Displaying items by tag: Cemex

Poland: The court of appeal has supported a decision by the Office for Competition and Consumer Protection (UOKiK) in 2009 to fine six cement producers for cartel-like behaviour. However, the total fine has been reduced by one third to Euro67m from Euro98.3m, according to the Polish News Bulletin.

Grupa Ozarow is to pay Euro22.1m, Cemex Polska Euro16.6m, Gorazdze Cement Euro12.3m, Dyckerhoff Polska Euro7.51m, Cementownia Warta Euro5.55m and Cementownia Odra Euro2.87m. Some companies had their fines reduced by the court of appeal. Dyckerhoff will pay Euro7.5m instead of Euro13m and Cemex Polska will pay Euro5.88 less than the original fine. Some of the companies involved are considering appealing to the Supreme Court.

UK: Cemex has launched its digital customer integration platform, Cemex Go, in the UK. The system allows the company and its customers to will be used in real time to manage order placement, live tracking of shipments and invoices and payments for the company’s main products, including bagged and bulk cement. Cemex Go was introduced in Mexico and the US in late 2017.

US: Italy’s Cementir Holding has completed its acquisition of an additional 38.75% of Lehigh White Cement. It paid US$107m for the purchase. Following the deal Cementir holds a 63.25% stake in Lehigh White Cement and Cemex holds the remaining 36.75%. Cementir said that the acquisition would allow it to directly manage assets in the US in the core white cement business.

US: Cemex has settled a lawsuit that accused it of discharging polluted storm water runoff from its West Sacramento cement terminal in California into the Sacramento River. The cement producer has agreed to implement an infiltration basin to treat runoff from its unit, according to the Sacramento Business Journal newspaper. It will also make a donation of US$40,000 in grants to environmental projects in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and pay the legal fees of the plaintiff, the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance. The alliance had originally sought US$88m from Cemex.

Mexico: Cemex’s chief executive officer (CEO) Fernando González says that the company is nearly ready to start considering acquisitions after a decade of asset sales and debt reduction. He told analysts at a conference in New York that the company will seek shareholder approval in April 2018 to issue new shares to raise capital, which it could eventually use along with debt and cash, according to Dow Jones.

The building materials producer plans to focus on cement operations in large emerging markets and on aggregates in developed markets. Major markets where Cemex doesn't have operations include India and Brazil and it would be interested in targeted these regions. The company has also striven to regain its investment-grade credit rating it held until 2008 when its earnings fell following its US$15.5bn purchase of Rinker.

US: Mexico’s Cemex says that the US Department of Justice (DOJ) is investigating whether the cement producer violated the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) in relation to a new cement plant being built by Cemex Colombia at Maceo in Antioquia. Previously, the cement producer received a subpoena from the US Securities and Exchange Commission in late 2016 as part of a probe also checking whether the FCPA had been breached.

Cemex says it is cooperating with both requests. However, it also said that it does not know how long either investigation will last or what impact the results of either investigation might have upon the company in terms of eventual sanctions.

In late September 2016 Cemex fired several senior staff members in relation to the Maceo project and its subsidiary’s chief executive resigned. This followed an internal audit and investigation into payments worth around US$20.5m made to a non-governmental third party in connection with the acquisition of the land, mining rights, and benefits of the tax free zone for the project.

The latest data from the United States Geological Survey (USGS) shows that cement shipments rose by 2.4% year-on-year to 95.5Mt in 2017. Readers with elephantine memories may remember that the Portland Cement Association (PCA) revised its forecast for 2017 down to 3.1% from 4.2% in a release made in late 2016. Shipments and consumption are different metrics but the PCA was heading in the right direction. Unfortunately, however ebullient the PCA’s chief economist Ed Sullivan was at the IEEE-PCA in 2017 about growth in the US in 2018 and 2019, the necessary rise required seems quite steep. President Donald Trump may have handed the major cement producers a tax break but until his infrastructure spending materializes the US construction industry is on its own.

Graph 1: Clinker production in the US, 2013 – 2017. Source: USGS.

Viewing the US as a whole is a little unfair given its wide regional variation. As can be seen in Graph 1 clinker production jumped up from 2013 to a high of 76.5Mt in 2015 before taking a dip in 2016 and then rising again to 76.9Mt in 2017. Cement shipments of Ordinary Portland and blended cement show a similar trend over the same timescale except without the decrease in 2016. Interestingly, imports of cement and clinker rose by 18% to 13.6Mt in that year. The major exporters to the US were Canada, Greece, China and Turkey, in that order.

Graph 2: Cement and clinker imported for consumption to the US in 2017 by country. Source: USGS.

From a producer perspective LafargeHolcim described 2017 as a ‘disappointing’ year, with overall net sales down slightly on a like-for-like basis. The group remained optimistic for 2018 though, with its hopes pinned on rising employment and housing construction. HeidelbergCement rode high on its acquisition of Italcementi’s local subsidiary Essroc, which enabled it to grow its business in the northeast and midwest. Its cement sales volumes rose by 2.3% to 4.1Mt. CRH noted similar cement sales volume growth of 3% and attributed this to stronger demand. Its business also benefited from the acquisition of Suwannee American Cement with its 1Mt/yr cement plant in Florida. Further growth to its production base is also expected soon as it completes its acquisition of Ash Grove Cement.

By contrast Buzzi Unicem reported a tougher year with its net sales barely increasing from 2016 to 2017. It blamed a tough first half of the year for this as well as weather-related issues due to Hurricane Harvey and then snow in December 2017. Cemex too reported harder conditions in the US, with cement sales volumes down by 6% for the year. Although on a like-for-like basis with plant sales excluded it reported this as a rise of 2%. Again, it blamed the weather but it did note an increase in residential housing construction as the year progressed.

In this kind of mixed environment for cement producers no wonder the PCA backed or, perhaps more accurately, reminded the President of his pledge to spend US$1.5tn to be invested in infrastructure. As per usual the PCA forecasts fair weather ahead for the US industry once the latest roadblock is overcome. At the last assessment it was inflationary pressure. As ever the government opening its cheque book to build things is exactly what the industry needs to build on its promise. Until then expect more of the same. One more thing to consider though is that the Trump administration is also trying to change the ratio of federal-to-state funding for cross-state infrastructure projects. If the states end up having to pay more money for these kinds of projects these may end up running out of funds, delaying or cancelling them. Counting on that infrastructure spend may be unwise until if or when the cement orders come piling in.

Mexico: Cemex has announced that it has become the first company in the cement industry to successfully operate plants by remote control, from its central location in Monterrey, Nuevo León. According to the company, the Cemento Control Center (C3) operates 365 days a year, tracking live data from the operation of 14 cement plants, 25 kilns and 86 mills in Mexico. It also monitors a cement plant in Colombia and another in the US.

In a statement, Cemex said that the continuous monitoring of the system provides information on each stage of the production process, as well as the performance of the equipment installed in the cement plants. It allows the C3 operators to not only monitor the plants, but also to take immediate corrective actions, in coordination with local operations staff and with access to existing intelligent control systems. This helps to minimise any deviation from the objectives of safety, environmental control, efficiency and product quality.

"Cemex created the C3 system to take more effective advantage of the resources and technological innovation available through the company's global operating network," said the statement from Cemex. The company's vice president of operations, Edgar Ángeles, added that the company has applied the most modern technology to develop a unique system in the current cement industry. With the operation of C3, Cemex says that the plants have already seen a 50% reduction in the number of operational accidents as well benefits from immediate sharing of best practice and the generation of shared knowelege and expertise.

HeidelbergCement’s acquisition of Italcementi really sticks out in a comparison of the major multinational cement producers in 2017. Both its sales revenue and cement sales volumes jumped up by more than 10% year-on-year from 2016 to 2017. It still puts HeidelbergCement behind LafargeHolcim and CRH in revenue terms but the gap is shortening. Although, as we reported at the time of its preliminary results in late February 2018, on a like-for-like basis its sales and volumes only rose by 2.1% and 1.1% respectively.

Graph 1: Sales revenue from multinational cement producers in 2016 and 2017 (Euro billions). Source: Company financial reports.

The European markets may be back on their feet but serious growth came from mergers and acquisitions. Along the same lines, India’s UltraTech Cement is set to reap the reward of its US$2.5bn acquisition of six integrated cement plants and five grinding plants from Jaiprakash Associates in mid-2017. Although as can be seen in graphs 1 and 2 it had been doing fairly well even before this.

Graph 2: Cement sales volumes from multinational cement producers in 2016 and 2017 (Mt). Source: Company financial reports.

We’ve included Ireland’s CRH this year to present the scale of the company. When it says that it is the world’s biggest building materials company, it means it! CRH doesn’t publish its cement sales volumes, which makes it hard to compare it to other cement producers. In part this may be due to the company’s regional-focused structure and its approach to the construction industry. In Global Cement Magazine’s Top 100 Report 2017 – 2018 feature, CRH was placed as the seventh largest cement producer by installed capacity with 50.5Mt/yr. The major story with CRH in recent years has been its steady stream of acquisitions, notably Ash Grove Cement in the US in 2017.

LafargeHolcim may remain the biggest cement producer in the world outside of China but it made an income loss of Euro1.46bn in 2017. At face value its cement sales volumes fell by 10.2% to 210Mt in 2017 from 233Mt in 2016 but this was mainly due to divestments in China, Vietnam and Chile. On a like-for-for-like basis its volumes rose by 3.3%. To this kind of mood music the emphasis on the release of its 2017 results this week was the announcement of a five-year plan to refocus the company. However, reports of overcapacity in Algeria that also emerged this week suggest the group may have its work cut out.

Cemex described 2017 as a ‘challenging year’ as its operating earnings fell due to a lower contribution from the US and South America despite growth in Mexico and Europe. Hurricanes in Florida had a negative impact in the US and the Colombian market suffered from falling production in 2017. UltraTech Cement uses a different financial year to the other companies detailed here, which makes comparisons a little harder. However, its profit after tax fell in the third quarter that ended on 31 December 2017 due to rising costs of petcoke and coal. Undeterred though, its expansion drive continues this week with its continued efforts to try and win the bid for Binani Cement. Vicat, meanwhile, reported falling earnings in part due to the poor market in Egypt. Yet overall its sales and volumes rose in 2017 aided by recovery in France. Finally, Buzzi Unicem rode out the Italian market with its acquisition of Zillo Group delivering a rise in sales and cement volumes.

Wider trends are hard to call given the differing geographical spreads of these cement producers. Europe has been recovering from a decade of stagnation and Asian markets are no longer reliable. South America is mixed with places like Brazil, and now Colombia, underperforming. Yet Argentina is proving one of the fastest growing construction markets at the moment with local plants unable to meet demand. Africa remains profitable and promising as ever but divided between the north and the Sub-Saharan region.

Once the effects from mergers and acquisition activity by the larger cement producers start to fade then the actual situation may become clearer. In the meantime, the effects of the recent cold snap in Europe on the first quarter results for 2018 could be pretty varied. The Financial Times newspaper, for example, quoted one pundit from the Construction Products Association who estimated the industry lost 1% of its annual output to the bad weather in the UK. This may not be great news for any company relying on the European market.

The old saying goes that nothing is certain except for death and taxes. But maybe that should be cement and taxes. Paying your taxes is something most people and companies just get on with, perhaps with some grumbling or perhaps not, but certainly with little press. So two news stories popping up in the same week about cement plants with tax issues is out of the ordinary.

The first concerned Lucky Cement’s battle in Pakistan to keep one of its plants open following accusations of underpaying its taxes. The local tax office tried to shut the Pezu plant down for not paying its property tax. The cement producer hit back with a restraining order from the provincial high court. The second detailed efforts by the Ethiopian authorities efforts to claw back US$10m from a local cement producer accused of deliberately understating its profits. In both cases it’s hard to tell if there is an obvious right or wrong party. Yet if these kinds of stories are hitting the local press headlines then either something has gone wrong or both parties are digging in for a fight.

Looking over a longer time frame two major stories about tax have been doing the rounds over the last year in the industry news. India’s Goods and Services Tax (GST) is a classic example of how cement producers sometimes have to deal with changes to existing regulations. It received another outing this week in the form of the credit agency ICRA’s latest forecast. It explained how the introduction of the new tax, a consolidation of other existing indirect taxes, had slowed production in the second quarter of the Indian financial year in 2017 - 2018.

The other example from a large cement producing country was US President Donald Trump’s cut to federal corporate tax in December 2017. The tax cut was expected to particularly benefit companies that produce materials, like building materials manufacturers. It prompted HeidelbergCement to say in early January 2018 that it expected to see a boost to its profits in 2019. Warren Buffet, the chairman of Berkshire Hathaway and owner of insulation producer Johns Manville amongst other companies, put it bluntly when he said in his 2017 annual report that nearly half the gain of his company’s net worth came from the changes to the US tax system.

Multinational companies, including some cement producers, face issues when dealing with different rules and regulations between the various countries that they operate in. However, sometimes unfairly, sometimes not, large companies also hold a reputation for trying to avoid paying tax.

In this context it’s interesting to look at how LafargeHolcim says it approaches the issue. The company published its tax principles in 2016 where it talks about being responsible and that it, “…accepts tax as a necessary and required contribution to society.” It then talks about the necessity of transparency and good relationships with tax authorities. The same year it declared a total tax bill of Euro726m versus total sales revenue of Euro23bn. By contrast Cemex UK in its tax strategy talks about how it follows the US Sarbanes Oxley Act 2002, which applies a more stringent international accounting and auditing standard. It feels far more honest when it says that it aims to minimise the tax burden upon its shareholders by using methods outlined by the UK government. Taxes may be a certainty but nobody wants to pay a penny more in taxes than they have to.