MethodologyContact usSupportLogin
Key takeaways:
Steel, aluminium, battery materials and other critical inputs are increasingly carrying embedded carbon costs, causing pricing credibility to become a competitive necessity for manufacturers.
In response, leading European automotive OEMs are using independent market benchmarks to validate supplier pricing, separate genuine cost signals from noise and make more confident sourcing and negotiation decisions under sustained regulatory pressure.
Under the EU’s Fit for 55 package, automakers are facing legally binding requirements to cut vehicle CO₂ emissions by 55% by 2030 and 100% by 2035 compared with 2021 levels.
These targets are reshaping sourcing decisions, cost structures and long-term supplier strategies.
At the same time, CBAM and the EU ETS are shifting carbon costs out of compliance functions and into vehicle bills of materials. Steel, aluminium, batteries and Tier‑1 components now carry explicit carbon exposure that must be priced, negotiated and managed.
Effective carbon prices remain muted due to free allowances, which are at 90% for steel and 78% for aluminium. This, however, will change with the decline of free EU ETS allocations.
EUA prices are widely projected to rise toward €130 per tonne by 2030, potentially adding 7‑17% to metal input costs for EU car producers.
Carbon pricing is no longer reputational. It is a direct margin risk.
Understanding the Global Landscape for Low‑Carbon Steel and Aluminium: Discover how Fastmarkets assesses and explains the evolving value of low‑carbon steel and aluminium in a rapidly changing global market.
From 2026, CBAM introduces a new layer of commercial exposure for automotive supply chains sourcing metals globally while manufacturing within the EU.
One of the biggest challenges for OEMs is verification. Where emissions data is absent or delayed, default CBAM emissions values apply, often significantly higher than verified figures.
“For automotive manufacturers in 2026, CBAM’s impact on metals input prices could be 23% greater if imports rely on default emissions values rather than verified data,” said Ben Crick, Senior economist at Fastmarkets. “The longer verification is postponed, the greater the default value penalty, rising to 33% by 2027.”
This creates a new risk asymmetry: OEMs are now exposed not just to their own emissions performance, but to the quality and credibility of suppliers’ carbon data.
Pricing disputes will increasingly hinge on whether carbon costs are genuine, inflated or misapplied. With automotive accounting for around 40% of EU flat steel demand, OEM procurement strategies will play a decisive role in determining whether carbon costs are absorbed upstream or passed directly into vehicle margins.
Historically, automotive procurement has relied on annual price resets, fixed contracts and bilateral negotiations. However, carbon inputs are volatile, policy‑driven and unevenly applied across regions.
Tier‑1 and Tier‑2 suppliers are using inconsistent methods to pass through CBAM and EU ETS costs. In some cases, carbon costs are being double‑counted, mispriced or embedded without transparency.
At the same time, internal vehicle cost models are losing authority. Without external reference points, OEM finance and procurement teams are forced to arbitrate between competing supplier claims with limited independent validation.
As CBAM matures, with quarterly pricing anchors emerging in 2026 and weekly certificate pricing from 2027, the need for credible, market‑linked reference pricing becomes unavoidable.
In this environment, bilateral pricing alone is no longer sufficient. Independent benchmarks are increasingly being used to frame negotiations, not eliminate them.
Crucially, benchmarks introduce neutrality into negotiations at a time when carbon costs are highly contested.
Automakers with strong reference pricing are not trying to eliminate green premiums. They are trying to ensure those premiums are real, proportionate and defensible.
Fastmarkets’ price data, forecasts and analysis support a quarter of global automotive manufacturers. Talk to our team and learn how we can anchor your cost models, reduce risk and inform your RFI/RFP/RFQ processes.
Leading European OEMs are integrating benchmarks into multiple layers of decision‑making:
OEMs are building carbon‑inclusive cost models at both vehicle and component level, integrating CBAM and EU ETS assumptions directly into bill‑of‑materials calculations. This allows procurement and finance teams to stress‑test exposure under different carbon price trajectories.
Independent benchmarks are increasingly being used to challenge carbon premiums in steel, aluminium and battery materials. Escalation and indexation clauses are being linked to neutral references, shifting discussions from price assertions to evidence‑based cost logic.
“Automakers with high‑quality carbon intelligence are able to understand suppliers’ true carbon cost structures and challenge unjustified CBAM pass‑throughs with precision,” Crick said, “rather than accepting inflated cost claims at face value.”
Benchmarks also allow OEMs to compare EU‑produced and imported components on a carbon‑inclusive basis, testing whether reshoring genuinely protects margins or simply introduces different cost risks.
This is becoming particularly important as competition for low‑carbon materials intensifies. Automotive demand is projected to rise to around one‑third of European green steel consumption by 2035, while construction’s share declines.
Beyond procurement, independent benchmarks are helping align sustainability, finance and sourcing teams around a shared commercial language.
Instead of treating carbon as a parallel ESG metric, benchmarks translate emissions into price signals, enabling faster, more consistent decision‑making across vehicle programs.
As carbon costs become more explicit, European automotive OEMs must enforce pricing discipline without destabilising key suppliers.
In this environment, benchmarks act as a common language rather than a blunt negotiating tool, supporting transparent pricing while maintaining long‑term supply‑chain stability. Neutral reference points allow OEMs to challenge unjustified carbon premiums without undermining supplier resilience.
Automakers that have already committed to green premiums may be structurally advantaged, having built lower‑carbon supply chains and reduced CBAM exposure. But as CBAM increases demand for verified low‑carbon materials, competition for green tonnes will intensify, making credibility and trust as critical as negotiation leverage.
For European automotive OEMs, the strategic divide is becoming clear. Those relying on supplier claims and internal models risk margin erosion, pricing drift and delayed responses to policy shocks. Those embedding independent benchmarks into cost governance gain foresight, confidence and control.
CBAM and EU ETS increase the need to verify carbon-cost pass-through in covered materials such as steel and aluminium. Separately, rising demand for certified low-carbon materials is creating green premiums, particularly in steel.
Benchmarks help OEMs distinguish regulatory carbon costs from voluntary or scarcity-driven green premiums. Automotive accounts for 33% (31Mt) cumulative demand for low and near-zero-emissions steel to 2035, with strong fundamentals to support its continued role in this market.
OEMs that have already built benchmark‑driven, low‑carbon supply strategies may find themselves structurally advantaged as CBAM reshapes trade flows.
Discover how Fastmarkets can help your team move forward with confidence.