Two investigations launched this September under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act have drawn fresh attention to the intersection of national security and industrial supply chains. While their immediate focus lies on copper products and personal protective equipment (PPE), their indirect consequences for automakers are profound.
Section 232 and the Automotive Supply Chain
For over a decade, Section 232 has been a cornerstone of U.S. trade enforcement in the automotive sphere. Steel and aluminum tariffs imposed in 2018 remain embedded in the cost structure of vehicles, and more recent inquiries into semiconductors and batteries have reinforced the linkage between industrial resilience and national defense.
The new copper investigation follows this trajectory. Copper is a critical input in wiring harnesses, electric motors, and batteries—technologies central to electric vehicles (EVs). If tariffs or quotas emerge, they will reshape sourcing strategies and cost structures across the automotive value chain.
Robotics and Industrial Machinery: The Hidden Layer
A crucial but less visible dimension of these investigations is their treatment of “robotics and industrial machinery.” As defined by the Department of Commerce, this category spans CNC machining centers, turning and milling machines, grinding and deburring equipment, stamping and pressing machines, automatic tool changers, welding systems, and precision laser- or watercutting tools. In short, it covers the very equipment that builds modern vehicles.
For automakers, the stakes are enormous. Copper is not only a material for cars themselves but also a critical enabler of the robotics and machining tools that shape, weld, and assemble automotive components. If Section 232 restrictions raise costs or disrupt supply in this category, the impact will cascade from machine shops to final assembly lines.
Application-specific equipment—autoclaves, industrial ovens, EDM machinery, and metal finishing tools—are also in scope. These are essential for treating lightweight alloys, hardening EV battery casings, and producing precision-engineered auto parts. By extending the definition of national security to encompass this machinery, the U.S. government effectively signals that automotive manufacturing capacity itself is a strategic asset.
Rising Cost Pressures
If tariffs on copper are imposed, automakers will face increased costs for essential components. A typical EV requires nearly four times as much copper as a traditional internal combustion vehicle. With U.S. automakers scaling up EV production under the Inflation Reduction Act, higher copper costs could reduce competitiveness against Asian and European producers. Even modest duties would ripple across supply chains, affecting wiring, motors, robotics, and charging infrastructure.
Moreover, restrictions on machine tools would raise capital expenditure costs for automakers modernizing plants. The advanced robotics that drive flexible, high-volume EV production could become more expensive or harder to source, slowing investment timelines.
Compliance and Operational Risks
Beyond tariffs, these investigations complicate just-in-time (JIT) logistics. Automakers already struggle with border delays linked to shifting rules of origin, forced labor enforcement, and carbon border adjustments. New restrictions on copper or industrial machinery could trigger stricter customs scrutiny, expanding the documentation burden. As compliance frameworks highlight, classification errors or incomplete supplier disclosures can halt production lines for days.
Strategic Realignment
The copper probe dovetails with broader U.S. efforts to secure critical minerals. Already, Section 301 tariffs target Chinese EV batteries and rare earths. Mexico’s recent decision to align with U.S. policy by raising tariffs on Chinese cars demonstrates how trade policy is being used to consolidate a “Fortress North America” automotive ecosystem.
If machine tools and robotics are drawn deeper into Section 232 enforcement, this trend will intensify. Automakers will be pushed to source not only materials but also production equipment domestically or from trusted allies. This could reinforce North American self-sufficiency but at the cost of higher investment needs.
Looking Ahead
For automakers, the lesson is clear: Section 232 investigations are no longer isolated events but part of a structural shift in U.S. trade policy. Copper today, robotics and CNC machinery tomorrow—the scope of “national security” is expanding, and with it, the compliance obligations facing manufacturers.
The Federal Circuit’s recent ruling on IEEPA tariffs underscores that Section 232 remains the legally durable path for trade restrictions. Automakers should therefore prepare for continuing, rolling investigations into both key inputs and the machinery that produces them.
In practical terms, this means recalibrating sourcing strategies, enhancing trade compliance systems, and anticipating tariff shocks as part of normal operations. For a sector already navigating electrification, labor value thresholds, and ESG requirements, the latest Section 232 investigations are one more reminder: trade compliance is no longer a back-office task. It is a strategic pillar of competitiveness in the global automotive industry.