Tariffs are rarely popular among those who believe in free trade, and yet they keep finding their way back into political agendas. The latest controversy comes from Mark Andy’s letter to Howard Lutnick, requesting that Section 232 tariffs be added to HS code 8443.16.0000. The move has raised eyebrows across the industry, but CEO Duane Pekar stands firmly by the decision, insisting that Mark Andy’s global position requires tough choices and leveling the playing field for steel in the US market creates domestic fair trade.

Speaking by telephone, Pekar argued that Mark Andy itself is exposed to tariffs, since its machines rely on parts and components purchased internationally. He also noted that the price of steel in the US has remained stubbornly high since Donald Trump’s first presidency, putting American manufacturers at a considerable disadvantage compared with Europe.

Steel price data backs up his claim: the US consistently pays more for steel than both Europe and China. The reasons, however, are largely structural. The US market has fewer producers, less competition, higher energy costs, and a focus on high-value grades of steel. These are not distortions caused by unfair competition, but the realities of the American market. Efforts to revive domestic production have so far failed to move output beyond mid-2000s levels. US companies continue to buy raw steel or finished products from abroad, meaning that tariffs imposed during Trump’s first term did little to change the fundamentals.

What they did succeed in doing was raising prices, which, in fairness, affects Mark Andy as well. Trump’s 25% steel tariff pushed costs up, and according to multiple sources, prices never returned to pre-tariff levels. That is consistent with history: tariffs are notoriously hard to roll back. Trump has now floated the idea of replacing federal taxes with tariffs altogether, which would make them even more politically difficult to reverse. The US may therefore be entering a period of permanently higher steel costs. Only George W. Bush’s 2002 rollback managed to return prices to earlier levels, and that remains the rare exception rather than the rule.

Pekar noted that in May, when the Trump administration increased the steel tariff to 50% and opened a window for derivative product inclusions, he decided to apply stating that “not doing so would further disadvantage Mark Andy in the US marketplace” adding “this does not mean that we agree with the tariffs but are simply exercising our rights as a US manufacturer.”

In theory, free market prices are determined by the balance of supply and demand. Tariffs restrict supply and, in turn, are meant to stimulate domestic production. But such changes take years, not months. Pekar nevertheless maintains that a 50% steel tariff would help balance competition in the long term.

He also adds that Mark Andy fully recognizes the CapEx pressures converters face, and is committed to supporting them through competitive pricing, strong service and support. He is also working to certify its US manufacturing plant as a Free Trade Zone in 2026 to minimize U.S. tariff impact on its international customers.

Understanding Section 232 requires a careful look at the numbers. For European Union exports, the Most-Favored-Nation tariff is 15% of the machine’s invoice value. Switzerland is not covered by MFN and instead faces a reciprocal tariff of 39%. A million-dollar machine, therefore, would carry $150,000 in tariffs if shipped from the EU and $390,000 from Switzerland.

Section 232 works differently. It applies only to the steel content of the product and only to HS codes where it has been explicitly included. A BOBST M5 machine, for example, weighs around 9,000 kilograms. Assuming 70% of that weight is steel, and applying current European steel prices, the Section 232 tariff would add between $4,500 and $5,000. This is modest compared with the overall tariffs, but it highlights an important contradiction: why would Mark Andy argue for a measure that complicates an already burdensome tariff regime?

Pekar pointed out that the only thing for certain in May during a highly dynamic tariff environment was that the steel tariff was increasing to 50% and would increase Mark Andy’s costs, widening the gap vs its competitors. While modest compared with where the overall tariffs landed, Mark Andy was simply aligning imported machines with the same steel cost burdens the company has been absorbing on U.S.-manufactured machines. The company’s intent was to level the playing field, not tilt it.

The process itself is relatively simple. Exporters must declare the steel weight of the press to US Customs. That weight is valued at the daily steel price — currently between $470 and $995 per ton — and multiplied by the tonnage. A 50% tariff is then applied to that total.

A flexographic press falls under HS Code 8443.16.0000. For products shipped from Europe, Section 232 has been added to this code, meaning importers must pay both the 15% MFN tariff and the steel tariff. For products shipped from Switzerland, Section 232 does not apply, and the importer pays only the 39% reciprocal tariff.

The mechanics may be clear, but the broader implications are not. By advocating for Section 232, Mark Andy aligns itself with a policy history that has consistently raised costs for American manufacturers without delivering the intended revival of domestic steelmaking. Whether this time will prove different remains uncertain, but history suggests otherwise. In a world where competition depends on efficiency, innovation, and fair market access, tariffs may offer only the illusion of protection — and leave American companies, including Mark Andy, paying the price.