Poland imported €125.3 million of Serbian iron and steel in 2025, making it the largest direct EU market for those products. Germany, Slovenia and France, meanwhile, led direct EU imports of Serbian aluminium, showing that the largest overall EU markets for CBAM-covered goods do not necessarily buy the most from Serbia.
EU imports from Serbia in the HS72 iron and steel category were valued at $640.7 million, approximately €567 million at the 2025 average exchange rate. Czechia was the second-largest direct market at €77.8 million, followed by Hungary at €71.9 million.
Italy imported €53.4 million of Serbian HS72 goods, while Slovenia’s imports were €10.0 million. Germany bought €4.9 million directly, a far smaller figure than its prominence in Serbia’s broader bilateral exports might suggest. Bulgaria and Romania were also significant direct markets, although import values for them were not specified.
The EU-wide rankings use a different measure. Italy accounted for 17.6% of the value of EU imports under CBAM codes from all extra-EU origins in 2025, while Germany and the Netherlands each accounted for about 12.7%. Those codes cover steel, aluminium, fertilisers, power and other goods, and the rankings do not describe Serbia-specific purchases.
Aluminium markets and CBAM exposure
EU imports from Serbia in the HS76 aluminium and articles category totalled $505.7 million in 2025, approximately €448 million. Germany was the largest direct reporting market, with imports worth €75.0 million, followed by Slovenia at €72.2 million and France at €64.0 million.
Poland imported €25.4 million of Serbian aluminium, Hungary €14.3 million and Italy €12.1 million. Czechia’s imports were €6.0 million. Croatia and Romania also followed the three leading markets, but no values were specified for either country.
The direct-import values are indicative euro conversions of US-dollar trade figures using the 2025 average exchange rate of €1 = $1.1300. HS72 and HS76 are chapter-level product categories that include goods such as ferrous and aluminium scrap, which are outside CBAM Annex I coverage. The totals indicate trade orientation and a possible compliance pipeline, but do not measure precisely the value of Serbia’s CBAM-liable sales; an eight-digit Combined Nomenclature match is needed to determine whether an individual delivery is covered.
Customs routes do not identify final customers
Customs clearance in a port or distribution hub does not establish where a material is ultimately consumed. The importer of record may be a merchant, service centre or regional distribution company rather than the industrial customer using the product.
A Serbian steel coil entering Poland could be rolled, coated or shaped before being used in machinery sold in Germany. Aluminium reported at Slovenia’s border could move onward as a semi-finished product or be processed in several countries, so country totals do not identify the final customers.
The direct-import pattern points to manufacturing and distribution clusters in central Europe, rather than showing that the largest EU customs markets buy every Serbian product. Steel suppliers should engage with buyers and processors in Poland, Czechia and Hungary, while aluminium exporters should prioritise contract chains in Germany, Slovenia and France.
Exporters need to identify both the party legally responsible for CBAM as the declarant and the industrial customer that controls technical specifications. The entity paying customs-related costs may not be the purchaser determining a material’s long-term competitiveness.
If importers use conservative default emissions values while awaiting verified plant information, purchase prices could include a carbon premium greater than the producer’s actual emissions would justify. Exporters seeking to defend market share need documented production and emissions information that travels with the goods.
Elevated by CBAM.Clarion Engineer
