BMW CEO hopeful for 'manageable' deal on US auto import tariffs
's CEO said on Friday he was optimistic that the European Union and the United States would soon reach a "manageable" agreement on
auto import tariffs
, potentially including a mechanism to offset imports with exports.
Oliver Zipse's comments come as Europe awaits a letter from the U.S. administration under
Donald Trump
that could outline the framework of a trade deal and clarify tariff levels on European
automotive exports
. Trump said on Thursday the EU could receive a letter on tariff rates by Friday.
"I'm optimistic that there will be a manageable outcome but we have to wait for the result," Zipse told journalists at a company event in Munich on Friday.
He said a possible "netting mechanism" could be part of the deal, allowing exports from the U.S. to offset imports. BMW stands to benefit from such an arrangement, as its largest production site is in Spartanburg, South Carolina.
The mechanism could be based on the value of exports out of the U.S. market - more than $10 billion in 2024 in BMW's case - rather than the number of exported vehicles, he said.
If both sides were to agree on such a mechanism, it could also benefit imports of auto parts, according to people familiar with the matter.
"We have an important point because we are the largest car exporter in the U.S." Zipse said, referring to the 225,000 cars it exported out of the country in 2024.
Hefty tariffs on car imports to the U.S. have left
European carmakers
scrambling to respond while hoping for a deal to minimise their impact in talks between Washington and the European Commission.
Sources told Reuters earlier this week that Brussels had proposed a package of measures to ease the pressure, including export and investment credits and mutual reductions in existing tariff rates.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
42 minutes ago
- Time of India
Trump dumps 25% tariff on India from Friday, plus penalty for buying Russian oil
NEW DELHI: US President Donald Trump on Wednesday announced a 25% tariff on all goods imported from India, along with an unspecified penalty, from Aug 1 after the two countries failed to reach an interim trade deal, triggering nervousness among exporters. After making several claims over the last four months of having got India to agree to slash tariffs, Trump took to social media to announce the stiff duties and linked the action to India's high trade surplus with the US and purchase of Russian oil and arms. "Also, they (India) have always bought a vast majority of their military equipment from Russia, and are Russia's largest buyer of energy, along with China, at a time when everyone wants Russia to stop the killing in Ukraine - all things not good! India will therefore be paying 25%, plus a penalty for the above, starting Aug 1," Trump posted on Truth Social. The US president had earlier announced a "reciprocal tariff" of 26% on India. He later paused it, but left a 10% baseline tariff on all countries. Trump's proposed penalty has complicated the calculations for Indian businesses. Over the last three months, he has managed to get other trading partners such as the European Union, Japan, Britain and Vietnam to open up their markets for American goods in return for lowering the tariffs, something he could not do with India due to its reluctance to offer concessions on farm and dairy products. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Ultra Lux 4BHK homes at 7 Mahalaxmi from 10.81 Cr* 7 Mahalaxmi, Runwal Group Enquire Now Undo Within the govt there was clarity that it would not settle for a sub-par deal that did not provide for adequate tariff cuts in the US for Indian textiles, leather and footwear and lower-end auto parts. Trump announcement seen as bid to mount pressure on India to agree to US demands President Trump managed to get other trading partners such as EU, Japan, Britain and Vietnam to open up their markets for US goods in return for lowering tariffs, something he could not do with India due to its reluctance to offer concessions on farm and dairy products. Within govt there was clarity that it would not settle for a sub-par deal that did not provide for adequate tariff cuts in the US for Indian textiles, leather and footwear and lower-end auto parts. The Trump administration's argument that it did not have the legislative mandate to revert to reducing tariffs to zero, as is the case with most trade agreements, did not find traction with Indian negotiators, who were asked by the leadership to leverage the large and growing market offered by India. During the negotiations, India had indicated its willingness to buy larger quantities of LNG, fertiliser and defence equipment from the US, but the demands kept increasing. Trump's repeated attempt to link the Operation Sindoor ceasefire to his offer for a good trade deal only complicated matters for him. Over the last few weeks, there was also an attempt to prepare industry for possible imposition of tariffs. While talks for the proposed trade deal will continue, the announcement is seen as a move to mount pressure on India to agree to American demands. In the meantime, businesses fear that the uncertainty over the penalty will make buyers reluctant to place orders, some of which may flow to other countries. Countries like Vietnam, which have negotiated lower levies, may hurt India. Stay informed with the latest business news, updates on bank holidays and public holidays . Discover stories of India's leading eco-innovators at Ecopreneur Honours 2025
Economic Times
an hour ago
- Economic Times
Trumpland: What if the world turned US trade war back on America?
AI image Tariff' Trump has announced a 25% levy on Indian goods entering US starting tomorrow, coupled with a penalty for India's continued oil and defence purchases from Russia. Prefixing his announcement on Truth Social with 'while India is a friend', the US president has sought to punish India for asserting sovereign choices in trade and foreign policy. With friends like this, who needs friends? The irony is poetic: the self-declared custodian of free trade is now its most protectionist offender. Economics is built around the principle of movement: of goods, capital, labour and data. This isn't just ideology, it's the physics of prosperity. Yet, the US, once the world's most vocal advocate for free markets, is, in the form of Trumpland, its most disruptive force. From semiconductor export bans and weaponised sanctions to unilateral tariffs and extraterritorial dictates, Trumpland has turned the global economy into a minefield of exceptions, exclusions and coercion. So, here's the question that can now be asked aloud: what if the rest of the world sanctioned the US? What if countries collectively paused the flow of rare earths, APIs, industrial machinery, telecom infrastructure, even data? Could the US survive the very conditions it imposes on others? In 2024, US goods imports hit a record $3.3 tn, while exports reached $2.1 tn, pushing goods trade deficit to $1.2 tn, a 14% increase from the previous year. Even after including services like finance and travel, total trade deficit stood at $918 bn, up 17%, the second highest on record. Trade gap with China grew to $295 bn, a clear sign of ongoing reliance. Beyond China, the US remains critically dependent on imports for over 221 essential goods, including microchips and battery components, with foreign sourcing levels between 90% and 100%. China supplies 70% of rare earths, and dominates the global graphite supply chain. Other key materials like lithium and cobalt are also heavily imported from countries like Chile, Canada and Argentina. In total, just four trading partners — China, the EU, Mexico and Canada — each account for more than 10% of US import value. These are not discretionary purchases, but foundational components of American industry. The US is not merely part of global supply chains, but also structurally dependent on them, never mind all that talk of decoupling and University's Budget Lab assessed that the US' 2025 tariff surge has raised its average effective tariff rate to 22.5%, the highest since 1909. This policy shift has led to a 2.3% rise in consumer prices, costing the average household $3,800 annually. Lower-income families are hit hardest, with those in the second income decile losing $1,700 a GDP growth is expected to drop by 0.9 percentage points in 2025. Long-term output is projected to remain 0.6% smaller, a permanent loss of around $180 bn a year. Exports have declined by 18.1%. Prices for essentials have spiked, with apparel up 17%, food nearly 3% higher, and new cars costing an extra $4,000 on from protecting the economy, Trump tariffs are eroding household income, slowing growth and adversely affecting America's economic Walter Scheidel explains in his 2017 book, The Great Leveler, entrenched systems rarely reform themselves through negotiation alone. Meaningful redistribution often follows rupture rather than consensus. So, what might rupture look like today? Imagine the world's major exporters including Europe, China, India, Asean and Latin America agreeing to a coordinated pause in shipments to the US. No semiconductors, no APIs, no telecom equipment. In a matter of weeks, American production lines would slow, inflation would surge, and financial markets would be rattled. It would serve as a powerful reminder that the US economy is not insulated by exceptionalism. It operates on the consent and cooperation of the rest of the world. This isn't about restoring balance. It's a call to deliberately hit the US economy where it hurts, to expose the double standards that define today's global order. In any functioning market, domestic or global, rules matter not only because they enable exchange but also because they constrain abuse. Participation in global trade is characterised by the principle of mutualism and benefits will flow only as long as responsibilities are this fundamental point, the US' economic bullying undermines not just the trust but the very ethos of the current global economic system. The world, India included, now faces a pivotal question. Should it continue to accommodate this exception, or begin to act as a collective? A coordinated stand by global exporters, in defence of systemic integrity, would affirm that globalisation is not the privilege of a single actor but the shared project of many. If the international order is to survive, it must demonstrate that no participant is above its rules. Trumpland may yet learn that the system the US helped create can continue to evolve without its dominance. And that the invisible hand, if constrained long enough, may simply withdraw its reach from the United States. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this column are that of the writer. The facts and opinions expressed here do not reflect the views of Elevate your knowledge and leadership skills at a cost cheaper than your daily tea. Regulators promote exchanges; can they stifle one? Watch IEX Jane St: How an options trader smelt a rat when others raised a toast TCS job cuts may not stop at 12,000; its bench policy threatens more From near bankruptcy to blockbuster drug: How Khorakiwala turned around Wockhardt Stock Radar: SBI Life rebounds after testing 50-DEMA; could hit fresh record highs above Rs 2,000 – check target & stop loss These 10 banking stocks can give more than 25% returns in 1 year, according to analysts Two Trades for Today: A metals stock for an over 6% gain, a large-cap chemicals maker for about 7% upmove F&O Radar| Deploy Broken Wing in LIC Housing Finance to benefit from bearish outlook
NDTV
2 hours ago
- NDTV
Trump "Frustrated" With India Trade Talks, Says White House Aide
Washington: US President Donald Trump is "frustrated" with the lack of progress on trade talks with India and feels that the 25 per cent tariff imposed on the country will "address and remedy" the situation, the White House economic adviser suggested on Wednesday. National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett indicated that Trump was upset over the way negotiations on the proposed bilateral trade deal were held. The two sides held a series of negotiations on the trade deal but no concrete outcome emerged in view of certain contentious issues. Trump on Wednesday announced the imposition of a 25 per cent tariff on all goods coming from India starting August 1, plus an unspecified penalty for buying Russian crude oil and military equipment. The surprise announcement came a day after Indian officials said that a US trade team would visit from August 25 to negotiate a trade deal. The announcement by Trump is being seen as a pressure tactic to get New Delhi to agree to demands made by the US, which has, in recent days, got favourable trade deals with major partners like Japan, the UK and the European Union. Hassett said India has had a market that's been pretty much closed to American products while the US has been wide open to theirs. He indicated that Trump was frustrated with the lack of progress that the US made with India, but "feels that a 25 per cent tariff will address and remedy the situation in a way that's good for the American people". In a post on social media, Trump said that the US has a massive trade deficit with India and also criticised India for buying a "vast majority" of its military equipment and energy from Russia. "Remember, while India is our friend, we have, over the years, done relatively little business with them because their Tariffs are far too high, among the highest in the World, and they have the most strenuous and obnoxious non-monetary Trade Barriers of any Country," Trump said. "Also, they have always bought a vast majority of their military equipment from Russia, and are Russia's largest buyer of energy, along with China, at a time when everyone wants Russia to stop the killing in Ukraine — All things not Good!" he added. "India will therefore be paying a tariff of 25 per cent, plus a penalty for the above, starting on August 1st," Trump said. Hassett, responding to a question on India facing an additional charge for its purchase of Russian oil, said Trump and US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer will have more information on that "shortly". On the 25 per cent tariff on India, Hassett added that "what's going to happen is that India is going to cut their prices to the US in order to maintain their market share". "That's what everybody else has been doing, and then they might reconsider their practices, which have led to this higher rate. And over time, I would guess the Indian firms will be onshoring production in the US, and Indians might even open their markets more to us, so that we reconsider a future trade deal," he said. On the tariff, Partner at The Asia Group Nisha Biswal said in a statement that the US is using "hardball tactics" when there is an ambitious deal already on the table. "There were many reasons why the final deal seems to have faltered. One, President Trump wanted to retain a minimum 20 per cent baseline tariff on India; this was a non-starter for New Delhi," she said. Biswal, who was Assistant Secretary for South and Central Asian Affairs at the Department of State from 2013 to 2017, added that Trump wanted US agricultural and dairy exports to India and New Delhi has gone as far as it can for now given domestic sensitivities. Trump also wanted to directly negotiate with Prime Minister Narendra Modi since he felt that the deal did not go far enough, while New Delhi thought it had an expansive deal with the US Trade Representative and "didn't want Trump to reopen or renegotiate terms like Vietnam", she said. "Trump is now exerting maximum pressure on India to get Modi's attention. PM Modi may want to examine what Japan, the EU and China did, all of whom have faced Trump's ire. Keep cool, retaliate if you must, but keep the channel open," Biswal said. "Trump wants more than what his negotiators got, and India needs to be ready with what it will give him. While he is throwing everyone in the mix — defence, Russian oil etc. – he is looking for a deal and this is how he negotiates, friend or foe. The real tragedy would be if both sides walk away from a big win. And the implications for US businesses and India's economy could be quite severe," she added.
