EU backs potential counter-tariffs on €93bn of US goods if no deal
European Union's
member countries voted on Thursday to approve counter-
tariffs
on €93 billion of US goods, which could be imposed should the bloc fail to reach a trade deal with Washington, EU diplomats said.
The 27-nation bloc's executive European Commission had said on Wednesday its primary focus was to achieve a negotiated outcome with Washington to avert 30 per cent US tariffs that president Donald Trump has said he will apply on August 1.
The commission said it would press on in parallel with plans for potential countermeasures, merging two packages of proposed tariffs of €21 billion and €72 billion into a single list and submitting this to EU members for approval.
No countermeasures would enter force until August 7. So far the EU has held back from imposing any countermeasures, despite Trump's repeated announcements of tariffs, the broadest of which have been postponed. EU member states authorised the first package of countermeasures in April, but these were immediately suspended to allow time for negotiations.
[
EU moves towards accepting 15% tariff as price of deal
Opens in new window
]
The EU and United States appear to be heading towards a possible trade deal, according to EU diplomats, which would result in a broad 15 per cent tariff on EU goods imported into the US, mirroring a framework agreement Washington struck with Japan. Trump would still need to take any final decision.
Under the outlines of the potential deal, the 15 per cent rate could apply to sectors including cars and pharmaceuticals and would not be added to long-standing US duties, which average just under 5 per cent.
There could also be concessions for sectors such as aircraft, lumber as well as some medicines and agricultural products, which would not face tariffs, diplomats said.
Washington does not, however, appear willing to lower its 50 per cent tariff on steel. – Reuters
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Journal
44 minutes ago
- The Journal
Judge overturns ruling that State breached human rights for not accommodating asylum seekers
AN APPEALS COURT judge has overturned a decision which ruled that the State was in breach of its human rights obligations over failing to provide basic needs, such as housing, to international protection applicants. The state ran out of public accommodation for asylum seekers almost two years ago and increased payments and provided temporary shelter, such as tents, to those who arrived by themselves and were without housing. In March, the State launched an appeal of a High Court decision last year that ruled the state was in breach of its international human rights obligations over the failure to provide necessities to people seeking asylum in Ireland . The ruling opened up the possibility for the state to be sued in the future. Today, a Mr Justice Anthony Collins overturned the ruling and stated that the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, which took the original case against the state, failed to uphold its claims that a lack of services impacted people's health status. Advertisement The Commission had claimed that the failure to place people seeking international protection into publicly-provided housing resulted in extreme material poverty and impacted their physical and mental health. The court accepted that people seeking international protection in Ireland could be classified as being in extreme material poverty, on account of testimony from 13 asylum seekers who claimed the lack of services had an impact on the status of their health. However, the judge disagreed that the group's health issues, as a result of a lack of services, were representative of all applicants in similar positions. 'That evidence is necessarily and understandably limited to those individuals' experiences,' the judgment said. It added that the Commission had not 'demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Court how that evidence can be applied across the board' or that they were 'put in a state of degradation incompatible with human dignity'. Section 41 In its appeal, the state had also argued that the Commission was not entitled to bring a Section 41 case, which allows it to challenge government decisions that it reasonably believes risks the fulfilment of international obligations. The state submitted argued that there was no basis for the claim, as the then-Minister for Integration Roderic O'Gorman had made efforts to increase payments to people seeking international protection who were not provided with public accommodation. Related Reads Fences will continue to be erected along canal if more tents appear, says Waterways Ireland boss 'You can't erect a tent wherever you want' - Taoiseach responds to 'cruelty' accusations Ministers to discuss a €75 payment to asylum applicants after accommodation runs out Mr Justice Collins rejected this today, however. He said that the Commission had a right, under Section 41 of the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission Act 2014, to bring the case forward. 'The Commission's institution of these proceedings comes within the intendment of that provision, by reason of which they were properly before the High Court,' he wrote. Speaking today, chief commissioner Liam Herrick said while the human rights watchdog was 'disappointed with the Court's ultimate finding', it welcomes the ruling which allows it to continue to legally challenge decisions. 'We will closely examine this judgment,' he said. 'And the Commission as a whole will consider whether or not to appeal.' He added: 'In the meantime, the substantive issues remain. Thousands of International Protection applicants are experiencing extreme material poverty. 'As of July 2025, there are 1,333 International Protection applicants who are without accommodation. Under EU law the State has an obligation to provide for their basic need.' Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone... A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article. Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation. Learn More Support The Journal
RTÉ News
an hour ago
- RTÉ News
Smithsonian museum removes Trump impeachment references, WSJ reports
The Smithsonian's National Museum of American History removed a label referencing Donald Trump's two impeachments last month following pressure from the White House, The Washington Post reported. Mr Trump is the only US president to have been impeached twice - first in 2019 for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, then in 2021 for inciting an insurrection. He was acquitted by the Senate both times. The label referencing his impeachments was introduced in 2021 to an exhibition about the American presidency at the Smithsonian, according to The Washington Post. The removal of the label "came about as part of a content review that the Smithsonian agreed to undertake following pressure from the White House to remove an art museum director," the Post wrote, citing a source not authorised to discuss the matter publicly. The exhibit has reverted to a 2008 label stating that "only three presidents have seriously faced removal" -- referring to Andrew Johnson, Bill Clinton, and Richard Nixon, who resigned in 1974 before he could be impeached. The Smithsonian later said in a statement that "a future and updated exhibit will include all impeachments," the paper reported, without specifying when. Since starting his second term in January, the Republican president has moved to control major cultural institutions - slashing arts and humanities funding, and cutting the National Park Service's budget. In March, Mr Trump signed an executive order to "restore the Smithsonian Institution to its rightful place as a symbol of inspiration and American greatness" and "remove improper ideology." The order accused the institution of having "come under the influence of a divisive, race-centreed ideology" and argued the shift has promoted narratives that portray US values as "inherently harmful and oppressive." In the order, Mr Trump instructed Vice President JD Vance - who sits on the Smithsonian's board - to coordinate with Congress to ban funding for exhibits or programmes that "degrade shared American values, divide Americans by race, or promote ideologies inconsistent with Federal law." He has also accused Washington's John F Kennedy Center of being too "woke," fired its board members, and appointed himself chairman.
The Journal
an hour ago
- The Journal
Trump announces new tariff rates for dozens of countries in push to reshape global trade
US PRESIDENT DONALD Trump has ordered the reimposition of tariffs on dozens of trading partners – his cornerstone strategy for reshaping global trade to benefit the US economy. However, in a minor reprieve that opens the door to further negotiations, the White House said these measures will take effect in a week, not Friday as previously expected. With questions hanging over the effectiveness of bilateral trade deals already struck – including with the European Union and Japan – the outcome of Trump's plan remains uncertain. Trump's new measures in an executive order raises duties on nearly 70 economies, from a current 10% level imposed in April when he unleashed 'reciprocal' tariffs citing unfair trade practices. The steeper levels, varying by trading partner, go as high as 41%. Trump also adjusted some tariff levels threatened in April, with Switzerland now facing a higher 39% duty and Thailand a lower 19% rate. Advertisement The tariff on Taiwanese products was revised down to 20%, but its President Lai Ching-te vowed to seek an even lower level. Trump separately hiked tariffs on Canadian goods to 35%, though indicating in an NBC interview he was open to further talks. Canada and Mexico face a separate tariff regime. But exemptions remain for imports entering the United States under a North American trade pact. Frantic negotiations The elevated duties come after Washington twice postponed their implementation amid a frantic series of negotiations, alongside announcements of new duties and deals with partners. Just Thursday, Trump announced he was delaying a tariff hike on Mexican products, keeping levels at 25% with existing exemptions. The 90-day postponement followed talks with his counterpart Claudia Sheinbaum. The 79-year-old Republican has made tariffs core to his protectionist brand of hard-right politics. On Thursday, he claimed that the US economy had 'no chance of survival or success' without tariffs. But the latest salvo came amid legal challenges against Trump's use of emergency economic powers. After a lower court said the president exceeded his authority, the US Court of Appeals heard arguments Thursday in cases against Trump's blanket tariffs targeting different countries. While Trump has touted a surge in customs revenues this year, economists warn the duties could fuel inflation. Proponents of his policy argue their impact will be one-off, but analysts are awaiting further data to gauge for more persistent effects. Related Reads Q&A: What we know (and don't know) about the EU-US tariff deal Are pharmaceuticals part of the EU-US tariff deal? And what's Section 232 got to do with it? Ones that got away Those who managed to strike deals with Washington to avert steeper threatened levies were Vietnam, Japan, Indonesia, the Philippines, South Korea and the EU. Britain also reached a pact with the United States, although it was not originally targeted by higher 'reciprocal' tariffs. For Canada, transshipped goods to evade its 35% duty would face even higher levels, said a White House fact sheet. Its trade ties with Washington faced renewed threat after Prime Minister Mark Carney announced plans to recognise a Palestinian state at the UN General Assembly in September. Trump's latest order however appeared to raise tariffs on several countries not initially targeted in April – to 15% – including Ecuador, Ghana and Iceland. Notably excluded from the drama was China, which faces a 12 August deadline instead, when duties could bounce back to higher levels. Washington and Beijing at one point brought tit-for-tat tariffs to triple-digit levels, but both countries have agreed to temporarily lower these duties and are working to extend their truce.
