
Trump tariffs: Crunch time looms in US-EU trade talks – DW – 07/04/2025
July 9 is almost upon us. That's when 50% tariffs could kick in on EU goods sold to the US if the two sides don't strike a deal beforehand.
US President Donald Trump hit EU goods with a baseline tariff of 10% on April 2, and a rate of 25% on imported cars and 50% on steel and aluminum. He threatened to ramp the 10% rate up to 50% by April 9, but a stock market selloff prompted by his tariffs led to a postponement.
In the meantime, EU and US negotiators have been working to strike an agreement ahead of the looming deadline, amid doubt in European capitals that EU Trade Commissioner Maros Sefcovic will be able to strike a deal that satisfies the member states.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen told a press conference on Thursday (June 3) that striking a comprehensive trade deal in 90 days was "impossible" but was hopeful of "an agreement in principle", specifically referring to the agreement the US and UK had struck as a model to aim for.
Those watching the negotiations closely say there have been sharp divisions among European Union member states over what concessions are acceptable and on what the US side should offer.
For example, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has spoken of the need to strike a deal quickly, criticizing the European Commission's "complicated" approach.
"What is at stake here is the rapid resolution of a customs dispute, particularly for our country's key industries," he said.
Yet, French President Emmanuel Macron has decried the idea of tariffs being levied by powerful countries as "blackmail", without specifically referring to Trump.
Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, from the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington D.C., doesn't think the position of the German chancellor will be "acceptable" for all EU members.
"Merz has said a number of times that we can live with a 10% across the board tariff. As long as we don't get a 25% sectoral tariff on cars, etc.," he told DW.
While the comments of Sefcovic and von der Leyen have been somewhat conciliatory towards Trump and the US, Kirkegaard considers this to be an attempt to maintain unity amongst member states.
"That's basically the Commission trying to protect itself against attacks from member states, because it's obviously they would have to bear the consequences of a trade war," he said.
If the UK deal is a model, then the EU will likely have to live with 10% tariffs remaining in place on many goods, as the UK has done. The US-UK agreement cut the 25% tariff on UK cars to 10%, but the number of cars that can be imported on that duty is limited to 100,000 — roughly the amount of cars the UK sold to the US in 2024.
Any cars exported above that quota will be subject to a 27.5% tax. The EU sold over 700,000 cars to the US last year.
To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
However, Kirkegaard believes if the steep car, steel and aluminium tariffs remain at the same level, it will hard for many on the EU side to accept.
"As long as that's the case, there's not going to be a deal, in my opinion," he said. "It is ultimately not acceptable to the EU, which is an economy roughly comparable in size to the US, for US tariffs to go up and the EU's to not go up."
Kirkegaard argues that in a trade confrontation between economies of the same size, tariffs should "go up together and down together."
Bill Reinsch, a senior economics adviser with the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), thinks a UK-style agreement is the most likely outcome.
However, what is most important for Trump is the perception that he has "won" rather than what has actually been agreed, Reinsch told DW.
"What matters for him is the Oval Office meeting, that so-and-so was agreed, and now everything's going to be fine. So it wouldn't surprise me if in the end there's a 'quote, unquote agreement' with the EU."
He argues it would be prudent for the EU to focus on policy outcomes rather than perceptions of who has won. "Let him have the win. If you let him have the win, what he wins doesn't matter. So you don't have to give up very much if you handle it right."
One area where there has been a lot of speculation around possible EU concessions, away from tariffs, is on its digital policy, particularly its Digital Services Act and possible digital sales taxes.
Germany has been considering a 10% tax on the sales of US digital giants such as Google and Meta's Facebook in Europe. Trump has spoken out against such plans and this week Canada dropped a digital sales tax proposal to keep trade talks with the US alive.
Reinsch thinks the EU should prevent member states introducing these taxes because "Trump is right" in his position, he argued, and that is "not even rhetoric."
"I think they are clearly discriminatory against some American companies," he said, adding that from a policy standpoint "it's totally the wrong approach."
"If you want to build European competitors, you don't do that by dragging down the competition this way. You do it by building European competitors and creating viable options," said Reinsch.
As the July 9 deadline looms, serious consideration is being given to the implications of a negotiations blow-up.
The EU has described thetrans-Atlantic trade relationship as "the most important commercial relationship in the world," as bilateral trade in goods and services reached €1.6 trillion ($1.88 trillion) in 2023, according to EU Commission data.
Kirkegaard says a no-deal scenario could lead to the requirement for fiscal stimulus in some EU countries due to "short-term volatility."
But the EU can cope with that, he believes.
"We would not be back in [financial crisis of] 2008 or facing a situation similar to even the energy price shock that happened after the Russian invasion in 2022 — absolutely not," he said.
He expects the EU to "lose half a percentage point of growth" this year and next year, which was "not trivial," but at the same time "nothing we couldn't live with."
Reinsch has a different view, saying a failure would be "bad news" for everybody.
"I think in terms of actual trade, it probably would not be as impactful as a blow-up with China because we buy so much more from China. But in terms of disrupting the relationship and particularly disrupting trans-Atlantic investment, I think it would be a huge problem."
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Int'l Business Times
3 hours ago
- Int'l Business Times
US Readies New Tariffs While July 4 Costs Surge For Families And Firms
As Americans fire up their grills and gather for fireworks this Independence Day, a new economic flashpoint looms: a fresh wave of tariffs that could take effect in less than a month. With official notifications expected to go out as early as July 5, concerns are mounting over how the rising cost of imports may impact small businesses and everyday consumers. The tariff strategy—announced by former President Donald Trump—is expected to impose levies ranging from 10% to 70% on goods from countries without existing bilateral trade deals. These measures could be implemented by Aug. 1, according to CBS News. The move marks the expiration of a 90-day pause following April's unilateral tariff threats. Fireworks Industry Feels the Fuse Burning For an industry synonymous with July 4, the fireworks business is in a bind. Roughly 95% of consumer fireworks are imported from China, and importers say recent tariff policy changes have created serious disruptions in supply and pricing. "We're seeing costs that have doubled in some categories over the last three years," said Julie Heckman, executive director of the American Pyrotechnics Association, in an interview with CBS News. Retailers are reporting higher costs per container, which have not fully stabilized since earlier tariff rounds that peaked at 145%. As reported by Business Insider, wholesalers like Indiana-based distributor Bob Hamilton said he secured extra inventory early, but warns that "margins are being eaten alive" by unpredictable import costs. The Cookout Crunch: Families Paying More for Fourth of July Basics This year's holiday cookouts are also costing more. According to Axios, the average cost of July 4 cookout staples—like beef, buns, soda, and condiments—has jumped 12.7% year-over-year. Items like hamburger meat and ice cream are among the steepest climbers, as import-linked ingredients and packaging materials face cost pressure. An Axios/Ipsos poll found 32% of Americans are opting for cheaper food options—like pizza or store-brand hot dogs—rather than hosting traditional barbecues. Economist Natalie Ortega of the National Retail Federation told Axios the inflation isn't isolated: "It's not just food—it's grills, folding chairs, decorations. Tariffs are driving up the cost of celebration." Small Businesses Caught in the Middle For small businesses, especially those relying on international supply chains, the pressure is mounting. According to a recent CBS MoneyWatch report, more than 30% of small firms say they've raised prices due to tariff-related costs, while others fear closure if current trade uncertainty continues. Shayai Lucero, owner of Earth & Sky Floral Designs in New Mexico, described her struggle to keep costs manageable. "Roses that used to cost under a dollar are now close to $2.50," she told CBS News. "We can't eat those costs forever." Trade groups have echoed these concerns. In comments cited by Financial Times, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce warned that business sentiment could weaken further if tariff escalation continues without diplomatic resolution. A Political Playbook or Economic Gamble? While the administration frames the move as reclaiming "economic independence," analysts are skeptical. Julia Sutherland, a policy analyst at the Brookings Institution, told CBS News that "tariffs are regressive taxes. They hit working families long before they touch corporations." Further analysis from Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan suggests the U.S. tariff burden is climbing toward 13%—levels not seen since the pre-WWII Smoot-Hawley era. Experts caution this could raise consumer prices into Q3 and chill capital expenditure among small manufacturers. What to Watch Next July 5: Official tariff letters expected to go out to U.S. trade partners. July 9: Deadline for the 90-day tariff pause to expire. August 1: Full implementation of new tariffs anticipated. Global reactions could follow. India has floated WTO action, while the EU and China are weighing possible retaliatory tariffs. Meanwhile, U.S. families are adjusting to holiday inflation. As noted by AP News, even sales of essentials like soft drinks and paper goods have dipped in lower-income households, which are disproportionately affected by price volatility. Final Thought While July 4 remains a day to celebrate American independence, 2025's edition offers a deeper reflection: What does economic independence mean when it comes at a rising cost to small businesses and families? As the country watches fireworks, many on Main Street are watching price tags—and wondering what the rest of the summer will bring.


Int'l Business Times
6 hours ago
- Int'l Business Times
E.Guinea Launches ICJ Case Against France Over Paris Mansion
Equatorial Guinea launched a case against France at the top United Nations court on Friday, the latest salvo in a long-running legal battle over a swanky Paris mansion confiscated by French authorities. The west African nation asked the International Court of Justice to issue emergency orders against France over a building seized after the conviction of Vice President Teodorin Obiang for corruption. It asked the court to order France not to sell the mansion, located on the upscale Avenue Foch near the Arc de Triomphe in Paris, which the two countries have been squabbling over for several years. French authorities seized the property, which boasts a cinema, hammam and marble and gold water taps, after convicting Obiang under a law targeting fortunes fraudulently amassed by foreign leaders. In 2021, France's top appeals court gave Obiang -- the eldest son of the long-standing president of Equatorial Guinea, Teodoro Obiang -- a three-year suspended sentence and 30 million euros in fines. France also confiscated assets, including the luxurious Avenue Foch building with an estimated value well above 100 million euros. In its latest complaint to the ICJ, dated July 3 but published by the court on Friday, Equatorial Guinea says French police entered the property last month and changed the locks on several of the doors. Equatorial Guinea called on the court to order France to give it "immediate, complete and unhindered access" to the building. The mansion was also at the centre of an earlier case filed by Equatorial Guinea in 2016 at the ICJ, which rules on disputes between UN member states. Equatorial Guinea argued the building served as the country's embassy in France and that France had broken the Vienna Convention, which safeguards diplomats from interference by host countries. But the UN court sided with France, which said the building was merely Teodorin Obiang's residence and served no diplomatic purpose. The ICJ upheld France's objections that Equatorial Guinea had only tried to designate it as such after the investigation began into Obiang, and that the country already had an embassy in Paris. A request for emergency orders -- provisional measures, in the court's jargon -- takes precedence over all other court business. The ICJ is currently wrestling with a busy caseload, including a high-profile case brought by South Africa against Israel alleging breaches of the UN Genocide Convention in Gaza. It is also expected to deliver a key ruling on countries' climate change obligations within months. While the ICJ is the top United Nations court, whose rulings are binding, it has no way of enforcing its decisions. For example, it has ordered Russia to stop its invasion of Ukraine -- to no avail.


DW
8 hours ago
- DW
Will Germany's military spending bring economic growth? – DW – 07/04/2025
The German arms industry is thriving thanks to a major state-run investment program. But will the country's wider economy benefit? March 18, 2025, will go down in Germanhistory as the day when a two-thirds parliamentary majority cleared the way for the country to take on unprecedented debt. German lawmakers approved an infrastructure investment package worth billions, while also lifting the cap on national defense spending. The aim is to provide the necessary funds to make Germany and its armed forces, the Bundeswehr, "ready for war," as Defense Minister Boris Pistorius has repeatedly demanded since Russia's 2022 invasion of Ukraine. Shortly after he took office as chancellor earlier this year, Friedrich Merz said he wanted to make the BundeswehrEurope's strongest conventional army. This spending spree is great news for companies that build roads and bridges, lay rail tracks and manufacture high-speed fiber-optic internet cables. The German defense industry stands to benefit even more. For decades, the sector had been losing economic importance. Who in Germany, after all, was interested in buying tanks? In 2020, shares in Rheinmetall, Germany's largest arms manufacturer, sold for €59 — by June 2025, they were trading between €1,700 and €1,800 ($2,116) each. Swiss bank UBS has forecast further share price growth, currently estimating a rise to €2,200. These are golden times for German arms manufacturers, with industry top brass insisting that defense spending not only benefits their sector but the economy as a whole. "Defense spending is a gigantic economic stimulus program," Oliver Dörre, CEO of defense contractor Hensoldt, told DW at an event in Frankfurt in March. Lawmakers hope the spending spree will help modernize German industry and boost economic growth. Economists, however, were less euphoric even before parliament agreed the investment package. "The increase in government military spending will give the German economy a boost, but the economic stimulus will be rather moderate," wrote Tom Krebs, an economics professor at the University of Mannheim, in a statement for the Bundestag's budget committee. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Krebs and his colleague Patrick Kaczmarczyk conducted a study examining the extent to which additional government spending will increase Germany's gross domestic product, or total value of economic output. The researchers found that military spending would have a maximum impact of 0.5 — meaning that, in the best-case scenario, €1 of government spending will generate just 50 cents of additional economic activity. Investments in infrastructure, education, child care facilities, day care centers and schools would, however, double or even triple the return on investment. "From an economic perspective, the planned militarization of the German economy is a risky gamble with a low overall economic return," said Krebs. The explanation for this is simple. After a tank is built, it is either parked somewhere or, in the worst case, destroyed in battle. A tank, in other words, does not create any additional economic value. Defense spending is, however, like taking out insurance. You make the payments so that you have protection in case of an emergency. If you don't need the insurance, the money is simply gone. If, on the other hand, the state invests in transport infrastructure, goods can be transported to businesses via these roads, bridges and railways. There, they can be used to manufacture products that are then sold. If kindergartens are built, parents are freed up to work and earn money. Investments in schools mean young people get the education they need for their future. Defense production currently only contributes very little to overall economic growth, although German arms companies have seen orders surge. Rheinmetall, for example, had an order backlog worth some €63 billion ($74 billion) in the first quarter of 2025. Before the start of the Ukraine war, it stood at just over €24 billion ($28 billion). Other German defense companies are also busy, with production at full capacity. But if supply is limited and demand increases, this usually causes prices to are already warning this could happen. Krebs and Kaczmarczyk write that "greater defense spending does more to grow arms companies' profit margins and dividends than improve [Germany's] defense capabilities." Companies currently operating outside the defense sector are also looking to get in on the business, especially those suffering amid Germany's economic malaise. Cologne-based Deutz AG, for example, produces engines for lifting platforms, agricultural vehicles, excavators and other large machines. Due to the weak economy, company sales slumped by some 12% in 2024. Deutz, which also manufactures engines for military vehicles, is now set to significantly expand this previously small line of business. "Defense is a very important and interesting market for us with great growth potential," CEO Sebastian Schulte told DW in March. German carmaker Volkswagen is another example. The company is in crisis and has already cut thousands of jobs, with its Osnabrück plant facing closure. Now, Rheinmetall is looking into whether tanks could be built there instead. These are two examples that show how greater defense spending could benefit the wider economy by offsetting losses, rather than generating additional growth. That said, even companies that are doing well are switching to arms production, with demand surging in the metalworking industry.