BASF Raises European Amines by Up to 30% and LANXESS Raises Inorganic Pigments by Up to 20%

Recently, price increases in European specialty chemicals have continued to spread. On March 25, BASF announced an increase of up to 30% across its standard amines portfolio in Europe, with some products rising even more; on the same day, LANXESS announced price increases of up to 20% for its inorganic pigments. The reasons given by both companies were highly concentrated, pointing mainly to continued increases in raw material, energy, logistics, and related overall costs under the background of Middle East tensions. This means that cost pressure in the European chemical industry is no longer limited to a few bulk raw materials, but is spreading into a wider range of intermediates and functional material categories.

Let us first look at BASF’s increase. According to BASF’s official announcement on March 25, the adjustment applies to its European standard amines portfolio, including ethanolamines, ethyleneamines, isopropanolamines, methylamines, N,N-dimethylethanolamine, DMAPA, DMF, propylamines, and ethylamines. The increase is effective immediately or in line with existing contract terms. The company made it clear that this round of price hikes is meant to address the significant rise in raw material prices, energy costs, and logistics costs triggered by the military conflict in the Middle East. For the market, this is not a vague statement about “rising costs,” but an indication that BASF has already translated the shock into a concrete repricing across an entire group of basic intermediate products.

Now look at LANXESS. LANXESS’s increase targets inorganic pigments, with rises of up to 20%, also effective immediately. In its press release, the company said the cost pressure mainly comes from significantly higher energy, key raw material, and logistics costs, and it specifically referred to “ongoing geopolitical tensions.” Official images and descriptions also show that the main products involved include iron oxide pigments and chromium oxide pigments. These materials are widely used in construction materials, plastics, coatings, rubber, and other sectors. So while they may not be discussed as often as bulk petrochemical raw materials, their impact on downstream manufacturing is by no means small.

Taken together, the clearest signal from these two announcements is not simply that “European chemical companies are raising prices again,” but that the scope of price increases is expanding from upstream energy-sensitive products into intermediates and functional materials. Amines are fundamental intermediates used in a wide range of chemical formulations, agrochemicals, surfactants, solvents, and synthesis pathways. Inorganic pigments, meanwhile, are typical formulation raw materials in coatings, plastics, and construction materials. What they have in common is that they are not the kind of products that can be raised casually just because market sentiment is strong. Suppliers usually only move in a concentrated way when cost pressure has become sufficiently clear and the room for internal absorption has narrowed significantly. In other words, this latest round of European chemical price increases is no longer just about volatility in raw material chains, but about cost transmission moving deeper into the manufacturing layer.

BASF’s move is especially noteworthy because the standard amines it covers are themselves highly foundational. Ethanolamines, ethyleneamines, and isopropanolamines serve not only chemical production, but also multiple end-use areas such as agrochemicals, cleaning, pharmaceuticals, and specialty formulations. In other words, once the amines system is adjusted upward as a whole, it is not just one downstream segment that is affected, but multiple industries that will feel the rise in cost levels. Moreover, BASF used the phrase “up to 30%” and made clear that some products will rise even more, indicating that the company is not making a symbolic price adjustment, but is resetting prices according to the degree of cost pressure on different products.

LANXESS’s inorganic pigment increase reflects another trend: non-energy-type and non-monomer materials are also being forced to rewrite their pricing. The market usually pays more attention to products such as MDI, TDI, BA, and 2-EHA that are directly tied to the oil and gas chain. But for materials such as pigments, additives, and functional intermediates, energy, logistics, and key raw materials can also have a profound impact on costs. LANXESS did not use especially dramatic language in its announcement, instead emphasizing that “despite significant efforts to mitigate rising costs and maintain price stability, the adjustment has become necessary in order to ensure long-term reliability and sustainability of supply.” The meaning of this phrasing is quite clear: the company has already tried to absorb the pressure internally first, but internal absorption is no longer enough.

This is also one of the most important changes in the European chemical market right now. Over the past period, outside observers have mostly focused on how Europe’s high energy costs are suppressing chemical profits. But the recent string of corporate announcements shows that European suppliers are gradually giving up their role as the “cost buffer.” Whether in BASF’s amines or LANXESS’s pigments, both companies are emphasizing long-term supply reliability and sustainable operations. In essence, this wording is telling customers that if prices are not adjusted, the stability of supply itself may be affected. For downstream buyers, that means procurement logic also needs to change. In the past, they could wait, compare, and negotiate aggressively. Now, they increasingly need to reassess delivery stability, alternative supply sources, and inventory strategy.

At the industry level, there is another shared background behind the moves by these two German companies. Neither survives by relying on just one single product. Both are major suppliers covering multiple product lines and serving global customers. When companies of this scale begin launching price increases in the same time window across different product families, the market typically interprets it as evidence that the cost system has shifted upward in stages, rather than as isolated tactical moves by individual firms. In particular, both BASF and LANXESS explicitly wrote Middle East tensions, energy, and logistics pressure into the logic behind their increases, making it easier for subsequent follow-on price hikes or renegotiations with customers to occur.

For downstream customers, what comes next is unlikely to be just a one-time change in procurement cost, but more likely a new round of price transmission. BASF’s amines increases may continue to affect cleaning chemicals, agrochemical intermediates, surfactants, and related formulation systems. LANXESS’s inorganic pigment increases may further transmit into coatings, plastics, rubber, and construction materials. The problem is that downstream sectors will not all be able to pass these costs on equally smoothly. High-value-added areas may be better able to absorb price increases, but in fiercely competitive and highly price-sensitive sectors, margins will be compressed first. That means the result of the same round of raw material inflation is unlikely to be synchronized price increases across the whole industry, and more likely to be differentiated cost pressure across different end-use markets.

Taken together, BASF’s increase in European standard amines prices and LANXESS’s increase in inorganic pigment prices may look on the surface like two separate corporate announcements, but they actually reflect the same trend: cost pressure in European chemicals is spreading further from upstream energy and petrochemical chains into the intermediate and functional materials layers. For suppliers, this is about protecting margins and supply stability. For customers, it means that cost, inventory, and quotation strategies all need to be adjusted again. In the short term, if Middle East tensions and European energy and logistics pressures do not ease noticeably, these kinds of price increases are unlikely to be the last round.