Global Red Zones for Battery Transportation: Which Countries Have Explicit Bans and the Reasons Behind Them

Amid the rapid development of the global new energy industry, lithium batteries, as core energy storage components, have seen a continuous expansion in their international trade scale. As the world’s largest producer and exporter of lithium batteries, China’s export volume exceeded 300 billion yuan in 2023, accounting for over 70% of the global market share. However, behind the impressive data, “red zones” for battery transportation set by many countries and regions around the world have become significant obstacles for enterprises going global. These bans are not caused by a single factor but are the result of the interweaving of multiple logics, including safety prevention and control, industrial protection, environmental requirements, and geopolitics. This article will systematically inventory the major countries/regions with prohibitive measures on global battery transportation, deeply analyze the core reasons behind the bans, and provide risk avoidance references for enterprises.

I. North American Market: Comprehensive Blockade Driven by Geopolitics

Led by the United States, the North American region has constructed a “prohibitive barrier” against Chinese lithium batteries through multiple means such as legislation, tariffs, and procurement restrictions, with its policies featuring clear political orientations and industrial protection characteristics.

(I) United States: Full-Chain Restrictions from Procurement Bans to Tariff Blockades

The United States is a major global consumer of lithium batteries, but in recent years, its restrictive measures against Chinese battery products have been continuously upgraded, forming a dual regulatory system of “comprehensive ban on military procurement + high tariff barriers in the civilian market.” In 2024, the U.S. Congress passed the “Battery Decoupling from Adversaries Act” (H.R.1166), explicitly prohibiting the Department of Homeland Security from purchasing battery products from six leading Chinese battery enterprises, including CATL, BYD, and Envision Energy. This is another major restriction imposed by the United States on Chinese battery enterprises following the 2024 Fiscal Year National Defense Authorization Act, which also stipulates that starting from October 2027, the Department of Defense will be fully prohibited from purchasing batteries from the aforementioned enterprises.

In the civilian market, the U.S. tariff barriers are equally stringent. In March 2024, the United States imposed a second 10% tariff surcharge on Chinese goods including lithium batteries, which, combined with the base tariff of 3.4% and previous anti-dumping duties, resulted in a final combined tax rate as high as 48.4%. In addition, the United States plans to increase the tariff on energy storage system batteries from 7.5% to 25% starting from 2026, and the tariff on lithium-ion batteries for electric vehicles has already been raised from 7.5% to 25%. These measures have essentially formed a “disguised ban”—the high tariffs have made Chinese battery products lose price competitiveness and forced them to withdraw from the U.S. market.

Core Reasons Behind the Ban:

1. Overgeneralization of National Security: The United States regards Chinese battery enterprises as “strategic competitors” and, under the pretext of “supply chain security,” worries about data security and technological dependence risks when battery products are used in military or critical infrastructure. The U.S. lacks a mature domestic battery industry system and cannot compete with Chinese enterprises in terms of technology, production capacity, and cost control, thus resorting to administrative means to curb the development of Chinese enterprises.
2. Demand for Industrial Protection: The United States attempts to create room for the development of its domestic battery industry by restricting imports of Chinese batteries. In recent years, the U.S. government has promoted the “Made in America” strategy and invested huge subsidies to support domestic battery production capacity, while the technological advantages of Chinese battery enterprises have become the biggest obstacle to the development of its industry.
3. Maintenance of Technological Hegemony: As a core component of strategic emerging industries such as new energy vehicles and energy storage, the competition for technological dominance in lithium batteries is crucial. The United States uses bans to prevent the global spread of Chinese battery technology and maintain its hegemony in the field of high-end manufacturing.

(II) Canada: Coordinated Restrictions Following U.S. Policies

Although Canada has not introduced a comprehensive ban on battery imports, it has set stringent thresholds in terms of certification, environmental protection, and transportation rules, essentially forming a “hidden ban.” Canada requires imported lithium batteries to obtain ISED certification (formerly IC certification) and comply with the strict restrictions on harmful substances such as mercury and cadmium under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. Meanwhile, transportation links must adhere to the detailed provisions of the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Regulations (TDG), including full-process compliance requirements for packaging, labeling, and documentation.

Core Reasons Behind the Ban:

1. Dual Considerations of Safety and Environmental Protection: Canada has a vast territory with long transportation routes and complex environments. As Class 9 dangerous goods, lithium batteries pose significant threats to transportation safety due to risks of short circuits and fires. At the same time, Canada has extremely high requirements for environmental protection and is concerned about soil and water pollution caused by substandard battery products.
2. U.S.-Canada Trade Coordination: As a member of the North American Free Trade Area, Canada maintains a high degree of consistency with the United States in trade policies and safeguards the coordinated development of the regional industry by synchronously restricting Chinese battery products.

II. European Market: “Compliance-Based Bans” Under Green Barriers

The EU and the United Kingdom, in the name of “environmental protection” and “sustainable development,” have constructed a “compliance-based red zone” for lithium batteries by formulating the world’s most stringent technical standards, essentially banning products that do not meet the standards from entering the market.

(I) EU: Comprehensive Restrictions Through “Battery Passports” and Full-Life-Cycle Supervision

The EU’s New Battery Regulation (BPR), which came into effect in August 2023, does not directly ban battery imports, but blocks a large number of substandard products by setting stringent requirements throughout the entire life cycle. The regulation clearly stipulates that starting from 2027, power batteries exported to Europe must hold a “battery passport,” detailing information such as manufacturers, material composition, carbon footprint, and supply chains. Additionally, the carbon footprint must be below the specified threshold, and mandatory standards are set for battery recycling rates and the content of harmful substances (lead, cobalt, mercury, etc.).

Core Reasons Behind the Ban:

1. Construction of Green Trade Barriers: The EU has politicized environmental issues and constructed “green trade barriers” by setting high standards for carbon footprints and recycling. Fan Chunmei, a second-level inspector from the Department of International Cooperation of the State Administration for Market Regulation, clearly pointed out that the regulation extends from pure product technical requirements to full-chain supervision, which is essentially a trade protection measure.
2. Demand for Internalization of Environmental Responsibilities: Europe has a strong domestic awareness of environmental protection. The high energy consumption and pollution during lithium battery production, as well as the environmental risks of waste batteries, have made them a focus of supervision. The EU attempts to force global battery enterprises to assume environmental responsibilities through stringent standards.
3. Industrial Competition Strategy: The share of Chinese power batteries exported to Europe has jumped from 14.9% in 2020 to 38.5% in 2024. European domestic battery enterprises lack competitiveness, so they restrict Chinese products through technical standards to protect the local industry.

(II) United Kingdom: Restrictions Under an Independent Compliance System After Brexit

After Brexit, the United Kingdom withdrew from the EU regulatory framework and established an independent regulatory system for battery imports, with requirements that are different from but equally stringent as those of the EU. The United Kingdom has replaced CE certification with UKCA certification as a mandatory requirement for battery imports, and transportation links must comply with the UK’s Dangerous Goods Regulations, which have detailed differences from the EU’s ADR rules. In addition, the UK’s import tariff and VAT policies are independent of the EU, further increasing compliance difficulties.

Core Reasons Behind the Ban:

1. Independence of the Regulatory System: After Brexit, the United Kingdom needed to establish an independent market regulatory framework, and batteries, as high-risk products, became a key area in the restructuring of the regulatory system.
2. Prevention and Control of Safety Risks: The UK has a dense domestic logistics network and a concentrated population, with extremely high safety requirements for the transportation of dangerous goods. It reduces safety hazards such as short circuits and explosions of lithium batteries through strict standards.
3. Autonomy of Trade Policies: The United Kingdom hopes to balance the protection of the local industry and the opening up of the international market through independent compliance requirements, avoiding being “bound” by EU trade policies.

III. Emerging Markets: Prohibitive Measures Caused by Policy Volatility and Infrastructure Shortcomings

Although emerging markets such as Southeast Asia and South Asia have great potential, some countries have introduced temporary or targeted prohibitive measures on battery transportation due to factors such as unstable policies, weak infrastructure, and local industrial protection, forming “phased red zones.”

(I) Indonesia: Import Restrictions Oriented Toward Resource Protection

As the largest new energy market in Southeast Asia, Indonesia’s restrictions on lithium battery imports have been continuously strengthened in recent years, upgrading from “tariff regulation” to a dual restriction of “quota management + local content requirements.” In 2023, Indonesia raised the import tariff on lithium batteries from 10% to 15%, and at the same time required importing enterprises to apply for quotas and give priority to purchasing locally produced raw materials. Enterprises that fail to meet the local content requirements are essentially prohibited from participating in government project procurement.

Core Reasons Behind the Ban:

1. Resource Protection and Industrial Chain Upgrading: Indonesia is rich in battery raw material resources such as lithium and nickel. It hopes to force foreign-funded enterprises to set up factories locally by restricting imports of finished batteries, build a complete industrial chain from raw material mining to battery production, and enhance industrial added value.
2. Demand for Trade Balance: Indonesia has long faced pressure from a trade deficit. By restricting imports of manufactured goods such as batteries, it protects the local manufacturing industry and reduces foreign exchange outflows.
3. Insufficient Policy Stability: The Indonesian government frequently adjusts trade policies and lacks long-term planning, resulting in the temporary and volatile nature of import restriction measures.

(II) Bangladesh: Targeted Bans Under Local Industrial Protection

In April 2025, the National Board of Revenue of Bangladesh announced the implementation of an import ban on certain Indian products. Although lithium batteries are not explicitly prohibited, battery-related electronic accessories are included in the list of 34 categories of prohibited imported goods, and trade channels for related products at five border land ports have been closed. This measure has indirectly affected the channel for lithium batteries to enter Bangladesh through re-export trade.

Core Reasons Behind the Ban:

1. Protection of Local Industry: Bangladesh’s textile, electronics, and other industries rely on imported accessories for assembly. To protect the competitiveness of local assembly enterprises, it reduces external competition by prohibiting imports of related accessories.
2. Prevention of Illegal Re-export: Bangladesh is worried that some imported products will be re-exported to neighboring countries through illegal channels to evade tariffs, so it strengthens control through border closures.
3. Maintenance of Trade Order: Bangladesh hopes to regulate trade processes, ensure tax collection, and avoid trade imbalances by restricting imports.

IV. Other “Red Zones”: Prohibitive Policies Led by Safety and Environmental Protection

In addition to the above major markets, some countries in the Middle East and Africa, as well as certain special regions, have imposed strict restrictions or even comprehensive bans on battery transportation due to reasons such as insufficient safety prevention and control capabilities and environmental protection capacities.

(I) Middle East: Safety Bans Under High-Temperature Conditions

Although countries in the Middle East such as the UAE and Saudi Arabia have not fully prohibited the import of lithium batteries, they have set nearly “prohibitive” stringent requirements for transportation links. Due to the perennial high temperatures in the Middle East, lithium batteries face a higher risk of short circuits and explosions during transportation. Therefore, imported batteries must obtain high-level certifications such as SASO (Saudi Arabia) and ESMA (UAE), and must use professional packaging that is high-temperature resistant and leak-proof. Products that fail to meet these requirements are directly detained or returned by customs.

Core Reasons Behind the Ban:

1. Safety Prevention and Control Under Extreme Environments: Temperatures in the Middle East often exceed 50℃ in summer, significantly increasing the risk of thermal runaway of lithium batteries in high-temperature environments. However, local fire-fighting facilities and emergency response capabilities are limited, so strict standards are adopted to reduce safety hazards.
2. Alignment with International Environmental and Technical Standards: Middle Eastern countries hope to improve the quality of products in the local market and align with global environmental protection requirements by adopting high-level international certification standards.

(II) Some African Countries: De Facto Bans Caused by Infrastructure Shortcomings

Although major African markets such as South Africa and Nigeria have not introduced explicit bans on lithium battery imports, they have formed a situation of “de facto bans” due to weak infrastructure, chaotic customs supervision, and low logistics efficiency. Most African countries lack sufficient port storage facilities and specialized equipment for dangerous goods transportation, and customs corruption is prominent. As a result, the risk of damage and loss of lithium batteries during transportation is extremely high, and enterprises often abandon entry due to excessively high compliance costs.

Core Reasons Behind the Ban:

1. Insufficient Infrastructure: Most African countries lack professional packaging, storage, and transportation equipment required for dangerous goods transportation, and cannot meet the transportation requirements of lithium batteries as Class 9 dangerous goods.
2. Weak Regulatory Capabilities: African countries lack professional dangerous goods testing institutions and regulatory personnel, and cannot effectively assess the safety of lithium batteries. Therefore, they tend to adopt “disguised bans” to reduce risks.
3. Unstable Policies: Some African countries are politically unstable, and trade policies are frequently adjusted. Enterprises find it difficult to adapt to compliance requirements and are forced to withdraw from the market.

V. Core Logic and Trend Judgment of Global Battery Transportation Bans

(I) Four Core Logics Behind the Bans

1. Safety Prevention and Control as the Basic Logic: As Class 9 dangerous goods, the risks of short circuits, fires, and explosions of lithium batteries are core issues of widespread concern in countries around the world. The United Nations Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods classifies lithium batteries as high-risk products and requires countries to implement strict supervision. For countries with insufficient fire-fighting facilities and emergency capabilities, prohibiting or strictly restricting battery transportation has become the most direct means of risk prevention and control.
2. Industrial Protection as the Core Driving Force: Competition in the global new energy industry is becoming increasingly fierce. As a core component, lithium batteries have become the focus of industrial competition among countries. Countries and regions such as the United States, the EU, and Indonesia have created room for the development of their domestic industries by prohibiting or restricting imports, attempting to occupy a dominant position in the industrial chain competition.
3. Environmental Protection Requirements as an Important Driver: Under the global trend of “carbon neutrality,” environmental protection has become an important consideration in trade policies. The EU’s New Battery Regulation, Canada’s Environmental Protection Act, etc., all set restrictive measures in the name of environmental protection, taking indicators such as carbon footprint and recycling as import thresholds.
4. Geopolitics as a Key Variable: The comprehensive blockade of Chinese battery enterprises by the United States is essentially the result of geopolitical games. Politicizing economic and trade issues and overgeneralizing the concept of “national security” have become important excuses for some countries to implement prohibitive policies.

(II) Future Trend Judgment

1. Continuous Expansion of Ban Scope: With the development of the new energy industry, the application scenarios of lithium batteries are constantly expanding. Countries’ requirements for battery safety and environmental protection will be further improved, and more countries may join the ranks of “red zones” or upgrade existing restrictive measures.
2. Technical Standards as Core Barriers: Future prohibitive measures will be more presented in the form of “technical standards,” such as the EU’s “battery passport” and carbon footprint requirements. Market access control will be achieved through compliance thresholds rather than direct bans.
3. Intensified Regional Coordinated Restrictions: Regional economic integration organizations such as North America and the EU will further promote the unification of compliance standards within the region, forming “regional red zones” that pose greater challenges to enterprises outside the region.

VI. Practical Suggestions for Enterprises to Respond to Global “Red Zones”

Faced with complex global prohibitive policies, Chinese battery enterprises need to adopt a strategy of “compliance first, diversified layout, and risk control” to reduce export risks.

(I) Establish a Dynamic Compliance System

Enterprises should set up a professional compliance team to track policy changes in target markets in real time, focusing on U.S. tariff adjustments, the implementation progress of the EU’s “battery passport,” and quota policies in emerging markets. Complete certifications such as UL, UKCA, and SASO in advance to ensure products meet the technical standards of target markets. At the same time, establish a product quality traceability system covering the entire process from raw material procurement, production to transportation to respond to customs spot checks.

(II) Optimize Supply Chain Layout

For “red zones” such as the United States and the EU, the “local production + regional supply” model can be adopted, such as setting up factories in Mexico and Southeast Asia to avoid tariffs and prohibitive procurement policies. For markets with local content requirements such as Indonesia, give priority to cooperating with local enterprises and purchasing local raw materials to meet quota requirements.

(III) Select Professional Logistics Partners

The transportation of lithium batteries must be entrusted to logistics enterprises with dangerous goods transportation qualifications, ensuring that they are familiar with international rules such as IMDG (sea freight) and IATA (air freight) and can provide packaging, labeling, and documentation services that meet requirements. At the same time, purchase sufficient dangerous goods transportation insurance to cover risks such as detention, damage, and loss of goods.

(IV) Actively Participate in the Formulation of International Rules

Enterprises should unite with industry associations to participate in trade rule reviews under the WTO framework and raise objections to unreasonable prohibitive measures. At the same time, take the initiative to participate in the formulation of international standards, enhance the right to speak of Chinese enterprises in fields