How Metal Importers Can Navigate the EU Carbon-Data Void in 2026
In a recent interview with The Supply Chainer, Dubrink CTO Jan-Joost den Brinker discusses the compliance challenges European metal importers face regarding overseas CBAM carbon data.
This update is based on an article written by Alex Badmington, originally published in The Supply Chainer, featuring an interview with Dubrink's Chief Technology Officer, Jan-Joost den Brinker.
As the European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) progresses toward full enforcement in 2026, European metal importers are confronting a structural compliance problem: a widening documentation gap from overseas suppliers.
To help navigate this, Dubrink's Chief Technology Officer shared his expert insights into why this data void exists and how importers must handle the relational and operational tensions it creates.
The Core Issue: Supplier Hesitation, Not Missing Data
According to den Brinker, the lack of data flowing into Europe isn't necessarily because the data doesn't exist. Instead, it stems from a mix of regulatory confusion and a protective stance over competitive intelligence, such as energy consumption and furnace efficiency.
In his written responses to the publication, den Brinker explained:
Most suppliers already possess much of the underlying production data needed for CBAM compliance.
However, many suppliers remain unaware of exactly what the European Union expects from them.
Others are understandably reluctant to share commercially sensitive information that they view as proprietary intelligence.
"The challenge is creating a process where suppliers can provide verified emissions data with confidence, without feeling they're exposing their competitive advantage," den Brinker noted.
Reframing the Administrative Burden
The article highlights that importers are often caught between looming regulatory deadlines and supplier relationships built on decades of trust that never previously required carbon transparency.
When addressing the cost-versus-compliance debate, den Brinker argued against viewing the administrative burden of CBAM as a primary roadblock.
"I actually think that's a false trade-off," den Brinker told The Supply Chainer. "The administrative burden is measurable and can be optimized over time. A disrupted supply chain or a critical supplier who fails verification is far more expensive."
He advised that businesses need to shift the conversation away from merely minimizing compliance costs. Instead, importers should focus on the "supply chain visibility and the resilience that comes from understanding trade flows," which den Brinker believes is the true key to identifying new supply chain opportunities.
Broader Procurement Shifts
The friction surrounding carbon data, as highlighted by den Brinker's insights, is actively reshaping sourcing decisions across the metals sector.
Importers are increasingly prioritizing supply chain resilience and visibility over strict cost optimization. Consequently, businesses are implementing shorter supplier contracts, conducting more frequent data audits, and utilizing dual-sourcing strategies to ensure their suppliers possess both the willingness and capability to meet European carbon verification standards.