EU prepares list of additional counter-tariffs on US$84 billion of US imports
Donald Trump
Advertisement
The
EU is still hoping to find a negotiated solution in a dispute with Washington over alleged trade imbalances and threatened tariff increases. Brussels wants to avoid imposing the counter-tariffs.
Trump recently announced that he is imposing 30 per cent tariffs on imports from the bloc as of August 1. EU trade ministers met in Brussels on Monday to discuss how to respond to the latest announcement and to prepare countermeasures.
The list, now presented to EU member states, is based on a proposal by the European Commission in May and initially covered mainly industrial and agricultural goods with an import volume of around €95 billion (US$110 billion).
After consultations with capitals and industry representatives, the list was amended. Sefcovic did not provide any details on what goods were taken off the list.
Advertisement
The list came in addition to a proposal to restrict EU exports of steel scrap and chemical products to the US worth €4.4 billion (US$5.1 billion).
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South China Morning Post
an hour ago
- South China Morning Post
India in a fix over Trump's tariff threat aimed at Russian oil
US President Donald Trump 's threat to impose steep secondary tariffs on countries trading with Russia has raised alarm in India over the future of its discounted oil purchases from Moscow, with analysts warning the issue could complicate negotiations on a bilateral trade deal with Washington. Trump vowed on Monday to impose 'very severe tariffs' if Russia did not end its war in Ukraine within 50 days. Washington would target Moscow's remaining trade partners with measures aimed at choking off support for the Kremlin's war machine, he added. Soon after starting his second term in January, Trump launched a bid at rapprochement with Russian President Vladimir Putin as he sought to honour his promise made during last year's US presidential election campaign to end the Ukraine war within 24 hours. But he has shown growing frustration over the impasse, with Putin stepping up attacks instead of halting the war. Trump's latest comments came shortly after Republican Senator Lindsey Graham and Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal pushed for swift action against Moscow, including legislation that would allow the president to slap a 500 per cent tariff on imports from countries buying Russian uranium, gas and oil. The bill, which is gaining traction in the Senate, reflects the growing bipartisan appetite to squeeze Russia's wartime economy. But it also presents a potential dilemma for India and China – two of the largest importers of Russian oil. 'Tariffs of this size would significantly impair India's capacity to maintain this trade flow and could lead to increased inflation,' said Priya Walia, vice-president of commodity markets for oil at Rystad Energy.
AllAfrica
4 hours ago
- AllAfrica
Australia is right not to commit to hypothetical Taiwan conflict
The United States can count on Australia as one of its closest allies. Dating back to the shared experiences in the second world war and the ANZUS Treaty signed in 1951, Australia has steadfastly worked to help ensure the US remains the principal security guarantor in the Indo-Pacific. Australia's track record speaks for itself. Yet additional demands have been placed that rankle. The Pentagon wants to know how Australia – and other allies such as Japan – would respond in the event of a war with China over Taiwan. Making these demands – which are being sought as part of the review of the AUKUS nuclear submarine agreement – is both unjustified and unreasonable. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Defense Industry Minister Pat Conroy have declined to make a public commitment, alluding to the United States' own policy of 'strategic ambiguity' about how the US would respond. Since federation in 1901, Australians have found themselves alongside US counterparts in almost all the major conflicts of the 20th century and beyond. It is this shared experience that led former Ambassador to Washington Joe Hockey to coin the term '100 years of mateship.' The pinnacle of the security relationship is the ANZUS Treaty which is a loosely worded document barely 800 words long. However, it is important to remember AUKUS is just that – a technical agreement, albeit premised on the century-spanning trusted collaboration across the full spectrum of national security ties. More recently, the US administration has made demands of allies, including Australia, the likes of which have not been seen in living memory. This spans not just tariffs, but also increased defense spending. American policymakers appear oblivious of or unconcerned about the blowback they are generating. It is this context that makes the US demands for a broad-ranging and largely open-ended commitment over the defense of Taiwan, in advance of any conflict, so extraordinary and unhelpful. Australia has long had a fear of abandonment. Ever since the searing experience of the fall of Singapore in 1942, officials have been eager to burnish ties with US counterparts. Conversely, there has always been a strong element in the community that has feared entrapment in yet another US-led war in Asia. The experience in the Korean and Vietnam wars, let alone Afghanistan and Iraq, left many guarded about the efficacy of hitching the wagon to US-led military campaigns. In essence, though, Australian policymakers have long sought the Goldilocks solution: not too enthusiastic to trigger entrapment and not too lukewarm to trigger abandonment. Now Australia, Japan and others face a surprising new push by American officials for a commitment to a hypothetical conflict, under open-ended circumstances. The irony is that American demands for a commitment fly in the face of the loosely worded ANZUS alliance – which stipulates an agreement to consult, but little more than that. The AUKUS agreement includes no such guarantees, either. The overt and confronting nature of Washington's demands means the prime minister effectively has no option but to push back: We support the status quo when it comes to Taiwan. We don't support any unilateral action […] we want peace and security in our region. Defense Industry Minister Pat Conroy was adamant Australia would not be committing forces ahead of any 'hypothetical' conflict: The decision to commit Australian troops to a conflict will be made by the government of the day, not in advance, but by the government of the day. A further irony is Australia, like Japan, is already hugely invested in its US military relationship, particularly through its military technology. The purchase of the F35 Joint Strike Fighter aircraft, for instance, was meant to help enable the generation of interoperable forces, yet no such demand has been made when it comes to an advance commitment over their use in support of US ambitions. So why invoke AUKUS in such a way? Evidently, the way the US is trying to stand over Japan and Australia is harmful to its own interests. Such adversarial and unduly transactional behaviour could provoke a popular backlash in Australia and elsewhere. The government has rightly rebuffed the calls saying it would be up to the government of the day to make such a decision. It is likely this will not be well received by the Trump administration. The PM is right though, to say it's hypothetical and not worthy of a public endorsement. Yet a further irony is that this is mostly a moot point. The key benefit of alliance collaboration is already in place – and that relates to the efforts to deter China from ever acting on its desire to change the status quo in the first place. As former PM, now ambassador to Washington, Kevin Rudd explained in his book, The Avoidable War, geopolitical disaster is still avoidable, particularly if the US and China can find a way to coexist without betraying their core interests through managed strategic competition. This strategic ambiguity is meant to complicate a potential adversary's military planners and political decision makers' thought processes over the advantages and disadvantages of going to war. China already knows a clash over Taiwan would mean US allies like Japan and Australia would find it virtually impossible to avoid being entangled. The strategic ambiguity can be maintained ad infinitum, so long as an outright invasion is averted. And the likelihood of conflict over Taiwan? I remain sanguine that conflict can be avoided. But to do so would involve clear and compelling messaging: both through diplomatic channels and through the demonstration of robust military capabilities that war would be too costly. John Blaxland is a professor, at the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, Australian National University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
South China Morning Post
5 hours ago
- South China Morning Post
Tech war: Nvidia to resume selling H20 graphic processing chips to China in boon for AI
Nvidia said it would sell a made-for-China computer chip to customers in the country, while its founder and CEO Jensen Huang is in Beijing for his third visit this year to the world's second-largest economy amid a deepening and widening rivalry with the US The US government has 'assured Nvidia that licences will be granted' for exporting the H20 chip, a made-for-China product that was less powerful than Nvidia's gold-standard acceleration chip, and the company 'hopes to start deliveries soon', according to a Tuesday statement by the California-based chip designer. Nvidia also planned to release a 'new, fully compliant' RTX PRO graphics processing unit (GPU) for China that was 'ideal for digital twin AI for smart factories and logistics,' the company said. The resumption of sales was a boon for Nvidia as the world's first US$4 trillion company gained access to one of the largest investors in artificial intelligence (AI), where funding could grow 48 per cent this year to US$98 billion , according to a forecast by Bank of America. It is also a breakthrough for China's developers of large language models and other AI uses as they get their hands on some of the most advanced chips for high-powered computing. Image of Nvidia H20 GPU. Photo: Handout Huang, who is expected to attend the International Supply Chain Expo in Beijing tomorrow, met 'government and industry officials to discuss how AI will raise productivity and expand opportunity,' the company said. The expo, a major conference held by the Chinese government, was previously attended by US executives including Apple's Tim Cook. Huang is scheduled to speak in Mandarin tomorrow morning at the Expo, according to a video clip published by the China Council for the Promotion of International Trade (CCPIT), the expo's organiser.
