This isn't just a minor discount—it's enough to make Indian buyers switch suppliers rapidly. In April 2026 alone, China's finished steel exports to India more than doubled to approximately 232,000 metric tons, reaching their highest level in at least two years. This surge demonstrates the extreme price sensitivity of Indian steel buyers, particularly in volume-sensitive sectors like construction and infrastructure.
For the full year 2025, China exported 603,936 tonnes of hot-rolled sheet and coil to India. In just the first five months of 2026, that figure already reached 383,639 tonnes. The math is straightforward: when you can save $11-$37 per ton on large infrastructure projects, the cost savings become too significant to ignore. This pricing pressure has forced domestic producers to either match these prices or lose market share.
Japan and Russia play distinctly different roles in India's import mix. Japan is actually India's largest supplier of hot-rolled coils, commanding 30.6% market share in FY25 with 1.25 million tonnes. Japanese steel typically commands premium prices, focusing on quality-sensitive applications in the automotive and high-end manufacturing sectors. Russia's role has diminished significantly—its exports to India remained negligible in FY25 after falling sharply from FY23 levels, largely due to geopolitical factors and sanctions.
The pricing strategies reflect these positions. China pursues aggressive discounting to gain volume, Japan maintains premium positioning for quality-focused buyers, and Russia has become a marginal player. This three-tiered import structure creates different competitive pressures across market segments, with Chinese imports hitting the commodity HRC segment hardest.
The margin compression at JSW Steel and Jindal Steel tells a clear story. In Q2 FY26, when steel imports jumped 36% quarter-on-quarter to 2.5 million tonnes, both companies faced significant pressure. JSW Steel's EBITDA margin stood at 17.4% in Q2 but compressed to 14.4% in Q3. Jindal Steel fared worse—its EBITDA margin collapsed from 13.9% in Q2 to just 10.5% in Q3, with net profit plunging 80% year-on-year to ₹189 crore. Transcripts +3
The correlation between import volumes and financial performance is striking. When imports declined 36% in Q3 FY26 and India became a net steel exporter, both companies saw improvements. By Q4 FY26, JSW Steel reported a remarkable 989% surge in net profit to ₹16,370 crore, while Jindal Steel delivered a strong turnaround with ₹1,041 crore in profit versus a loss in the previous year. InvestorPresentations
The applications filed by JSW Steel, JSW Vijayanagar Metallics, and Jindal Steel Odisha presented comprehensive evidence across five critical injury parameters. They documented a 37% year-on-year surge in total steel imports to 9.65 million tonnes in FY 2024-25, with Chinese imports specifically jumping 93% to 2.7 million tonnes. Financial metrics showed revenue declining 6%, operating EBITDA falling 16%, and EBITDA margins contracting from 16.26% to 14.39%. AnnualReports +1
The companies also presented evidence of price suppression, with the $11-$37 per ton differential directly impacting domestic pricing power. They requested retrospective imposition of anti-dumping duties, citing a history of dumping in the product category and arguing that delaying duties could lead to irreparable harm. The investigation covers hot-rolled flat products up to 25mm thickness and 2,100mm width, with the dumping investigation period from January to December 2025 and injury analysis from April 2022 onwards. AnnualReports
DGTR will apply a WTO-compliant three-pronged test: establishing dumping margins, determining material injury, and proving causal links between the two. For China, being treated as a non-market economy, normal value will be based on Indian cost of production plus reasonable profit. For Japan and Russia, normal value will be estimated using Indian costs due to lack of reliable public data.
The "lesser duty rule" India applies means the recommended anti-dumping duty will be the lower of the margin of dumping or the injury margin—just enough to remove injury, not punish exporters. Based on international precedents, potential duty ranges could be 20-30% for China, 10-15% for Japan, and 15-20% for Russia. These levels would more than neutralize the $11-$37 per ton price advantage.
Both companies are pursuing strategic responses beyond relying on trade remedies. JSW Steel maintains exceptional capacity utilization above 90% and is investing ₹1,26,161 crore in expansion, with 65% allocated to steelmaking capacity growth and 11% to value-added product facilities. Jindal Steel has achieved 73% value-added product share—its highest ever—and is shifting focus from expansion to "asset sweating" to optimize existing facilities. InvestorPresentations +2
India's policy environment provides additional support. The Production-Linked Incentive (PLI) scheme for specialty steel has committed ₹11,887 crore across 85 projects from 55 companies, focusing on coated/plated products, high strength steel, and CRGO electrical steel. BIS certification requirements create effective non-tariff barriers, adding 2-3% to import costs and preventing below-standard products from entering the market.
The investigation outcome will significantly influence competitive dynamics. If duties are imposed at expected levels, domestic producers could see margin recovery of 150-250 basis points and market share gains of 5-8% in the HRC segment. However, China's structural overcapacity problem—projected to reach 721 million metric tons globally by 2027—means this is likely a long-term competitive challenge requiring sustained strategic responses beyond trade remedies.
