CBAM-related costs are increasingly reflected in aluminium pricing benchmarks, extending their commercial impact beyond the importer that carries the formal compliance obligation.
An analysis by AL Circle, written by Joško Kandido and published on 3 September, examined the effect of the EU border mechanism on aluminium pricing for processors, distributors and other buyers that may purchase metal from an importer rather than bring it directly into the EU.
The development is reflected in the methodology used by Fastmarkets for its Italian and Spanish duty-paid P1020A premiums. The assessments incorporate CBAM costs from 1 January 2026, consistent with the methodology for Fastmarkets’ Rotterdam duty-paid reference.
Market premiums do not equal statutory CBAM liabilities
Fastmarkets distinguishes its assessments from a mechanically calculated carbon surcharge. The duty-paid premiums are observed market assessments, meaning the carbon cost incorporated into transactions may not be passed through in full.
The amount reflected in an individual transaction can vary according to origin, brand, customs-clearance timing and other commercial circumstances. A change in a market premium therefore does not constitute a direct calculation of an individual importer’s CBAM obligation.
The regulatory liability remains connected to the specific goods and supporting evidence involved in the CBAM calculation, whereas a market benchmark reflects broader trading conditions.
Indexed contracts face carbon-cost allocation questions
The inclusion of CBAM-related costs in market references also creates a potential double-counting risk for contracts using indexed aluminium prices. If an agreed benchmark already incorporates part of the carbon cost, applying an additional carbon charge without specifying its basis could result in the same cost component being recovered twice.
That possibility does not establish that any particular supplier has double-charged a customer. The issue instead concerns how the underlying pricing formula allocates and identifies carbon-related costs.
For downstream buyers, the distinction between the benchmark and the statutory liability is therefore material. A duty-paid index can reflect market conditions influenced by CBAM without representing the precise certificate requirement attached to a particular shipment.
The contractual question is consequently what the selected index already captures before an additional carbon-related charge is applied. Clear identification of the components incorporated into the aluminium price is required to distinguish the benchmarked market cost from a separate CBAM charge.
