In a strong stance that reignites the debate over foreign investment in critical industries, U.S. President Donald Trump has openly opposed the proposed acquisition of United States Steel Corporation by Japan’s Nippon Steel. Speaking to reporters at the White House on Wednesday, Trump stated clearly that he is “not in favor” of the deal, underscoring his position that U.S. Steel should remain under American ownership.
This comes amid heightened scrutiny of Nippon Steel’s ambitious plan to take over the historic U.S. steelmaker, a move that has sparked both political and union-led backlash. The proposed acquisition, originally announced in late 2023, has been stalled repeatedly due to national security concerns and strong resistance from the United Steelworkers union and other domestic industry advocates.
President Trump reiterated his commitment to protecting American industry, calling U.S. Steel a “strategic asset” and emphasizing the importance of keeping such companies domestically controlled. His administration has already initiated a comprehensive review of the deal, casting serious doubt on any path forward for Nippon Steel.
The controversy escalated earlier this year when then-President Joe Biden blocked the acquisition, citing national interest and the potential risk to American jobs. After returning to office, Trump upheld this decision and affirmed that he would not allow the deal to move forward under any circumstances.
Despite the political roadblocks, Nippon Steel remains firm in its pursuit. The Japanese steel giant has filed a lawsuit in U.S. courts in an effort to reverse the government’s intervention and revive the acquisition. However, with bipartisan resistance and increasing public scrutiny, the future of the U.S. Steel–Nippon Steel deal remains highly uncertain.
This high-stakes standoff highlights the growing tension between global investment ambitions and domestic economic security. As the steel industry plays a pivotal role in infrastructure, defense, and manufacturing, the outcome of this dispute could shape U.S. industrial policy for years to come.
