China’s Post-2025 Paperboard Export Strategy and U.S. Packaging Impacts
Tariff Shifts in 2025 and Easing Trade Barriers
The year 2025 brought a pivotal shift in trade policy between the U.S. and China. After a period of escalating tariffs early in the year, both countries agreed to a tariff truce by mid-2025. Under a May 12, 2025 accord, the U.S. slashed tariffs on Chinese imports from a threatened 145% down to a 30% baseline, while China lowered its duties on U.S. goods from 125% to 10%. This easing of trade barriers marked a significant de-escalation of the trade war, especially for paper and packaging materials which had been caught in the crossfire. The reduction or removal of these tariffs immediately made Chinese paperboard more cost-competitive in global markets, reversing the price inflation that tariffs had caused. (Notably, during the tariff hikes, folding cartonboard – a key packaging substrate – was identified as the grade that would have been most impacted, so its relief under the eased tariffs was especially important.) By late 2025, legal challenges further clouded the tariff regime, and the long-term status of duties remained fluid. In this context, China began formulating an export strategy to leverage its regained access to the U.S. market, aiming to expand its paperboard exports under the more favorable tariff conditions.
China’s Paperboard Production and Export Capacity
China’s ability to supply paperboard is massive. In 2024, Chinese paper and paperboard output hit a record 158.5 million tons – an 8.6% year-on-year surge – illustrating the country’s enormous production base. Major Chinese papermakers have built significant excess capacity, leading to oversupply that is now rippling through global markets. Even before tariffs eased, Chinese manufacturers were pushing exports aggressively: Chinese paper exports jumped 23% in the first half of 2025 compared to the prior year. This suggests that China was strategically redirecting its paperboard output abroad to mitigate domestic oversupply and capture global market share.
Chinese producers also enjoy structural cost advantages that underpin their export strategy. Key players like Nine Dragons, Lee & Man, and Sun Paper are highly integrated – controlling everything from pulp to finished packaging – yielding economies of scale and cost structures Western competitors struggle to match. China’s mills benefit from low-cost inputs and support: access to inexpensive energy (e.g. discounted Russian oil/gas) and lower domestic financing costs, bolstered by government manufacturing incentives. These factors enable Chinese paperboard to be produced and sold at lower prices internationally. With tariffs lowered, these cost advantages translate directly into more aggressive pricing of Chinese paperboard in the U.S. market. In 2024, China had already exported over $1.26 billion worth of paper-based packaging (cartons, boxes, cases, etc.) to the U.S.. That figure is poised to grow as Chinese suppliers ramp up exports, given their ample slack capacity (Chinese packaging paper mills were running at only ~65% operating rates in 2024 amid a glut). In short, China has both the capability and the incentive to significantly increase paperboard exports to the U.S. under the new tariff regime.
Global Substrate Pricing Implications
The easing or removal of trade barriers in 2025 is reshaping global substrate pricing dynamics. With Chinese paperboard re-entering markets with minimal tariff costs, downward pressure on prices is expected. Chinese exporters can afford to undercut many competitors thanks to their cost edge, effectively creating a price ceiling in various paper grades. During the trade war, tariffs had driven up U.S. packaging costs – higher import taxes meant inflated prices that were often passed down to customers. Now, that inflationary pressure is lifting. U.S. packaging converters and printers may see relief in raw material costs as Chinese board becomes available at more economical rates. Global benchmark prices for containerboard and folding boxboard could soften as Chinese supply flows more freely, especially given China’s oversupply. Indeed, industry analysis indicates Chinese competition is already limiting pricing power for Western producers in many markets. In practical terms, U.S. buyers of paperboard substrates might negotiate lower prices or at least avoid the steep increases of the tariff period.
However, cheaper global prices come with a competitive shake-up. U.S. and European paper producers are being squeezed; their input costs remain relatively high, while Chinese imports cap the prices they can charge. This could lead to thinner margins for domestic mills and even potential mill closures if volume losses occur – mirroring how tariff-driven distortions previously threatened oversupply and capacity closures in certain regions. In the long run, if Chinese exports continue growing, we may see heightened volatility in global paperboard pricing: initially lower prices benefiting consumers and downstream industries, but with a risk of future corrections if trade tensions flare up again or if countermeasures (like anti-dumping duties) are imposed to prop up local prices. Global substrate pricing will thus be increasingly influenced by China’s export strategy and any policy responses it provokes.
Shifts in U.S. Sourcing Strategies
For American print and packaging firms, the tariff rollback forces a reassessment of sourcing strategies. During the high-tariff era, many U.S. converters and packaging buyers shifted sourcing to domestic or non-Chinese suppliers despite higher costs, simply to avoid prohibitive duties. Now, with Chinese paperboard largely free of extra tariffs, these companies can once again consider China as a viable source for affordable substrates. We are likely to see some reversion to Chinese sourcing for cost-sensitive products. For example, a U.S. folding carton converter might resume importing Chinese carton board if the landed cost is substantially lower than North American stock – a scenario much more plausible at a 0–30% tariff than at 100%+. Printers who produce packaging or display materials could also benefit by procuring Chinese laminated board or specialty paperboard that had been too expensive under tariffs.
That said, sophisticated procurement teams will approach this strategically rather than simply chasing the lowest price. The rollercoaster of 2018–2025 taught manufacturers the value of supply chain agility. Going forward, many U.S. companies will adopt a “China-plus” sourcing strategy: leveraging China’s cost advantage while maintaining alternate sources as a hedge. Key considerations include:
Diversifying the Supplier Base: Brands and converters will diversify suppliers across regions to avoid over-reliance on any single country. Even if a majority of volume shifts back to China, secondary suppliers in North America, Europe or Southeast Asia might be kept on tap. This ensures that if trade policies change abruptly, operations can pivot without crippling disruptions.
Flexible Contracts and Pricing: U.S. buyers may negotiate more flexible contracts, such as shorter-term agreements or clauses that adjust pricing if tariffs return. The ability to re-route orders quickly is now part of contingency planning. As one packaging supply chain advisory noted, frequent policy changes mean companies must be “agile and flexible” in sourcing, closely tracking material origins and tariff classifications.
Inventory and Lead Time Management: With transoceanic sourcing back in play, firms will balance cost savings against longer lead times. Some may increase safety stocks of critical paperboard to buffer against shipping delays or sudden policy shifts. Others might keep just-in-time supply for domestic materials but plan further ahead for Chinese imports.
Supplier Collaboration: Strong relationships with suppliers (both domestic and Chinese) are crucial. Transparent communication can help U.S. companies time their purchases – for instance, taking advantage of low global prices while preparing backup plans. Collaborating with suppliers on forecasting and rush order options will improve resilience.
Overall, U.S. procurement strategies are trending toward a hybrid model: capitalize on China’s cost competitiveness for a portion of supply, while retaining enough flexibility and local sourcing to safeguard against future shocks. The net effect could be more globalized sourcing in 2026 than the U.S. packaging industry saw at the height of the trade war, but done with a far more cautious, risk-managed approach.
Ensuring Supply Chain Stability
From an operational perspective, the post-2025 landscape offers both opportunities and risks for supply chain stability. On one hand, easing tariffs removes a major source of uncertainty and cost volatility. U.S. print and packaging companies can plan production budgets with more confidence that input costs won’t suddenly spike due to a tweet or executive order. This predictability is vital for an industry that often works on thin margins and long-term contracts. Moreover, increased availability of Chinese paperboard adds an element of supply stability: previously, some U.S. converters faced shortages or delays as domestic mills struggled to meet demand (for instance, when tariffs drove a surge of orders to U.S. suppliers, some experienced capacity strain and extended lead times). Now, having China “back online” as a source can relieve bottlenecks and serve as a pressure valve for U.S. supply chains. In theory, a more open trade environment should make the overall supply chain more resilient by widening the pool of supply options.
However, industry leaders understand that stability can be fleeting. Geopolitical tensions remain, and the risk of policy reversal or new trade disputes still looms in the background. A trade truce is not the same as a permanent peace. Therefore, U.S. firms are actively working to de-risk their supply chains. Many are institutionalizing the lessons learned during the trade war and the pandemic: build redundancy and flexibility into supply networks. For example, a large packaging converter might qualify multiple grades of paperboard (from different countries) for the same end-use, so that if one source is disrupted the plant can quickly switch to another. Likewise, critical materials may be dual-sourced – one domestic, one overseas – to balance cost and continuity.
Another consideration is the possibility of future trade remedies if Chinese exports flood the market. Already, global industry observers anticipate some countries will respond to China’s export surge with anti-dumping or safeguard measures. U.S. paper producers could petition for tariffs or duties if they can demonstrate harm from underpriced imports. This means U.S. converters and printers must stay attuned to policy developments; a sudden anti-dumping duty on Chinese board could upend cost calculations again. Thus, while current conditions favor stability and low prices, prudent companies are maintaining what-if scenarios for a return of trade barriers. Supply chain stability, in this context, comes from preparedness: multi-sourcing, keeping some inventory buffer, and closely monitoring trade policy signals to avoid being caught off guard.
U.S. Industry Reactions and Strategic Shifts
The reaction among American converters, printers, and packaging material suppliers to China’s post-tariff-shift strategy is a mix of cautious optimism and strategic defense. For converters and printers – the companies that turn paperboard into packaging and print products – the immediate implications are positive. Lower-cost substrate imports from China mean reduced raw material costs, which can either bolster their margins or be passed on as savings to end customers. In a highly competitive print/packaging market, many converters welcome any input cost relief after years of tariff-induced inflation. Access to affordable Chinese board could especially help smaller and mid-sized converters who have struggled with high domestic board prices; it gives them a chance to compete on larger contracts where materials make up a big chunk of costs. We may also see some U.S. printers who specialize in packaging (like folding carton printers or large-format display printers) diversify their supply chains by directly importing certain board grades that were unavailable or too pricey before. These operational tweaks can improve their agility and pricing to clients.
On the flip side, U.S. paperboard manufacturers and suppliers are facing renewed competitive pressure. Companies like WestRock, International Paper, and PCA (Packaging Corp of America) – which produce containerboard and boxboard domestically – must contend with an influx of lower-priced Chinese product in the market. Their likely responses are strategic and multifaceted. Firstly, we can expect intensified emphasis on product differentiation and service. Domestic suppliers will highlight advantages such as faster delivery times, customized grades, and reliability of a local supply (no overseas shipping risks) to retain customers. They might also adjust pricing strategies, offering more competitive rates or flexible terms to match Chinese offers where possible. Secondly, there could be a push for efficiency and consolidation. Western producers, already squeezed by rising input costs, may streamline operations or consolidate mills to reduce overhead – a trend industry analysts foresee continuing as weaker players seek mergers to survive the price squeeze. In extreme cases, if Chinese imports significantly erode market share, some higher-cost mills might shut down, accelerating consolidation of the U.S. paper industry.
Another reaction from U.S. suppliers is likely on the policy and trade front. The domestic industry may lobby policymakers for oversight on Chinese imports, especially if there’s evidence of dumping or state subsidies. With China’s government known to support its paper sector, U.S. producers could argue for trade actions if unfair pricing is suspected. The mention that several countries are mulling anti-dumping measures against Chinese paper exports in 2026 underscores this possibility. American industry groups will weigh the benefits of cheaper inputs for converters against the risks to manufacturing jobs in paper mills. The outcome might not be immediate tariffs (given the recent aversion to trade wars), but possibly more stringent monitoring or standards.
It’s important to note that not all U.S. reaction is defensive – there’s also strategic partnership in play. Some American packaging companies may deepen ties with Chinese suppliers, perhaps via joint ventures or sourcing offices in Asia, to gain better control over quality and logistics when importing. Conversely, Chinese paper companies might invest in U.S. facilities (as a few did in the late 2010s) to establish a local footprint. Such moves can create a win-win: Chinese firms get around trade uncertainties by producing on U.S. soil, and U.S. communities keep jobs and supply stable. In summary, American converters and printers are broadly poised to benefit operationally from tariff easing (through cost savings and supply options), while American paperboard makers are strategizing to maintain competitiveness – whether through innovation, cost reduction, or advocacy.
Long-Term Planning Considerations for U.S. Firms
For industry leaders – print CEOs and procurement heads – the post-2025 environment demands a forward-looking, strategic planning mindset. The key is to incorporate both the current reality of freer trade and the potential for future volatility. Long-term plans should be built on flexibility. Concretely, U.S.-based firms are advised to:
Continuously Monitor Trade Policy: Given how swiftly tariff landscapes changed in 2025, staying informed is essential. Companies should keep close watch on U.S.–China trade discussions, WTO cases, and any early warnings of tariff reimposition or new barriers. As one trade update noted, the tariff situation has become an “evolving story” that requires ongoing monitoring. Dedicating resources (either internal analysts or industry associations) to track these developments can provide a critical head start in adjusting strategies.
Embed Agility in Supply Contracts: Long-term procurement contracts might include clauses for tariff contingencies or options to renegotiate if duty structures change. Some firms are planning scenario-based contracts – e.g. Plan A pricing when no tariffs, Plan B if a 25% tariff returns. This kind of foresight in agreements can save headaches later and is part of building a resilient operation.
Invest in Relationships and Intelligence: Developing strong relationships with both domestic and international suppliers will pay dividends. In times of uncertainty, a collaborative supplier can help secure alternative sources or fast-track shipments. Similarly, leveraging data and market intelligence (for instance, knowing when Chinese mills have surplus inventory that could lead to discounts) allows companies to time purchases advantageously. A proactive approach might involve regular dialogue with suppliers about their capacity and cost outlooks, which informs the buyer’s own long-term planning.
Consider Total Cost and Risk, Not Just Unit Price: Strategically, firms will weigh the pure cost savings of Chinese paperboard against hidden and longer-term costs. These include shipping and inventory carrying costs, the risk of quality issues or recalls, and the potential impact of future carbon regulations or ESG considerations (shipping heavy paperboard across the ocean has a carbon footprint that some customers might scrutinize). Long-term, U.S. companies may decide that a balanced approach – using China for cost efficiency but not to the exclusion of closer suppliers – best meets their fiduciary and sustainability goals.
Capex and Investment Decisions: Perhaps the toughest long-term calls will be about capacity and capital investment. U.S. converters might ask: should we invest in new equipment or even a new paper mill to secure domestic supply, or is the future one of abundant imports? With tariff peace, building new U.S. mills is less attractive financially if they must compete with low-cost Chinese imports. On the flip side, if one anticipates that geopolitical tensions could reignite by late decade, having some domestic production could be a strategic asset. Companies are approaching these decisions cautiously. Some are deferring major capacity expansions until there is more certainty, echoing the trend that uncertainty can chill investment. Others might opt for incremental upgrades (automation, efficiency improvements) rather than big new builds, ensuring they stay competitive but without overcommitting in an uncertain trade climate.
Prepare for Industry Adjustments: Long-term plans should also account for likely industry shifts such as consolidation and technological change. If Chinese imports drive a wave of mergers among U.S. paper companies, how might that affect supply reliability or pricing power? If domestic mills close, will logistics need to adjust to sourcing more from ports than local suppliers? Strategic planners are mapping these possibilities. In parallel, advancements like digital printing on packaging or improved recycling could alter the demand and supply equation. Savvy firms keep these broader trends in view alongside trade policy when charting their 5- to 10-year plans.
In conclusion, the easing of tariffs in 2025 has opened a new chapter in which China’s paperboard export strategy will significantly influence the U.S. print and packaging industry. Global substrate pricing is likely to remain in check due to China’s cost-competitive surge, offering short-term relief for buyers but increasing competitive pressure on domestic suppliers. U.S. companies are adjusting sourcing strategies to seize cost advantages while hedging against future shocks through diversification and agility. Supply chains, for now, are more stable and predictable, yet the prudent path for industry leaders is to plan for multiple scenarios and maintain flexibility in operations. A neutral, strategic outlook suggests that those who proactively adapt – balancing efficiency with resilience – will be best positioned to navigate whatever the evolving U.S.–China trade relationship brings in the coming years. The focus is on factual implications and operational preparedness: controlling costs with open trade, without being caught unprepared if the winds change again. By planning with both optimism and caution, U.S. print and packaging firms can turn the 2025 policy shift from a potential disruption into a sustainable competitive advantage.
Sources: China–U.S. tariff agreement updates; Chinese paper production and export data; industry analyses on pricing and trade impacts; packaging supply chain guidance; and RaboResearch insights on tariffs’ strategic effects.