EU defends Trump trade deal facing backlash
"I'm 100 percent sure that this deal is better than a trade war with the United States," top EU trade negotiator Maros Sefcovic told journalists.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen clinched the framework accord with Trump Sunday after dashing to Scotland as the August 1 deadline loomed for steep levies that threatened to cripple Europe's economy.
EU exports are now set to face across-the-board tariffs of 15 percent -- higher than customs duties before Trump returned to the White House, but much lower than his threatened 30 percent.
The 27-nation bloc also promised its companies would purchase energy worth $750 billion from the United States and make $600 billion in additional investments -- although it was not clear how binding those pledges would be.
"This is clearly the best deal we could get under very difficult circumstances," Sefcovic said.
Full details of the agreement -- and crucially which sectors could escape the 15-percent levy -- will be known in coming days, although the EU says it has avoided steeper tariffs on key exports including cars and medicines.
But the reaction from European capitals -- which gave von der Leyen the mandate to negotiate -- ranged from muted to outright hostile.
French Prime Minister Francois Bayrou said it was a "dark day" for Europe and said the accord was tantamount to "submission".
Speaking for Europe's biggest economy, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz gave a warmer welcome to a deal he said had avoided "needless escalation".
Industry groups in both countries made plain their disappointment however, with Germany's main auto sector body saying the 15-percent levy "burdens" carmakers while its VCI chemical trade association said the rates were "too high".
Hungary's Prime Minister Viktor Orban attacked the deal in blunt terms, saying "Trump ate Ursula von der Leyen for breakfast".
- 'Not only about trade' -
"It looks a bit like a capitulation," said Alberto Rizzi of the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR).
"The EU accepted a fairly unbalanced deal," he added, saying it delivered a "political victory for Trump".
Von der Leyen had faced intense pressure from EU states to strike a deal quickly with the bloc's biggest partner and protect a $1.9-trillion trading relationship.
Defending Brussels' approach, Sefcovic warned that a no-deal scenario -- meaning a 30-percent tariff and the prospect of further escalation -- would have risked up to five million jobs in Europe.
Throughout the months-long talks, Brussels prioritised stability and maintaining good relations with Washington, over escalation.
That line of thinking has support: Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, a Trump ally, said the deal had avoided "potentially devastating" consequences.
Markets in Asia and Europe welcomed the certainty and rose following the announcement -- reflecting the 4.4 billion euros ($5.1 billion) worth of daily transatlantic goods and services trade that were at stake.
Hanging over the negotiations was the risk to other areas of cooperation -- like Ukraine -- if the EU descended into a trade war with its closest security partner.
"It's not only about the trade -- it's about security, it's about Ukraine," Sefcovic told reporters Monday.
Jacob Funk Kirkegaard of the Peterson Institute for International Economics acknowledged it was "clearly an imbalanced deal" if judged purely on trade terms.
"But if you're trying to avoid worse national security outcomes, well then maybe the deal is not so bad," he said.
- Cautious approach -
The EU had sought to ramp up the pressure in the final stretch of talks, fearing a bad deal and higher levies, with countries approving a $109-billion package of counter-tariffs at the last minute.
And states led by France were pushing for a more robust response including the option to deploy the trade "bazooka" known as the anti-coercion instrument.
But the threat of retaliation was consistently framed by Brussels as a last resort should talks fail, and experts suggested the hardening stance may have come too late to make a real difference.
"If the EU had played hardball at the very beginning, it probably could have got a better deal," ECFR's Rizzi told AFP.
raz/ec/rl
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sydney Morning Herald
21 minutes ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Firing people can't save Trump from the US economy's unflattering reality
In response, a group of statistical agencies that goes by the name The Friends of the Bureau of Labour Statistics released its own, more factual, statement that read: 'This escalates the President's unprecedented attack on the independence and integrity of the federal statistical system. The President seeks to blame someone for unwelcome news,' it said. It's also worth noting that the group statement was issued by William Beach, who was McEntarfer's Trump-appointed predecessor at the bureau. It's hard to overstate what Trump has done. Imagine if Anthony Albanese decided to sack the nation's chief statistician because the latest inflation data was not what the government wanted. There would, rightly, be an outcry. Naturally, the Trump apologists have been out defending the indefensible, ignoring the fact that the bureau has always revised job numbers (up and down), no matter the occupant of the White House. Last year, while Joe Biden was still in office, the bureau revised its jobs figures between January and July down by 340,000. But the single largest downward revision came in March and April 2020, during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, when the number of jobs was cut by almost 925,000. Loading Revisions are part and parcel of what the Bureau of Labour Statistics does. Every month it updates its numbers as it receives more information. The monthly release, plus the revisions, are vital to policymakers (like the Federal Reserve) and investors so they can see how the economy is travelling in as close to real time as possible. Ever since he declared a record crowd at his 2017 inauguration, Trump and reality have been at odds. In the grand scheme of things, crowd size does not really matter. But using a Sharpie to extend the expected landfall of a hurricane, gutting agencies responsible for tracking climate change, and ignoring employment data have very real consequences. Economists and policymakers have, for years, been worried about the statistics coming out of nations where the political leaders meddle with the numbers. In Argentina during the 1990s, the government fired bureaucrats who released less-than-flattering inflation figures and began releasing their own (sound familiar?). Understandably, this made international investors wary and increase their premiums as protection. By 2001, the government was in a full-blown debt crisis and defaulted on $US93 billion of debt. Greece, Turkey, Russia and China have also tried to play fast and loose with statistics over the years. It got to such a point in the case of China that outside economists used electricity consumption or satellite pictures taken at night (to see artificial light) as a de facto measure of GDP because their trust in the official numbers was so low. As financial analyst Ned Davis told The Wall Street Journal, ' Your initial thought is, 'Are we heading toward what you see in Latin America or Turkey, where if the data doesn't look good, you fire someone, and then eventually stop reporting it?'' Just a few days before McEntarfer's sacking, Trump was saying how great the economy was travelling – and demanding the Federal Reserve cut interest rates because it was going so well. Of course, the GDP figures did not show that (growth is slowing while inflation, at 2.7 per cent, is above the Fed's 2 per cent target rate). But Trump couldn't admit that, so he told his own story. Loading Around the same time, the president claimed that his government had cut pharmaceutical prices by '1200, 1300, 1400, 1500 per cent. I don't mean 50 per cent, I mean 1400, 1500 per cent'. And he's the one who thought the Bureau of Labour Statistics was making up numbers. The problem with making up your own numbers, or installing people who will make the numbers show what you want, is that they will be at odds with the lived experience of voters. Just as Biden struggled to convince Americans that the cost of living was getting better while they could see the price of everyday essentials going up, saying the economy is great to people lining up for unemployment benefits has a short shelf life. There's an adage used by economists to describe the models they use to understand the economy: Put crap in, and you get crap out.
AU Financial Review
21 minutes ago
- AU Financial Review
Before the Bell: ASX to fall, Apple leaps, oil slides
Australian shares are set to rise. Wall Street advanced helped by a near 6 per cent surge in Apple on reports its eased tensions with the Trump administration. The White House said the iPhone maker will commit to investing an additional $US100 billion into its US business. In addition, there were reports iPhones will avert new tariffs on imports from India. Apple was 5.8 per cent higher near 2.55pm, lifting its market cap back above the $US3 trillion mark. President Donald Trump said he's going to increase tariffs on India to 50 per cent, from 25 per cent because India refuses to stop buying oil from Russia. India says it needs the oil for its national security. Market highlights ASX 200 futures are pointing down 32 points or 0.4 per cent to 8774. All US prices near 2.55pm New York time. Today's agenda AMP and Light & Wonder are set to report results on Thursday. The June trade balance is scheduled for 11.30am. Across the Tasman, the RBNZ's third-quarter Survey of Expectations will be most closely followed for its inflation expectations components. Overseas, the Bank of England is widely expected to cut its key rate by 25 basis points. China is set to release its July trade balance. Top stories ASX under fire after 'ridiculous' $400m TPG mix-up | A major investor has slammed the 'continuing saga' within the exchange operator after it confused the telco with a private equity firm. | A spokesperson for India's Ministry of External Affairs called the US president's announcement 'unfair, unjustified and unreasonable'. | Mining unions leapt on the proposal as a reason workers should organise, but Rio Tinto says long sick leave puts pressure on those who stay on the job.
The Age
21 minutes ago
- The Age
Firing people can't save Trump from the US economy's unflattering reality
In response, a group of statistical agencies that goes by the name The Friends of the Bureau of Labour Statistics released its own, more factual, statement that read: 'This escalates the President's unprecedented attack on the independence and integrity of the federal statistical system. The President seeks to blame someone for unwelcome news,' it said. It's also worth noting that the group statement was issued by William Beach, who was McEntarfer's Trump-appointed predecessor at the bureau. It's hard to overstate what Trump has done. Imagine if Anthony Albanese decided to sack the nation's chief statistician because the latest inflation data was not what the government wanted. There would, rightly, be an outcry. Naturally, the Trump apologists have been out defending the indefensible, ignoring the fact that the bureau has always revised job numbers (up and down), no matter the occupant of the White House. Last year, while Joe Biden was still in office, the bureau revised its jobs figures between January and July down by 340,000. But the single largest downward revision came in March and April 2020, during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, when the number of jobs was cut by almost 925,000. Loading Revisions are part and parcel of what the Bureau of Labour Statistics does. Every month it updates its numbers as it receives more information. The monthly release, plus the revisions, are vital to policymakers (like the Federal Reserve) and investors so they can see how the economy is travelling in as close to real time as possible. Ever since he declared a record crowd at his 2017 inauguration, Trump and reality have been at odds. In the grand scheme of things, crowd size does not really matter. But using a Sharpie to extend the expected landfall of a hurricane, gutting agencies responsible for tracking climate change, and ignoring employment data have very real consequences. Economists and policymakers have, for years, been worried about the statistics coming out of nations where the political leaders meddle with the numbers. In Argentina during the 1990s, the government fired bureaucrats who released less-than-flattering inflation figures and began releasing their own (sound familiar?). Understandably, this made international investors wary and increase their premiums as protection. By 2001, the government was in a full-blown debt crisis and defaulted on $US93 billion of debt. Greece, Turkey, Russia and China have also tried to play fast and loose with statistics over the years. It got to such a point in the case of China that outside economists used electricity consumption or satellite pictures taken at night (to see artificial light) as a de facto measure of GDP because their trust in the official numbers was so low. As financial analyst Ned Davis told The Wall Street Journal, ' Your initial thought is, 'Are we heading toward what you see in Latin America or Turkey, where if the data doesn't look good, you fire someone, and then eventually stop reporting it?'' Just a few days before McEntarfer's sacking, Trump was saying how great the economy was travelling – and demanding the Federal Reserve cut interest rates because it was going so well. Of course, the GDP figures did not show that (growth is slowing while inflation, at 2.7 per cent, is above the Fed's 2 per cent target rate). But Trump couldn't admit that, so he told his own story. Loading Around the same time, the president claimed that his government had cut pharmaceutical prices by '1200, 1300, 1400, 1500 per cent. I don't mean 50 per cent, I mean 1400, 1500 per cent'. And he's the one who thought the Bureau of Labour Statistics was making up numbers. The problem with making up your own numbers, or installing people who will make the numbers show what you want, is that they will be at odds with the lived experience of voters. Just as Biden struggled to convince Americans that the cost of living was getting better while they could see the price of everyday essentials going up, saying the economy is great to people lining up for unemployment benefits has a short shelf life. There's an adage used by economists to describe the models they use to understand the economy: Put crap in, and you get crap out.
