Under the sulfuric acid export ban, where is the titanium dioxide industry headed?

According to foreign media reports, China announced a halt to sulfuric acid exports starting in May—a decision that has sent shockwaves through the market. Sulfuric acid is a critical raw material for certain copper ore extraction and phosphate fertilizer production processes; the export ban covers by-product sulfuric acid generated during copper and zinc smelting. Since the outbreak of the Iran conflict, the Strait of Hormuz has been effectively blockaded, cutting off transportation routes from the Middle East—the world’s major sulfur-producing region. As sulfur is the primary feedstock for sulfuric acid production, its supply disruption has directly driven sustained increases in sulfuric acid prices. Sulfuric acid-based production remains the dominant process for domestic titanium dioxide manufacturing, accounting for over 80% of total output. Producing one ton of titanium dioxide consumes approximately 3–4 tons of sulfuric acid (about 4 tons when using ilmenite as feedstock, and roughly 3.5 tons with mixed feedstocks). In 2025, China’s total titanium dioxide output stood at approximately 4.72 million tons, of which over 4.06 million tons were produced via the sulfuric acid process—implying an annual sulfuric acid consumption of roughly 14–16 million tons. Sulfuric acid now accounts for over 40% of production costs in the sulfuric acid process, and more than 60% of total raw material costs. Since March 2026, a complete cost-transmission chain—“rising sulfur prices → rising sulfuric acid prices → rising titanium dioxide prices”—has taken shape. The 4.64 million tons of sulfuric acid exported in 2025 could have been used domestically; beginning in May, this volume will fully return to the domestic market. However, the export ban—combined with the Middle Eastern sulfur supply disruption—will only intensify, rather than alleviate, domestic sulfuric acid supply tightness. While the export ban is expected to improve domestic sulfuric acid availability, this hinges on stable smelter production capacity. Market Demand vs. Cost Pressures: Will the Price Hike Persist? Current conditions suggest that unless the Middle East conflict escalates further, titanium dioxide prices will likely gradually revert to rational levels. Weak market demand and prior demand exhaustion are exerting strong downward pressure on the price surge. Downstream users, facing non-uniform price hikes, are highly prone to resist high-priced titanium dioxide and instead purchase unaffected alternatives. This not only undermines sales for companies implementing price increases but also pushes overall market pricing toward stabilization. A de-escalation of Middle East tensions is a key factor—it eases cost pressures on titanium dioxide producers, enhances their ability to ensure stable supply, supports export recovery, and thereby bolsters price stability. Industry analysts point out that although prices will likely continue rising in April, significant downside risks loom for May–June due to weakening terminal demand and volatile raw material prices.

Amid dual pressures—domestic and external—intensive price hikes: Titanium dioxide faces a 'double blow' from soaring costs and trade barriers

If anti-dumping measures represent an external 'cold front,' then surging raw material costs constitute an internal 'volcanic eruption.' As of February 28, the price of 98% sulfuric acid surpassed RMB 1,030 per ton—sharply higher than the same period in 2025. As the core raw material for sulfuric acid-based titanium dioxide production, persistently elevated sulfuric acid prices have directly breached corporate profit margins. Under mounting pressure, the entire industry launched an intensive round of price hikes between February 24 and March 4. Yibin Tianyuan, Shandong Xianghai, and CITIC Titanium Industry led the way, raising prices by RMB 500 per ton at the end of February; following March 1, Panzhihua Haifengxin, Lomon Group, Qianjiang Fangyuan, and Jinhai Titanium Industry quickly followed suit; on March 3 alone, over ten companies—including Annada, Inner Mongolia Guocheng, Guangxi Jinmao, and Fumin Longteng—jointly announced price increases; the next day, global giant Tronox announced a hike of USD 150 per ton. This wave of price increases is not demand-driven, but rather a classic case of cost-driven compulsion. An industry insider candidly admitted: 'Not raising prices means producing at a loss; raising them, however, leaves uncertain whether downstream buyers will accept the new rates.' Even more concerning is that the upward trajectory for sulfuric acid prices remains open. Market consensus expects sulfuric acid prices to remain relatively firm in the near term, propelled by rising raw material costs and tightening regional supply—meaning continued cost pressure for titanium dioxide producers. Domestic Producers Mired in Losses; Global Giants Struggle Toward Recovery Behind the flurry of price hikes lie dismal earnings forecasts. Annada expects its 2025 net profit attributable to shareholders to range from a loss of RMB 65 million to RMB 103 million, with non-recurring net profit losses projected between RMB 53.2 million and RMB 91.2 million—citing substantial annual declines in titanium dioxide prices and sharply reduced gross margins caused by rising sulfuric acid costs. Huizun Titanium Industry achieved steady growth in sales volume and revenue, yet still posted losses, attributing them to 'slowing global economic growth and intensifying international trade barriers,' heightened industry competition, and weak, downward-trending prices. JINPU Titanium Industry’s losses widened further, forecasting a net profit attributable to shareholders of between –RMB 489 million and –RMB 420 million—marking several consecutive years of deep losses. Compared with struggling domestic firms, global giants face similar market softness but demonstrate markedly stronger recovery capabilities. Chemours’ 2025 Titanium Technologies business reported net sales of USD 2.4 billion—a 6% year-on-year decline—and EBITDA plummeted 52% to USD 145 million. Yet management emphasized that global price hikes implemented in Q4 have begun yielding results, laying the groundwork for profit recovery in 2026. Tronox saw a rebound in Q4: titanium dioxide sales volume surged 9% quarter-on-quarter to reach the highest level of the year, and it forecasts Q1 2026 sales to remain at elevated levels, with sequential price increases. This 'domestic losses, overseas recovery' dynamic reflects the awkward position of China’s titanium dioxide industry within the global value chain—despite accounting for half the world’s output, it remains passive and vulnerable in terms of pricing power and profit distribution. Downstream Pressure Mounts: Coating and Plastics Industries Enter a 'Cost-Transmission Battle' Upstream price hikes are now cascading downstream. Industries including coatings, plastics, inks, and papermaking are increasingly feeling the ripple effects of mounting cost pressures. The first responders were waterproofing material manufacturers. On March 1, Orient Yuhong issued a price adjustment notice, announcing a 5–10% price increase for asphalt-based waterproofing membranes and coating products, effective March 15. The company’s securities department confirmed to reporters that the hike was primarily driven by rising asphalt prices—from RMB 3,000 per ton in early January to RMB 3,350 per ton.

Tronox Posts Q3 Miss as War Weighs on TiO2 Demand, Drives Up Costs

10 hours ago

Tronox Holdings reported a Q3 net loss of $55 million as Middle East conflicts disrupted supply chains and raised input costs for titanium dioxide and zircon production. Volumes fell short of expectations while prices increased, offset by unfavorable exchange rates and freight costs.

chemweek

2026-01-26

Tronox to permanently close TiO2 plant in China

2026-03-04

Tronox: Titanium Dioxide Market Showing Signs of Recovery

2026-08-12

Tronox Net Loss Widens Despite Sales Surge

2026-11-06

Tronox Posts Q3 Miss as War Weighs on TiO2 Demand, Drives Up Costs

Tronox Posts Q3 Miss as War Weighs on TiO2 Demand, Drives Up Costs

FAQ