Good afternoon, and welcome to the Alcoa Corporation Third Quarter 2025 Earnings Presentation and Conference Call. Participants will be in a listen-only mode. After today's presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions. Please note that this event is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Louis Langlois, Senior Vice President of Treasury and Capital Markets. Please go ahead, sir.

Thank you, and good day, everyone. I'm joined today by William Oplinger, Alcoa Corporation President and Chief Executive Officer, and Molly Beerman, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. We will take your questions after comments by Bill and Molly. As a reminder, today's discussion will contain forward-looking statements relating to future events and expectations and are subject to various assumptions and caveats. Factors that may cause the company's actual results to differ materially from these statements are included in today's presentation and in our SEC filings. In addition, we have included some non-GAAP financial measures in this presentation. For historical non-GAAP financial measures, reconciliation to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures can be found in the appendix to today's presentation. We have not presented quantitative reconciliation of certain forward-looking non-GAAP financial measures for reasons noted on this slide. Any reference in our discussion today to EBITDA means adjusted EBITDA. Finally, as previously announced, the earnings press release and slide presentation are available on our website. Now, I'd like to turn over the call to Bill.

Thank you, Louis, and welcome to our third quarter 2025 earnings conference call. Let me begin with safety. In late July, we experienced a tragic loss with the passing of a colleague due to a fatal incident at the carbon plant of our Alumar smelter, our first workplace fatality since 2020. This event has deeply affected the entire Alcoa family; our thoughts remain with his loved ones, friends, and colleagues. Following the incident, safety leaders from across Alcoa, supported by independent external experts, conducted a comprehensive investigation. We held a town hall with employees to share findings, address concerns, and reinforce our safety protocols. Already, the implementation of the associated actions is well advanced at Alumar, and a series of global measures have been introduced to prevent such incidents in the future. This loss is a solemn reminder of the critical importance of safety in everything we do. We remain steadfast in our commitment to provide a safe working environment. In the third quarter, we delivered strong operational performance and stability, achieving year-to-date aluminum production records at five of our smelters. These additional tons are particularly valuable as they carry higher margins and contribute meaningfully to our bottom line. With increases in the Midwest premium this quarter, related revenue on our U.S.-produced tons more than offset the net unfavorable tariff impacts on imports of aluminum to the U.S. from our Canadian smelters. We had three one-time items impacting the quarter, which Molly will cover: the permanent closure of the Kwinana refinery, the closing of the sale of our 25.1% interest in the Ma'aden joint venture, and a sizable increase in asset retirement obligations, primarily related to our Brazil operations. Looking ahead to the fourth quarter, we anticipate higher shipments and a sequential release of working capital. The recent rise in…

Thank you, Bill. Revenue decreased 1% sequentially to $3 billion. In the Alumina segment, third-party revenue decreased 9% on lower volumes and price of bauxite offtake and supply agreements. In the Aluminum segment, third-party revenue increased 4% on an increase in average realized third-party price, partially offset by lower shipments and unfavorable currency impacts. However, this was lower than our revenue expectation for the segment, primarily due to certain aluminum shipments from Canada to U.S. customers being in transit at quarter-end. This also explains why our tariff costs sequentially were lower than expected. Third-quarter net income attributable to Alcoa was $232 million versus the prior quarter of $164 million, with earnings per common share increasing to $0.88 per share. The results reflect a $786 million gain on the sale of our interest in the Ma'aden joint venture and a subsequent favorable mark-to-market change of $267 million on the Ma'aden shares, partially offset by restructuring and related charges of $895 million for the permanent closure of the Kwinana refinery in Australia. On an adjusted basis, net loss attributable to Alcoa was $6 million, or $0.02 per share. Adjusted EBITDA was $270 million. Let's look at the key drivers of EBITDA. The sequential decrease in adjusted EBITDA of $43 million is primarily due to increased U.S. Section 232 tariff costs on aluminum imported into the U.S. from our Canadian smelters, adjustments to asset retirement obligations, unfavorable currency impacts, and lower alumina prices, partially offset by higher aluminum prices. The Alumina segment adjusted EBITDA decreased $72 million, primarily due to adjustments to asset retirement obligations, primarily in Brazil. Also, lower volumes and price of bauxite offtake and supply agreements and lower alumina prices were only partially offset by lower production costs related to the timing of maintenance activities. The Aluminum segment adjusted EBITDA…

Thanks, Molly. Let's discuss our markets, starting with alumina. Alumina prices have declined significantly over the past month, with recent prices around $315 per metric ton as the market remains under pressure due to ample spot availability and refinery expansions in Indonesia and China. Outside China, the timing mismatch between new refining capacity coming online in Indonesia in 2025 and additional smelting capacity expected only in late 2025 or into 2026 is creating a short-term imbalance. In China, most previously curtailed capacity has been restarted since May, adding further supply pressure. Many Chinese refineries operate at the top of the cost curve. Continued downward pressure on domestic prices may prompt further supply-side response, resulting in curtailments. Looking ahead, alumina demand will be supported by new smelting capacity in Indonesia and anticipated to come online in 2026. However, uncertainty around the Mozal smelter could weigh on demand and pricing. Meanwhile, bauxite prices remained firm, supported by seasonal supply disruptions in Guinea and the market working through stockpiles accumulated earlier in 2025. Alcoa continues to deliver on strong fundamentals, consistent quality in our smelter-grade alumina products, and preferred supplier status due to our reliability. We remain on track for a record year in third-party bauxite sales volumes. Let's now move on to aluminum. LME prices rose approximately 7% sequentially and have continued to increase, recently reaching $2,775 per metric ton, reflecting a combination of factors: a weaker US dollar, expectations of monetary easing, and persistent supply tightness amid resilient global demand. In the U.S., the Midwest premium continued to increase during the third quarter and recently reached import parity. This reflects declining inventories and reduced aluminum imports following the Section 232 tariff increase earlier this year. European premiums also rebounded from earlier lows, signaling improving market fundamentals. Demand remains steady across Europe…

We will now begin the question and answer session.

And our first question will come from Chris LaFemina with Jefferies. Please go ahead.

Hey guys, thanks for taking my question. Hi Bill. Just wanted to ask about, I guess, capital allocation. I mean, you're approaching your net debt target range. You could be in a position where you're able to start returning capital a bit more aggressively in 2026. You're obviously focused on further operational upside. I know you're going to give us a lot more detail around this at the upcoming Investor Day, but just wondering about how you think about potential M&A opportunities in the market? And to the extent that you think about that at all, is it any particular spot in the supply chain that you'd be focused on? Would you be interested in bauxite and alumina? Is it more in the downstream? Or is that really not even on your mind right now because of all the stuff you have going on internally? Thank you.

So Chris, let me let Molly address the capital allocation and then we'll come to the M&A question.

Hi, Chris. We are $135 million away from the top of our adjusted net debt target of $1.6 billion, and the top target is $1.5 billion. We do have a priority to continue to pay down debt. We have notes, the 2027 notes, with $141 million remaining, and on the 2028 notes, $219 million remaining. That will be our first priority. But as we stay within the net debt target, we will certainly be evaluating additional returns to stockholders in parallel with pursuing some growth options.

And Chris, to address the M&A question, we did the Alumina Limited transaction last year, and that showed that we have the ability to successfully do M&A work. That transaction, if you look back upon it, allowed us to do the Ma'aden transaction where we're swapping out the Ma'aden equity interest for shares. As I look forward, we will look at opportunities for M&A across the spectrum of the product line. I would not say at this point that we have any particular part of the product line that we need to add to. But we will look at opportunities as they come up, and we'll do the evaluation. And what we'll do is, where we have opportunities to create significant synergies that aren't available to our shareholders otherwise, we would look at those opportunities from the acquisition perspective.

That's very helpful. Thanks, Bill. See you next week in New York.

Yes. Thanks.

Your next question today will come from Lawson Winder with Bank of America. Please go ahead.

Great. Thank you very much, operator. Good evening, Bill and Molly. Nice to hear from you both. Could I ask about the U.S.-Australia Alcoa partnership? Would you be able to provide some background on how this came together? Was that an initiative driven by Alcoa?

It was an initiative that really began between Alcoa and the Japanese. The Japanese were looking for the potential offtake of gallium. We got that joint development agreement put together a little while back. And we've been talking to both the U.S. and the Australian governments for a number of months now. The real strategic advantage of this deal is that it provides a supply chain outside of China for gallium that is around 10% of the world's gallium market. It will be at our Wagerup facility in Western Australia. That solidifies the importance of that facility in Australia. And it really strengthens the relationship between, and you saw this in the press conference yesterday and in the joint signing ceremony between President Trump and Prime Minister Albanese, strengthens the relationship between the U.S., Australia, Japan, and really shows the importance of Alcoa in Australia.

Thank you for that. And then as a follow-up, can you give us an idea of what sort of approvals or permits might be needed and the timeline to first production on that facility?

So that's one of the reasons why Wagerup was chosen. The approvals, we have line of sight to get the approvals done fairly quickly. We are pushing to have first metal by 2026. We think we will be first to market outside of China on an aggressive schedule. The next step is that we need to get final documents signed, but we're pushing to be able to create, to extract gallium by 2026.

Okay. Thank you, Bill.

Thanks.

And your next question today will come from Timna Tanners with Wells Fargo. Please go ahead.

Yes. Hey, good evening. I'm looking forward to hearing more about Australia and Spain as you teased for next week's Investor Day. But I didn't hear mention of Canada or the U.S. I thought I would probe those topics. Didn't hear mention, in particular, on the negotiations with Canada regarding any carve-out of aluminum. So I'd like to hear about that export opportunity, the latest there. And then given that the U.S. now has arguably the lowest aluminum smelter production costs in the world, just if there's any rethinking of expanding capacity domestically, like at Warrick with that idle hotline? Thanks.

Wow, there are a lot of questions there, Timna. So as far as the Canadian-U.S. negotiations that are going on, we are providing information to both sets of governments so that they have the right information, the right data to make the right decisions. And we're working with both administrations to ensure that they understand the trade flows because we're probably the world's expert on the trade flows between Canada and the U.S. when it comes to aluminum. I'm a little bit surprised by your comment around the lowest cost in the world for aluminum. We have not yet seen, with the exception, and I'll cover the Massena Project, we have not yet seen significantly competitive energy prices available for the long term in the United States. You know that globally, we would be shooting for energy prices between $30 and $40 a megawatt hour. We've not seen those available yet for long-term packages in the U.S. In fact, the opposite of that is occurring because some of the data centers and the AI centers are able to pay $100 a megawatt hour, whereas we're looking for $30 to $40. And then lastly, around your question around Warrick, the Warrick restart is a complex restart for that fourth line. It will cost us probably about $100 million, and it'll take anywhere between one to two years to get that fourth line up. We'll continue to evaluate it, but we won't make an investment decision simply on a tariff. Tariffs can and do change over time, so we won't be plowing $100 million into the ground at this point based on a tariff cost. Did I answer all of that?

That's helpful. I think you did, and I should clarify that that comment on the lowest production cost is adjusted for tariff and actually came from CRU, but that's helpful detail. I appreciate it.

Oh, and I should have highlighted Massena. And let me just take a second to highlight Massena. Really big deal. And I said this in my prepared remarks, but maybe it didn't come out as exciting as I wanted it to. Really big deal in Massena. We have a ten-year contract that has two potential extensions of five years each. That allows us now to make long-term decisions associated with Massena, and we've decided to invest in the bake furnace in Massena. So really excited for the people of Massena. And as I said in my prepared remarks, I committed to them. We're going to get them a globally competitive long-term power contract. They've committed to me that they're going to work on the profitability of that plant, the safety of that plant, and the production of that plant. And I'm looking forward to getting up to Upstate New York and celebrating here soon.

Okay. Thanks again.

Thanks.

And your next question today will come from Carlos De Alba with Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead.

A question on gallium. Do you have any color that you can share on the economics of that project? And if it is too early, maybe when do you expect a technical report or feasibility study that you can share, given that it could come up rather quickly? And maybe related to that, does this project change in any way the ongoing mining permitting process you have going on in Western Australia?

I missed the second half of that. Does it impact our approvals at all?

Like, if it changes the ongoing mining permit process that you have in Western Australia?

Right. So let me go there fairly quickly. The approvals process that we're going through currently is related to Huntley and Pinjarra. Huntley, the mine, Pinjarra, the refinery. So this would have no impact on that approvals process. In Wagerup, we will be going through an approvals process there at a later date. And this should have no impact on that approval process either. When it comes to the economics, Carlos, this is not a large plant. It is not a large plant. It is going to be financed via a couple of the Japanese entities, the U.S. government, and the Australian government. Alcoa will have a small part of the financing. The really critically important thing here is to have a supply chain of gallium outside of China. And this is what the governments want, and they will be taking an offtake of that gallium. So Japan, Australia, and the U.S. will all have an offtake of the gallium.

I'll just add that the structure for that offtake is a cost-plus margin, which is still in the process of negotiation.

Great. Thank you for that. And then one more, if I may. Maybe related to the last question, didn't ask. Any intention to maybe look at getting back into the rolling business and unfortunate situations from some of the current producers there maybe highlighted the need for having a more robust supply chain?

Hey, my attorneys always tell me not to make unequivocal statements. But I will make an unequivocal statement. No. There's no interest in getting back in the rolling business.

Fair enough. Thank you very much. See you next week.

See you.

And your next question today will come from Daniel Major with UBS. Please go ahead.

Hi, Bill, Molly. Thanks for the questions. I think most have been answered, but discussed most of the strategic elements. Next week. But just one follow-up, just on the comment you made on gallium. Would you you said that the pricing would be an offtake agreement at a cost-plus or a fixed margin. Is that for all of would that be for all of the volumes associated with the project? Is that the right way to think about it?

All of the volume. Alcoa and we still have to get through definitive agreements. So we're making these comments based on the MOU that was signed. Alcoa will have a very small offtake, very small offtake, the rest will be cost-plus.

Okay. And just one follow-up on the gallium dynamic. Can you give any insight on the ownership structure of the JV and your equity participation in the 100 tons?

So the ownership structure is two entities will own the plant. The Japanese will own 50%. The combination of the U.S., Australia, and Alcoa will own the other 50%. We have not publicly said the ownership of that second 50%. And the offtake will be similar in line with the ownership percentages.

Right. So I'll go yeah. Comfortably less than 50% of the economics of the joint venture.

Yes. To put it in perspective, we would anticipate taking again, this is all in negotiation. Something like five tons of the 100-ton capacity.

Okay. Thank you. And then your second question, again, trying to front-run next week. Can you still confirm the target for San Ciprian smelter running at steady state is mid-2026? Is that still correct?

Yes. That is our target that we will have full run rate mid-2026, trying to get to the level of profitability at the smelter in the back half of '26.

Okay. And then yes, last we've seen a bit of an uptick recently in both Midwest and European premiums. Can you give any color on what's trying to drive that? Are you seeing any green shoots in end demand? Or is this some tightening in the supply chain? What would you attribute that uptick to?

So in the Midwest, the Midwest has finally risen to a level where it covers the full tariff cost. In Europe, we're seeing some uncertainty around Mozal, the potential Mozal shutdown. And then the Century shut that's occurred within the last day or two, that could put further pressure on the European premium.

Both markets are still in deficit, and the supply is very tight. So I think you're seeing the price react to that.

Yeah. In the U.S., I think our days' consumption has gone down to something like thirty-five days, which typically triggers it's below a level where it typically triggers higher pricing.

Very clear. Thank you.

And your next question today will come from Alexander Nicholas Hacking with Citi. Please go ahead.

Yes, evening Bill and Molly. Look forward to seeing you next week. Congratulations on the agreement at Massena. Just one question for me. Your geographic mix of shipments from your Canadian smelters, I know at one point you were rerouting some of that material away from the U.S. With the MWP back where it is, are those kind of flows back to normal again? Thanks.

So we had redirected about 135,000 tons during the course of the year so far. But at this point, with the Midwest premium as high as it is, it would be back to normal shipments in the United States.

Thank you.

And your next question today will come from Nick Giles with B. Riley Securities. Please go ahead.

Thank you, operator. Bill, coincidentally, net income attributable to Alcoa was $232 million this quarter. My question is, what do you think the administration needs to see from here to ultimately come to this agreement with Canada and reach a resolution on the tariffs?

You know, Nick, I'm not going to speculate on what the U.S. needs to see. The position that we're in, and I was in Washington over the last two days, and I was meeting with key decision-makers on both sides of the table. The position that we're in is we're explaining to them the market flows. And just so everybody knows, and I'm sure you've heard these numbers, the U.S. is short roughly 4 million metric tons on an annual basis. Canada provides around 3 million metric tons out of that 4 million metric tons. I know there's been some discussions, and you've probably heard some of the rumors around lower tariffs or potentially a tariff wall around North America, potentially tariff rate quotas. We are a resource to both to help them understand the impacts of those, and that's the function that we've been fulfilling.

Appreciate that, Bill. My second question was, you've noted some production records at several of your assets year-to-date and assume that's the result of all the productivity and competitiveness work over the past twelve months. But what assets would you still consider to be underperforming today? And any other commentary about how much more you could improve at some of those other assets?

So I am very pleased with the operations globally. It starts with stability, and that gets reflected in generally higher production levels and lower costs. When I look around the world, if I just take you on a tour around the world, our Western Australian refineries have dealt with really, really poor bauxite quality. This is bauxite that we would have typically thrown away in the past, and they've been able to offset a massive amount of that deterioration with better operating procedures and technology. If I then go to, and I should have stopped in Spain just for a second. The startup in Spain is going really, really well. You know, we've never questioned the ability of our workers in Spain to run that facility extremely well, and the startup is going well. We've hit production records in Quebec. We've hit some production records in Norway. And the U.S. is running well from a smelting perspective. It all starts with stability, a focus on the relaunched Alcoa business system, really focusing around maintenance and getting maintenance done right. And I should highlight down in Brazil, we hit a production record in our refinery, our Alumar refinery, in September. Fantastic performance there. And the smelter is up to around 93%, 94% starting. Start at capacity. And every day, they just add a pot or two. So are there areas? Yeah. There are definitely areas across the patch. As I look at opportunities for improvement, Brazil now has to get the stability and take the cost out. We still have opportunities to serve our customers better out of the cast house in Massena, New York, for one, and in Mosjøen in Norway. So as I look across the system, there's still a lot of opportunity for improvement.

Bill, that was a great tour. I appreciate all the color and continuing best of luck.

Thanks.

Your next question today will come from John Tumazos with John Tumazos Very Independent Research. Please go ahead.

Could you give us some color on the continued ten-year agreement in Massena? Is it a region where the demand for electricity has risen? Are there data centers or other new uses, new buyers? And is there new electricity capacity such as wind or natural gas or solar? And then secondly, does any of the infrastructure from the old prior Massena West plant still exist? Is this a candidate, or are there any candidates among your properties where old capacity could be brought back?

Oh, wow. You ended that in a different way than I thought you were going. So let me address each one of those, and Molly, feel free to jump in on any of this. The agreement that we have with the New York Power Authority extends the power contract for Massena out ten years, plus two opportunities to extend it another five and five. So Massena can have very competitive, low-cost green energy for the next twenty years. That allows us line of sight to be able to make the bake furnace investments. So we're going to invest $60 million in the bake furnace. So as I talk to people, for instance, in the U.S. administration, this is what aluminum needs in the United States. It's competitive, globally competitive electricity, preferably green, because at some point, we will get a green premium that's significant in the U.S. But this is exactly what's needed for investment in the United States, and that's why we've announced it and why we've done it. Your second part of that question is, is there competition for the electricity in Upstate New York? There absolutely is. I think New York Power Authority and the state of New York, and you remember New York Power Authority is part of the state of New York, understands the commitment to jobs in the North Country. Unlike a data center, we actually employ people. And we have approximately 550, 600 direct employees up in Massena, and this solidifies the future for them. They have to now deliver on a lot of things that I'm going to ask them to deliver upon. You then went to Massena, you said West, it's actually Massena East that's the curtailed capacity there. Massena East, there is no potline left, so we are not going to be restarting aluminum production. What we do have opportunities in Massena East is around data centers and AI, and there is electrical infrastructure still in place, and we're looking at opportunities there along with everywhere else in North America, but we're really looking at opportunities at Massena East. The electrical infrastructure is there.

Thanks, Bill. Congratulations.

Thanks, John. Good to hear from you.

And your next question today will come from Glyn Lawcock with Baron Joey. Please go ahead.

Good morning from Australia, Bill.

Hey, Glyn.

Bill, on the call, you said the public review period has closed. Have you been privy to what was in the public review period? And has there been anything that you've seen, you know, been outside what your expectations, etcetera, in the review period that you have to respond to?

For the question, Glyn. Yes, the public review period is closed. We have received the comments from the EPA. Rough numbers, 60,000 comments, which is a very large number of comments to come in through a public review period. We had originally thought out of those 60,000, about 5,500 were individual comments. We've subsequently had the time to go through each of the comments and use a set of tools that can help us go through those comments. There's probably around 2,000 individual comments that have been submitted. We have a very large team in Western Australia that is completely focused on replying to those comments and addressing those comments. As you can imagine, there's probably two or three areas that those comments are focused on. One is proximity to water. And just so that everybody knows, we've been mining in Western Australia for sixty years. We've never impacted the water supply at Perth. But I understand the concern around proximity to water. That's why we've agreed to step back some of the mining farther away from the water sources. The second is really around mining in the jarrah and that's rehabilitation and any potential impact on black cockatoos. I think, Glyn, you were probably out on our tour that we took you through. You've seen it for yourself. I would invite anybody else that wants to take a tour of Western Australia. We have public tours to show you the rehabilitation in Western Australia. It is world-class. And that's one of the two areas that people are focused on.

Alright. Thanks, Bill. If I could squeeze in a second and staying in Australia, you announced the Kwinana permanent closure the other day. You talked about the potential for a significant offset from the land sale. Just two questions. $1.6 billion seemed a lot of money for the closure. Was there anything that's specific to the closure versus other refineries? And then secondly, when you say significant for the land sale, is it commercially zoned? And could it be rezoned to make it more valuable? Or do you not think there's a zoning opportunity change as well? Thanks.

So, Glyn, I'll take this one. So the significance of the closure costs for Kwinana, we have a large water management with the RSAs there, and this is the largest that we've seen in any of our prior refinery closures. So that's the accelerated up. Higher cost that you are seeing and our accelerated attempts to remediate that as quickly as possible. As far as the zoning, it's in an industrial park, so it is already a part of a large complex. We do believe the land will be quite valuable. It has port access, rail access. And because in Kwinana, we have the residue areas physically separated from the refinery site, we will focus on remediating the refinery site and preparing that for redevelopment and resale there to try to get a full recovery of those closure costs and possibly exceed it.

Alright. Thanks very much for the response.

And your next question today will come from William Chapman Peterson with JPMorgan. Please go ahead.

Yes. Hi. Good afternoon, and I look forward to the update next week on the longer-term areas. Maybe as a snapshot and picking up on an earlier response on hyperscalers and maybe interest in idled assets or some of the interconnections. Have you seen hyperscaler interest pick up in recent months? You mentioned specifically Massena. So I'm just wondering how the dialogue is proceeding and is a snapshot relative to earlier this year when you first started up?

So the interest in data centers and AI centers hasn't really mitigated at all, hasn't come off at all over the last six months. We have spent a significant amount of time within the company trying to completely dimension what the opportunities are for our sites and how we aggressively market those sites to the right customers, the right developers for that land. So more to come on that in the future, but a lot of work going into what are the opportunities that we have, what electrical infrastructure we have, what interconnect that we can provide, and who the best developer or buyer of the site would be. And these are the closed and commissioned sites, not so much the active sites.

Yes, understood. Earlier in your prepared remarks, you talked about the demand profile. And I guess specific to the U.S., you spoke of strength in packaging and electrical weakness in construction and transportation. Is this a sign of demand destruction? Or potentially substitution given tariffs and high Midwest premium? Is this kind of more of a cyclical statement? Trying to get a sense of how the higher Midwest premium could be contributing to some of this demand weakness, if at all?

We don't think it's demand destruction at this point. When and I think you ran through the end markets pretty well. When I look at the end markets, packaging and electrical conductor are very strong. Building construction hasn't gotten worse. We were expecting, as probably most people were expecting, lower interest rates in the second half of this year. Those have not materialized. That will spur residential construction. The real weakness that we're seeing both in Europe and in North America is the automotive. And is that demand destruction, or is that in the case of Europe, really substitution by electric vehicles coming out of China? It's really hard to say. But, at this point, we're not seeing significant demand disruption.

Okay. Thanks for that. And, again, look forward to next week.

Thanks.

And your next question today will come from Nick Giles with a follow-up of B. Riley. Thanks.

Please go ahead. Thanks for taking my follow-up. Obviously, we've gotten some updated measures in the EU on safeguards for steel. So I was curious if there are any updates you could share on what we could see on the aluminum side or how those discussions have progressed?

No. I can't give you any update on that in Europe. The next big set of regulations will be coming into Europe is CBAM. And our company's position is that we think CBAM will go into effect as of 2026. There are still some pretty big loopholes in CBAM, and anybody that wants to discuss that next week with me, we can. But the two big loopholes are scrap and end-user and product production. We think that CBAM will raise the Midwest not the Midwest, the European premium probably $40 or $50 a ton in 2026. That will be a slight positive for us. Ultimately, costs will go up too as carbon costs creep into the overall cost structure. So CBAM, we think, will be coming in, in 2026 and at least in the near term have a positive impact for Alcoa.

Thanks a lot, Bill. Appreciate it.

This will conclude our question and answer session. I would like to turn the conference back over to Mr. Oplinger for any closing remarks.

Thanks, operator, and thanks to everybody for joining our call. We hope that you will join us for Investor Day next Thursday. I really look forward to seeing many of you there in New York. And that concludes the call, so thank you.

The conference has now concluded. Thank you for attending today's presentation. You may now disconnect.