U.S. Steel CEO Warns of Mill Closures Amid Controversy Over Nippon Steel Deal

U.S. Steel’s Chief Executive Officer, David Burritt, has warned that the company could face mill closures and move its headquarters out of Pittsburgh if its proposed sale to Japan-based Nippon Steel falls through. The deal, valued at approximately $14.9 billion, has come under fire from several key political figures, including President Joe Biden and 2024 presidential nominees Kamala Harris and Donald Trump. The potential loss of jobs is a major concern for the workforce and the broader community.

The Stakes for U.S. Steel
Burritt emphasized the significance of Nippon Steel’s planned $3 billion investment in U.S. Steel’s aging mills, stressing that without it, the company might not remain competitive or secure jobs for its workforce. “We wouldn’t do that if the deal falls through,” Burritt remarked in an interview. “I don’t have the money.”

U.S. Steel, a symbol of American industrial might, faces the potential for declining operations as political opposition mounts. The deal has sparked a heated debate, with several influential leaders advocating for U.S. Steel to remain under American ownership.

Political Backlash Grows
Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee for president, expressed her opposition to the deal during a campaign event in Pittsburgh, stating that U.S. Steel should “remain American-owned and American-operated.” Her comments followed similar sentiments from President Biden and former President Trump, who voiced concerns over selling the iconic company to foreign interests.

While Harris stopped short of explicitly stating she would block the deal, her statements have added to the uncertainty surrounding the regulatory review process. The United Steelworkers union, a critical voice in the industry, has also opposed the acquisition, adding further tension to the situation.

Potential Impact on U.S. Steel’s Future
Burritt’s grim outlook is rooted in concerns that blocking the deal could undermine the company’s ability to modernize its production facilities. The CEO suggested that U.S. Steel would struggle to compete with more advanced steelmakers globally without the Nippon Steel investment, which could lead to potential plant closures and job losses.

The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) is reviewing the deal and scrutinizing its potential national security implications. U.S. Steel has maintained that the sale poses no national security risks, citing Japan as a close U.S. ally.

Rising Protectionism in the U.S.
The opposition to U.S. Steel’s sale reflects a broader trend of protectionism in the U.S., even toward companies with strong ties to allied nations like Japan. With a capacity of 20 million metric tons annually, U.S. Steel’s integration with Nippon Steel, which produces 86 million tons, could significantly boost the American steel industry. A Nippon Steel spokesperson argued that the acquisition would revitalize the American Rust Belt and benefit U.S. national security, underscoring the broader potential implications of the deal.

“We fully expect to pursue all possible options under the law to ensure this transaction, which is the best future for Pennsylvania, American steelmaking, and all of our stakeholders, closes,” a U.S. Steel spokesperson said.

The fate of U.S. Steel and its future in the American industrial landscape now rests with regulators, politicians, and possibly a new administration. As political pressure mounts, the outcome of the sale could shape the future of the U.S. steel industry for years to come.