America's Tin Can Industry Is Paying the Price for Trump's Steel Tariffs

When Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross held up a Campbell's soup can on CNBC in March 2018 to dismiss fears about Trump's new 25% steel tariff, he inadvertently spotlighted one of the tariff regime's most tangible victims: the American tin can industry. Ross argued the downstream impact would be negligible — but years later, can manufacturers tell a very different story.

The tin can is one of the most steel-intensive consumer products in existence, and the industry that makes it operates on razor-thin margins. Steel tariffs drove up input costs dramatically for domestic can makers, who couldn't easily pass those costs on to food giants like Campbell's, Del Monte, or other large customers with multi-year supply contracts. The Can Corporation of America, with its factory near Allentown, Pennsylvania, became emblematic of the squeeze: caught between protected, higher-cost domestic steel suppliers and powerful buyers who refused to absorb price increases.

The broader story is a cautionary tale about the unintended consequences of industrial protectionism. While the tariffs were designed to shield U.S. steelmakers — and did provide some relief to blast furnace operators — they effectively taxed every American manufacturer that uses steel as an input. The can industry, which employs tens of thousands of workers and underpins the country's food supply chain, found itself collateral damage in a policy aimed at a different sector entirely.

As Trump has revived and expanded his tariff agenda in his second term, the tin can's predicament illustrates the compounding volatility that comes with an unpredictable trade policy. Companies struggle to invest, plan capacity, or lock in supply deals when the tariff landscape can shift overnight via presidential announcement. The industry's struggle underscores a central tension in economic nationalism: protecting one domestic industry often means undermining another.