Trump controls U.S. Steel under unprecedented golden share agreement

In June 2023, President Donald Trump granted Japan-based Nippon Steel the approval to acquire U.S. Steel, marking a significant shift in the relationship between federal oversight and private corporate activity. This acquisition was made possible under a national security agreement that gives Trump a unique role in influencing the future decisions of U.S. Steel. The agreement, effective as of June 13, permits Trump to appoint a board member and exercise veto power over key business decisions such as plant closures, relocation of headquarters, and changes in operational structures, extending even beyond his time in office. The deliberations surrounding the buyout were lengthy, lasting over a year and a half, partially due to various national security concerns, lobbying by trade unions, and political factors stemming from battleground states like Pennsylvania where U.S. Steel is headquartered. Nippon Steel’s decision to pursue this acquisition was heavily influenced by the promise of substantial capital investments aimed at upgrading U.S. Steel’s facilities, as well as enhancing technology transfer from Japan. This golden share provision introduces heightened federal involvement in the private sector, raising eyebrows among analysts and government critics who voice concerns over the implications of such direct government control over a private entity. This arrangement is perceived by many as a significant conflict of interest, especially as the government that regulates the steel industry now has a controlling stake in U.S. Steel, a direct competitor. The tensions regarding this deal mirror broader debates on the nature of corporate governance and government intervention in the U.S. economy. Critics describe the golden share as a form of socialism, akin to concepts historically favored by the political left. The arrangement suggests a troubling precedent for future administrations, allowing for increased presidential control over private businesses, regardless of the party in power. The arrangement’s defense among Republican circles is anticipated to stir discussions reminiscent of previous government interventions in the corporate sector, notably the auto industry bailouts under the Obama administration.