EU ministers weigh response to latest Trump tariff threat
The US leader Trump threw months of painstaking negotiations into disarray on Saturday by announcing he would hammer the bloc with sweeping 30-percent tariffs if no agreement is reached by August 1.
European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen has insisted the EU still wants to reach an accord -- and on Sunday delayed retaliation over separate US tariffs on steel and aluminium as a sign of goodwill.
"We have always been very clear that we prefer a negotiated solution," the president of the commission, which handles trade issues on behalf of the EU's 27 countries, said.
This remains the case, and we will use the time that we have now till August 1."
The move by von der Leyen spurs hope that Trump's latest threat -- in which he also targeted Mexico -- has not killed off the progress made in negotiations that have taken place so far between Brussels and Washington.
But EU officials insist the bloc remains clear-eyed on the challenges of dealing with the unpredictable US leader, and ready to hit back.
Diplomats said that an additional package of reprisal measures will be presented to trade ministers at their meeting in Brussels on Monday that could be rolled out if Trump imposes the 30-percent tariffs.
The EU threatened in May to slap tariffs on US goods worth around 100 billion euros ($117 billion), including cars and planes, if talks fail to yield an agreement -- although one diplomat said the finalised list was expected to be worth 72 billion euros.
- 'Defend European interests' -
EU nations -- some of which export far more to the United States than others -- have sought to stay on the same page over how strong a line to take with Washington in order to get a deal.
French President Emmanuel Macron on Saturday urged von der Leyen's commission to "resolutely defend European interests" and said the EU should step up preparation for countermeasures.
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz agreed and said he had spoken to Macron, Trump and von der Leyen in the past few days and would "engage intensively" to try to find a solution.
Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni warned Sunday that a "trade war within the West" would weaken everyone.
The EU's suspension of its retaliation over US steel and aluminium tariffs had been set to expire overnight Monday to Tuesday.
Brussels readied duties on US goods worth around 21 billion euros in response to the levies Trump slapped on metal imports earlier this year.
But it announced in April it was holding off on those measures to give space to find a broader trade agreement.
Since returning to the presidency in January, Trump has unleashed sweeping stop-start tariffs on allies and competitors alike, roiling financial markets and raising fears of a global economic downturn.
But his administration is coming under pressure to secure deals with trading partners after promising a flurry of agreements.
So far, US officials have only unveiled two pacts, with Britain and Vietnam, alongside temporarily lower tit-for-tat duties with China.
The EU, alongside dozens of other economies, had been set to see its US tariff level increase from a baseline of 10 percent on Wednesday, but Trump pushed back the deadline to August 1.
In a letter published on Saturday, Trump cited the US's trade imbalance with the bloc as justification for the new 30-percent levies.
The EU tariff is markedly steeper than the 20 percent levy Trump unveiled in April -- but paused initially until mid-July.
del/ec/gv/rsc
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
West Australian
12 minutes ago
- West Australian
Raymond Da Silva Rosa: Trump's Big Beautiful Bill might not be a certain disaster
When-oh-when will Donald Trump get his comeuppance? Given many economists claim the budget measures in his One Big Beautiful Bill will be a catastrophe, some people think — and my guess is many more fervently hope — it will happen soon. Bad things happen when a country's budget flies in the face of economic theory, right? I think so but it's far from obvious that the bill will be a disaster for Trump. The key feature of the bill is a massive increase in the US's budget deficit to allow tax cuts that are partially offset by a reduction in benefits to poor people. This approach, which Ronald Reagan adopted with great electoral success, is a standard feature of Republican budgets. As an aside, it's probably no coincidence that Reagan also provoked intense dislike, scorn and frustration among liberals. OK, so if the bill is a bog-standard Republican budget why were many Republican congress members against it and why are many economists also highly critical? Some Republicans put up a fight to get a better deal for their constituents. Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska won significant concessions for her State by holding out till the last minute. Others face the new circumstance that poor people have started voting Republican and so Republican congress members are likely to face a reckoning in the 2026 mid-term elections. In any event, a reliable rule of US politics is that the party holding the presidency loses ground in the mid-term elections and so if this happens it won't be surprising. As for the economists, the issue they fret about is the increase in size of the deficit. Economists worry that if the US Government floods the market with treasury bills to finance a much-expanded deficit, the supply will overwhelm demand. Investors will demand higher interest rates which will be a huge drag on the economy. Using reasonable assumptions, the above is true. It is also true that, using reasonable assumptions, economists believed that negative interest rates were highly unlikely and that housing prices were due to fall, if not crash, any minute. My point is that the range of likely economic outcomes from the passage of the bill is very wide and includes both a disastrous hike in interest rates and also a more or less 'meh' reaction from bond investors. Judging from the negligible change in bond rates, bond investors' reaction to the bill is 'nothing to see here, let's party on'. The yield required by investors on US 30-year Treasury bonds is around 4.8 per cent at present; it barely moved in response to passage of the bill. Why the lack of concern from the bond market? The only answer to this question we can be sure about is, God knows why. The next best answer is that there is a growing demand for safe assets from people around the world, including a high proportion of the US boomer generation, who have accumulated wealth. US government bonds paying around five per cent are attractive to them. The negative real interest rates of a few years back indicate the enormous global appetite for safe assets. It's not as though there will be no negative consequences. Using 'reasonable assumptions', my take is that US economic growth will slow down and become as sclerotic as, say, Japan's or the EU's, due to interest payments dominating its budget. However, by the time this phenomenon manifests Trump will have long retired to Mexico to return only for the unveiling of his likeness on Mt Rushmore while clutching his Nobel Peace Prize. OK, so maybe Mexico is unlikely to be Trump's first choice as a retirement haven, but the Mt Rushmore scenario is far from far-fetched. President Trump is likely to leave office a hero like President Reagan or as reviled as President Nixon. It's a toss-up. Winthrop Professor Raymond Da Silva Rosa is an expert in finance from The University of Western Australia's Business School
News.com.au
2 hours ago
- News.com.au
EU readies retaliatory list targeting US services
The EU executive is preparing a list of proposed restrictions on US services companies -- including tech giants -- should Brussels fail to strike a trade deal with Washington, European diplomats said on Thursday. US President Donald Trump blindsided the European Union earlier this month by threatening to slap 30 percent tariffs on the bloc's goods, despite months of talks to get an agreement. If they don't clinch a deal by August 1, Brussels has warned it will have no choice but to retaliate against Trump's steep levies because of their economic impact, and has drawn up two lists of US goods to target. The European Commission, steering trade policy for the 27-country bloc, is also working on a list of American services -- including financial services -- it could hit with restrictions, for example on public procurement, EU diplomats said. It could also mean excluding certain suppliers, one diplomat said, adding that the commission had not yet put forward any list to EU member states. Any action on services would be in addition to two sets of retaliatory tariffs on goods: one put forward this week that targets 72 billion euros ($83 billion) of US products, and another worth 21 billion euros, drawn up in response to steel and aluminium tariffs. One EU diplomat said the bloc could retaliate step-by-step, hitting the United States with first the smaller, then the larger counter tariffs on goods -- before potentially escalating to services. The official also stressed the EU had yet to even approve the measures by vote and that they could still change, but another diplomat said Brussels would have no choice but to respond "forcefully". Most EU member states want to keep options on the table but have backed the commission's attempts to try once again to get an agreement before firing off retaliatory measures. The EU's top trade negotiator, Maros Sefcovic, jetted to Washington on Wednesday for talks with his US counterparts but the commission did not provide details on meetings. There are questions over Europe's appetite for a damaging fight with Trump if he slaps on the 30-percent levies as promised. But France has been pushing for Brussels to take a harder line and consider deploying its most powerful trade tool, known as the anti-coercion instrument, if negotiations with the United States end in disappointment. Even if Brussels were to activate this so-called trade "bazooka", it could take months before any measures were taken, according to the rules. First, the commission would have four months to investigate the third country it accuses of detrimental trade policies -- then member states would have eight to 10 weeks to back any proposal for action. Only then would the commission have a green light to prepare measures, to take effect within six months.
ABC News
8 hours ago
- ABC News
Prime Minister concludes diplomatic visit to China
The Prime Minister is wrapping up his six-day visit to China after meetings with the Chinese President Xi Jinping and Premier Li Qiang. Sarah Ferguson speaks to Jacob Greber with a wrap up of the tour with security and trade a key focus.
