During the closing moments of his presidential campaign, Donald Trump stood before a crowd of steelworkers in Pittsburgh and vowed to safeguard American jobs and manufacturing. Yet notably absent from his rally rhetoric was any mention of his earlier promise to block the sale of United States Steel Corp. to Nippon Steel Corp.
Now, as the $14.1 billion acquisition faces scrutiny, questions abound about Trump’s next move. With Nippon Steel executives preparing a charm offensive in Pittsburgh, and steelworkers divided over the deal, the matter has become a lightning rod for political and industrial debate.
A Campaign Promise in Question
Trump’s opposition to the sale was a key talking point during his campaign, aligning with his “America First” agenda. Yet backstage after a rally in Pittsburgh, Trump appeared to take a more cautious approach. Speaking with Jason Zugai, Vice President of United Steelworkers (USW) Local 2227, Trump reportedly agreed not to publicly denounce the deal.
“I told him, ‘I need one thing from you. I need you not to say you’re going to kill the deal on national television,’” Zugai recounted. According to Zugai, Trump expressed concerns about selling US Steel to a foreign company, but Zugai countered that the deal would bring much-needed foreign investment to the U.S. and safeguard steelworkers’ jobs.
Union Divisions and Leadership Tensions
While some union leaders, such as USW International President David McCall, remain staunchly opposed to the deal, rank-and-file members like Zugai argue for negotiation. McCall has called for written guarantees from Nippon Steel regarding capital investments and long-term job security. Without these assurances, McCall has warned members of the potential risks, accusing Nippon Steel of attempting to sow division within the union.
Nippon Steel, for its part, has stated its commitment to engaging with stakeholders and providing reassurances about the future. In a statement, the company said: “We have engaged with employees to share our vision for US Steel, provide reassurances about the future, and answer any questions they may have.”
A Broader Political and Economic Debate
The deal’s fate hinges on approval from the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), a powerful inter-agency body that assesses the national security implications of foreign investments. While CFIUS has allowed Nippon Steel to refile its plans, a decision has yet to be finalised.
This timing adds an additional layer of complexity. The CFIUS decision timeline has been pushed to December, potentially leaving the matter unresolved by the time Trump assumes office. Current President Joe Biden has already taken a firm stance against the deal, declaring that US Steel should remain under American ownership.
For Trump, supporting the deal would risk alienating the blue-collar workers who helped propel him to victory in Pennsylvania—a critical battleground state. Yet opposing it outright could undermine his promises to attract foreign investment and reinvigorate American manufacturing.
Economic Realities and Industry Perspectives
US Steel’s declining fortunes have made it increasingly vulnerable to foreign acquisition. Advocates for the Nippon Steel deal argue that the Japanese company’s resources and expertise could revitalise the iconic American firm, safeguarding jobs in the process. Critics, however, contend that foreign ownership would jeopardise national security and undermine America’s industrial base.
More Read
Zugai and other proponents within the union see the deal as a lifeline for steelworkers whose livelihoods are at stake. “You have to know your audience,” Zugai said. “These are their livelihoods.”
McCall, however, remains sceptical of Nippon Steel’s motives. In a letter to union members, he warned that the Japanese executives were primarily interested in closing the transaction rather than protecting American jobs.
The Road Ahead
As Nippon Steel Executive Vice President Takahiro Mori prepares to visit Pittsburgh, the stakes for all parties involved continue to rise. For union leaders, the visit represents an opportunity to demand stronger guarantees. For steelworkers, it is a chance to voice their concerns and hopes for the future.
Whether the deal proceeds may ultimately depend on CFIUS and the incoming Trump administration’s stance. For now, the uncertainty leaves both the steel industry and its workforce in limbo.
Trump, who built much of his campaign on promises to revitalise American industry, now faces a delicate balancing act. How he navigates the competing interests of foreign investment, union pressures, and his own political base could define not just the fate of US Steel but also his broader economic legacy.
