Tata Steel's performance in FY 2023–2024 was relatively poor—even worse than that of most domestic Chinese steel enterprises.

Some friends wanted to review the financial reports of listed steel companies in India and other regions, so I conducted some research—but encountered considerable difficulties. The main challenge was not language-related. First, accessing such websites is extremely slow—likely due to the 'Great Firewall'. Second, Indian accounting standards and commonly used financial metrics differ significantly from ours. Although India claims convergence with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), those familiar with China’s own 'convergence' rhetoric know that substantial practical differences remain. For unknown reasons, the full annual report cannot be downloaded directly; only partial data could be cross-verified and confirmed via several professional financial data platforms—and subsequently shared here. As a result, it is inevitably impossible to fully clarify the breakdown of cost and expense items, or revenue composition by product category and geographic region. Tata Steel is a core industrial subsidiary of the Tata Group, founded in 1907 and headquartered in Jamshedpur, Jharkhand State, India. It ranks among the world’s leading steel manufacturers, with extensive global operations. Its annual production capacity exceeds 27 million tonnes, making it the world’s sixth-largest steel producer (as of 2022). Its business spans 45 countries, with manufacturing facilities located in the UK, the Netherlands, India, Singapore, Vietnam, Thailand, and China. Tata Steel’s main products fall into three categories: flat products, long products, and construction steel. Its downstream customers operate primarily in construction, automotive, packaging, rail transport, excavator manufacturing, and power generation. In certain regions, Tata Steel owns its own iron ore and coal mines—providing a competitive advantage in raw material supply. Moreover, the company emphasizes technological innovation and process optimization to reduce operating costs, positioning itself among the world’s lowest-cost steel producers. In FY 2023–2024 (April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024), Tata Steel’s revenue declined 5.5% year-on-year to ₹230.98 billion. India uses the unit 'crore' (1 crore = 10 million) for large monetary values—a concept somewhat confusing to Chinese readers. To enable meaningful comparison with A-share listed companies, we must convert this figure: on March 29, 2023, the RMB–INR exchange rate stood at 1 RMB = 11.9524 INR. Converted, Tata Steel’s FY 2023–2024 revenue amounted to approximately ¥19.32 billion RMB—ranking second only to Baoshan Iron & Steel Co., Ltd. in terms of scale. Whereas FY 2022–2023 saw only a sharp plunge in net profit, FY 2023–2024 marked the company’s first outright loss: ₹44.4 billion (≈¥3.7 billion RMB). In 2023, no A-share steel company reported a larger loss—only Anshan Iron and Steel Group Corporation (Ansteel) posted a loss of ¥3.26 billion, close to Tata Steel’s figure. Clearly, the steel industry downturn is truly global—not confined to China alone. At least India, South Korea, and Europe are similarly affected; U.S. data remains unexamined. Yet Tata Steel of India—and ArcelorMittal of Europe—both demonstrated strong capability in seizing opportunities during industry upswings. For instance, in FY 2021–2022 (April 1, 2021 to March 31, 2022), Tata Steel’s net profit reached ₹401.5 billion (≈¥33.6 billion RMB)—substantially higher than Baoshan Iron & Steel’s ¥23.6 billion that year.

Review of Jingye Group’s acquisition of British Steel and risk warnings regarding broadened security concerns: 01—Transactions and acquisition execution amid industrial distress.

A clear chronological overlap reveals that each critical milestone in the Brexit process corresponded precisely with the worsening operational performance of British Steel. Policy and trade risks arising from Brexit continuously amplified the industry’s inherent cost disadvantages—constituting a major external catalyst behind the company’s eventual bankruptcy. II. Quantified Trade-Cost Impact of Brexit on the UK Steel Industry The UK steel industry’s core markets are highly dependent on EU trade: Prior to Brexit, nearly 40% of UK long products were exported to EU countries, while over 30% of domestic steel consumption relied on imports from the EU. Simultaneously, roughly 70% of the iron ore, coke, and other key raw materials required for UK steel production entered via EU ports or international shipping routes transiting through the EU. Brexit-induced increases in tariffs, customs clearance costs, and exchange-rate volatility directly erased the remaining competitiveness of UK long products. (A) Direct Tariff and Customs Clearance Cost Increases Specialized calculations by UK Steel indicate that, under a no-deal Brexit scenario—ending the UK’s zero-tariff access to the EU Single Market—UK long products exported to the EU would face Most-Favoured-Nation (MFN) tariffs of up to 14%. Furthermore, EU anti-dumping duties and provisional safeguard measures applied to certain steel products would automatically extend to UK-origin goods. Adding border customs procedures, origin certification inspections, and sanitary/phytosanitary checks, the per-tonne export cost for UK long products to the EU would rise by approximately €65—fully offsetting the technical premium enjoyed by high-end UK products. Even if the UK later secured a zero-tariff trade agreement with the EU, cross-border logistics costs would still surge markedly: According to freight forwarding industry estimates, cross-Channel customs clearance processes would lengthen average cargo transit time by at least two days, raising per-TEU (twenty-foot equivalent unit) logistics costs by around €120. For low-value, high-volume long products, this cost increment alone would compress industry profit margins to zero. (B) Indirect Amplification of Raw Material Import Costs Core raw materials—including iron ore and coke—required for UK steelmaking are largely imported from Australia, Brazil, and the United States, often transshipped via EU ports or transported using EU inland rail logistics networks. Post-Brexit declines in cross-border logistics efficiency have significantly raised international transportation and warehousing costs for these inputs. Meanwhile, the sharp depreciation of the pound sterling has directly increased procurement costs for raw materials priced in USD or EUR. Internal Tata Steel estimates suggest Brexit-driven exchange-rate volatility adds approximately €30 per tonne to raw material costs for every tonne of steel produced. (C) Direct Impact of Order Uncertainty on Capacity Utilization Expectations Trade-policy uncertainty stemming from Brexit directly caused downstream industries to sharply curtail steel procurement orders: Surveys by the UK Steel Industry Association show that since H2 2018, EU-based infrastructure and manufacturing firms have significantly reduced long-term purchase commitments for UK long products—opting instead for stable supplies from France, Germany, Belgium, and other EU member states. In H1 2019 alone, UK long-product exports to the EU fell 23% year-on-year—directly undermining enterprise capacity utilization. This trend is explicitly corroborated in official UK government industry analyses: The UK House of Commons Library Briefing Paper No. CBP 8182 states that Brexit will reduce overall UK steel industry capacity utilization by 5–8 percentage points and shrink industry revenue by more than 10%—further intensifying sector-wide survival pressures.

Tata Steel misses quarterly profit view on increased raw materials costs, one-time charges

May 15, 2026

Tata Steel reported a fourth-quarter profit miss driven by rising coking coal costs and restructuring charges at its Netherlands unit. Despite higher expenses, domestic production and revenue both exceeded analyst expectations during the quarter.

reuters

2026-05-15

Tata Steel misses quarterly profit view on increased raw materials costs, one-time charges

2026-06-08

Unions Demand Government Intervention Over Tata Steel Furnace Grid Connection Delay in South Wales

Tata Steel misses quarterly profit view on increased raw materials costs, one-time charges

FAQ