden trade deal breakthrough with major exporter. 87%.

Tariffs strengthened in Q1 (transformer derivatives). Maintenance through 2026 very likely. 85%.

Enforcement deepening. Imports at 2009 lows. Section 232 maintained through 2026 highly likely. 86%.

Upgrade modestly from baseline 82% — Q1 added derivative tariffs, confirming policy direction. 87%.