Olin and Huntsman agree to all-stock merger, forming OlinHuntsman

Olin Corp. and Huntsman Corp. have agreed to combine in an all-stock merger valued at about $2.43 billion, creating a larger chemicals company called OlinHuntsman.

The companies said the merger will bring together two industrial chemicals businesses with complementary product lines and a broader North American footprint. They said the combined company generated about $12.5 billion in annual revenue.

The boards of both companies unanimously approved the transaction, which remains subject to regulatory review and approval by shareholders of both companies. The companies said they expect the deal to close in the first half of 2027.

Deal terms

Under the agreement, Huntsman shareholders will receive 0.5476 Olin shares for each Huntsman share. Olin shareholders are expected to own about 54.5% of the combined company, while Huntsman shareholders will own about 45.5%.

Olin CEO Ken Lane is slated to lead the combined company. Huntsman CEO Peter Huntsman is expected to serve as non-executive chairman.

The companies said the transaction should generate more than $300 million in cost synergies and integration benefits. They also cited $100 million in raw-material integration benefits beginning in 2031 and about $125 million in cash tax benefits tied to accelerated net operating losses.

The deal was structured as a merger of equals, but the exchange ratio immediately drew attention because it implied a lower value for Huntsman than its prior trading price. Coverage of the transaction said the ratio was based on trailing 30-day volume-weighted average prices as of the close of June 12, 2026.

Why the companies are combining

Olin is a major producer of chlorine, caustic soda and epoxy. Huntsman sells polyurethane systems, advanced materials and specialty chemicals. Together, the companies said they see a broader portfolio, a larger scale base and a more diversified industrial footprint.

That strategic logic is central to the pitch for the merger. The companies are arguing that a larger combined business can spread costs across a wider revenue base while also extracting savings from procurement, logistics and operations.

The headline valuation and ownership split suggest that Olin shareholders are contributing the larger public-company footprint, even as both sides describe the deal as a combination rather than a straight takeover. The new company name, OlinHuntsman, is meant to reflect that framing.

Market reaction

Investors initially reacted negatively to the announcement. Both stocks fell on June 16, 2026, after the merger terms became public.

That response reflected concern about dilution, integration risk and the valuation optics of the exchange ratio. Barron's reported that the deal priced Huntsman below its prior close because the ratio was set using trailing VWAPs rather than the last trade.

The discount debate matters because it may influence how Huntsman shareholders assess the agreement even if the companies argue that the formula was mechanical and based on market averages. The exchange structure also leaves the combined company with questions to answer about value creation versus near-term dilution.

What comes next

The next milestones are regulatory review, shareholder votes and the publication of formal proxy materials and related filings. Those steps will determine whether the companies can stay on the timetable they have outlined.

Antitrust scrutiny could become a focus because Olin and Huntsman operate in overlapping areas of the chemicals industry, including products tied to chlorine, caustic soda, epoxy and related markets. The companies have not yet said how regulators may view the transaction.

Investors will also be watching whether management can sustain its synergy targets and whether the promised integration and tax benefits arrive on schedule. The companies pointed to raw-material savings beginning in 2031, which suggests that some of the value case depends on a long runway.

For now, the merger marks a significant consolidation move in industrial chemicals. If approved, it would create a larger North American producer with a wider product mix, a new corporate structure and a deal rationale built around scale, cost savings and tax efficiency.