
The US-EU trade deal in numbers - how it compares to UK deal
What's the difference between the deals?
On the face of it, the UK's lower baseline tariff rate (10% vs 15%) could offer an advantage to UK-based firms competing with EU-based companies for sales into the US - allowing UK exports to be more competitively priced for the US market after the tariffs have been applied."In principle, the UK is in a more advantageous position than other countries – so there is the potential to benefit from this," Michael Gasiorek, director of the Centre for Inclusive Trade Policy (CITP) told BBC Verify.However, there are complexities in the two agreements and a lack of clarity around both, which make it tricky to compare them.
In the case of car exports, the UK-US agreement specifies that exports of cars from the UK to the US will face a 10% tariff, which is lower than the 15% rate that will be faced by EU firms selling cars in the US.However, the UK's 10% rate only applies to a quota of 100,000 vehicles a year, which is roughly the number of cars the UK sells into the US at the moment.Each vehicle sold above that quota would be hit with the US's 25% tariff on car imports, which would be higher than the 15% tariff facing all EU car exports.In 2024 the EU sold around 758,000 vehicles to the US, almost seven times are many as the UK exported to America in that year.
The UK-US agreement also says the UK will negotiate an agreement to avoid future US tariffs on pharmaceutical imports. But the US has not imposed those particular tariffs yet, and we don't know what the nature of any UK exception would be.There is also a lack of clarity about whether the US-EU 15% tariff would always apply to pharmaceuticals or not. On Sunday the US president suggested it would not, but EU commission president Ursula Von der Leyen suggested it would.Similarly, it's unclear whether the EU's 15% baseline tariff incorporates existing US import tariffs, or whether, as in the case of the UK's 10% tariff, it will be applied on top of existing import levies.The answer to that could have an influence on the relative advantage of UK exports. If the UK's tariffs are "stacked" but those of the EU are not, the overall effective tariff imposed on some EU goods could end being lower than what's imposed on some UK goods.No text of the EU-US agreement has yet been published, making it impossible to be certain at this stage.
What about steel?
UK steel exported to the US is currently subject to a 25% tariff, which is lower than the 50% global rate on imports of the metal imposed by Donald Trump in June.The president granted the UK this partial exemption to allow time for implementation of the US-UK trade deal.UK officials are working with their US counterparts to resolve technical issues that they hope will mean UK firms will be able to export steel to the US up to a certain quota that avoids even this 25% tariff.Meanwhile, US officials have briefed that under the EU-US deal, EU steel will remain subject to the US's global 50% tariff on metal imports.That would seem to significantly benefit UK steel exporters relative to their EU counterparts when it comes to selling to the US.However, the EU Commission president has also suggested that Brussels and Washington remain in talks about a quota system, whereby EU steel exports under the quota would also be subject to a lower rate.That could ultimately erode any relative advantage for UK steel manufacturers.In theory, EU manufacturers - in steel and other sectors - could move some of their production to the UK to benefit from lower tariffs when exporting to the USBut some analysts are sceptical about the likelihood of this."I doubt companies in modern supply chains are going to make big, long-term relocation decisions based on marginal tariff differences," says David Henig, the UK director of the European Centre For International Political Economy (ECIPE)."To take advantage of any such tariff differences businesses need to feel reasonably secure that the differences will last. Given the uncertainty surrounding US trade policy, that certainty is currently not there," agrees Michael Gasiorek.
What about wider economic impacts?
The US is the UK's single largest national trade partner.In 2024, the UK exported £196bn of goods and services to the US, 22.5% of all exports.However, the countries of the European Union collectively account for a larger share of UK trade than the US.
In 2024, the UK exported £358bn of goods and services to the EU, 41% of all exports."Demand for EU exports from the United States is likely to fall and, if that were to lead to a slowdown in the European Union, that would be bad for the United Kingdom as it would lead to a reduction in demand for our exports from our largest trading partner," Stephen Millard from the National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) told Verify.Most economists also expect Trump's tariffs to ultimately slow the growth of the US economy, which would also harm UK firms exporting to the US.
What do you want BBC Verify to investigate?
Hashtags

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


The Independent
8 minutes ago
- The Independent
Earthquake hits New York City and eastern New Jersey late Saturday as residents report buildings shaking
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging. At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story. Your support makes all the difference.


Daily Mail
9 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Secret Service ex-director who quit after Trump assassination attempt faces fresh humiliation
Kimberly Cheatle, the former Secret Service director who resigned in disgrace following the attempted assassination of President Donald Trump, has suffered a new professional blow after receiving news her security clearance will not be renewed. The decision by the Secret Service, first reported by RealClearPolitics came after a wave of fierce opposition from Republican lawmakers, including Senator Ron Johnson (R-Wisconsin), who led a sweeping investigation into the agency's catastrophic failures at Trump's July 2024 rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. 'Following the security debacle in Butler, the former director of USSS made the right decision to resign,' Johnson said. 'I see no reason for her security clearance to be reinstated.' Cheatle, handpicked by then–First Lady Jill Biden in 2022, had previously led the agency through what congressional investigators later described as one of the most glaring security breakdowns in presidential protection in modern history. Trump narrowly survived the July 13, 2024, shooting after a bullet grazed his ear, while a local firefighter, Corey Comperatore, was killed and two others were wounded in the chaos. Cheatle stepped down just 10 days later following intense pressure from lawmakers who demanded accountability over a security detail that failed to station an officer on the rooftop where the gunman had positioned himself, among other lapses. The revocation of her clearance is not only a personal humiliation for Cheatle, but also a stark departure from past practice. For decades, the Secret Service has routinely renewed security clearances for its former directors, maintaining open channels for consultations on national security issues. But under new Director Sean Curran, a Trump loyalist and the former head of the president's protective detail, that tradition has now ended. 'Director Curran has been modernizing the intelligence apparatus within the agency,' a Secret Service spokesperson said. 'During that process, he has determined that not all former directors will have their clearances renewed.' The process to renew Cheatle's clearance was already underway until RealClearPolitics inquired about Johnson's objections. Soon after, the agency seemed to reverse course. Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-Tennessee), a Judiciary Committee member who jointly investigated the Butler debacle, offered no sympathy. 'Kim Cheatle disgraced the Secret Service by failing to prevent a horrifying attempt on President Trump's life,' Blackburn said in a statement. 'Not only did she oversee one of the greatest security failures in our nation's history, but she also stonewalled congressional oversight and ran away from my colleagues and me when we confronted her. 'Under no circumstances should she be allowed to regain her security clearance, and it is shameful she would even try.' On the one-year anniversary of the Butler rally, Senator Rand Paul (R-Kentucky), now chair of the Homeland Security Committee, issued a scathing report accusing Cheatle of lying to Congress when she claimed under oath she had not denied requests for increased security for Trump. Cheatle, speaking through her attorney, denied the accusation in a rare public statement. 'Any assertion or implication that I provided misleading testimony is patently false and does a disservice to those men and women on the front lines who have been unfairly disciplined for a team, rather than individual, failure.' And it appears this may not be the last of it. House Oversight Chair Rep. James Comer has said a criminal referral is still on the table. 'If stark evidence of an intentional effort to deceive arises... this Committee will respond,' an Oversight aide said. 'Whether or not Ms. Cheatle's testimony meets the legal definition of misleading Congress, it's clear she failed in her mission leading the agency and appropriately resigned.' According to a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report released in July, the Secret Service received classified warnings about a possible Iranian threat to Trump 10 days before the Butler rally but that intelligence that was never passed to agents securing the site. The report, commissioned by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), reinforced suspicions that Cheatle's office had treated Trump more like a former president than a current presidential candidate, despite clear evidence that he was a high-value target. Multiple Secret Service insiders said Cheatle's team had repeatedly denied Curran's requests for additional counter-sniper support and other heightened security assets during the 2024 campaign. Cheatle's fall is just one part of a much larger shake-up in the US intelligence world under Trump's second term. Within 24 hours of retaking office, the president signed an executive order revoking the clearances of dozens of former intelligence officials including the now-infamous '51 spies who lied' who had signed a 2020 letter dismissing the New York Post's Hunter Biden laptop story as 'Russian disinformation.' Among those stripped of access: John Brennan, James Clapper, Leon Panetta, Michael Hayden, and John Bolton. In March, Trump went further, ordering the suspension of clearances for the Democratic-aligned law firm Perkins Coie, which was central to commissioning the now-discredited Steele dossier during the 2016 election. A federal judge has since blocked that order, but DOJ lawyers are appealing. National security attorney Sean Bigley said the revocations reflect a reform that is long-overdue. 'You have all of these former government bureaucrats, who are continuing to have access to the highest level of classified information... and then they can go and take that continued insider access and make themselves a hot commodity in the private sector or on the cable news circuit,' Bigley told RCP. 'That's not what security clearances are supposed to be used for – it's a fringe benefit that should be pulled.' Despite Cheatle's ousting, Trump has publicly taken a more tempered tone toward the Secret Service rank-and-file. 'They should have had communications with the local police... So there were mistakes made,' Trump said in an interview last month with Fox News. 'But I was satisfied in terms of the bigger plot... And I have great confidence in these people... They had a bad day. And I think they'll admit that.' Last month, the agency suffered another embarrassing episode when a Secret Service agent tried to sneak his wife onto an Air Force One flight during Trump's overseas trip to Scotland.


Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Red state homeowners are rushing to make major home improvement to cut bills and bag 30 percent tax credit
In the wake of Donald Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill', Florida homeowners are clamoring to add solar panels to their homes before it's too late. Trump's Big, Beautiful Bill Act was signed into law on July 4. Amongst restrictions to Medicaid and tightening on immigration, it also moved up the deadline for homeowners wishing to receive a tax credit for their solar panels. Now, homeowners who want to conserve energy and earn a 30 percent tax credit must have their solar panels installed by the end of the year. US Representative Kathy Castor told Floridians at a press conference this week: 'Our message today is if you are interested in lower–cost solar for your home or for your business, for your church, synagogue or mosque — you have to act now.' And act they have, but the rush is overwhelming local solar panel companies and creating a dismal future for the industry in Florida as a whole. According to the Solar Energy Industries Association, the appropriately named Sunshine State ranked third in the solar industry. Over 20,000 solar panel systems have been installed, employing 14,000 Floridians. The often sweltering heat and sunny conditions makes low–coast solar a good way to decrease electric bills and promote environmentally-friendly living. President Trump's Big, Beautiful Bill was signed into law on July 4 Among other things, the act moved up the deadline for Americans to receive a 30 percent tax credit for installing solar panels on their homes Solar companies in Florida are now scrambling to meet the demands of citizens who wish to make changes to their home before the new December 31 deadline Florida House Representative Kathy Castor (pictured) ridiculed the decision in a press conference and encouraged residents to act fast Bill Johnson, who runs Brilliant Harvest in Sarasota, Florida told the Tampa Bay Times: 'Within 48 hours of the bill being signed, we had enough contracts to complete the year.' It could take weeks for companies like Johnson's to obtain the proper permits and contracts to even begin installing solar panels. So to get that tax credit homeowners must start immediately. Steve Rutherford, the CEO of Tampa Bay Solar said he can't train enough installers to fulfill every request by the December 31 deadline. But after that deadline has come and gone, solar industry professionals worry what a drastic decline in demand will do to their business. Without the government incentive to install green energy, Tampa businesses could see job losses. Rutherford said that these realizations are 'a bit of a funeral in the industry'. Johnson was a little more optimistic and noted that he'd already had clients create contracts for next year, despite losing out on the tax credit. 'This is a body blow,' he said. Bill Johnson (pictured), who runs Brilliant Harvest, said 'Within 48 hours of the bill being signed, we had enough contracts to complete the year' It can take weeks to obtain the proper permits and contracts for solar panel installation Steve Rutherford (pictured), the CEO of Tampa Bay Solar called the change 'a bit of a funeral in the industry' With or without a tax credit, Americans may save hundreds of dollars a year after installing solar energy. File photo above Officials worried that losing federal support for solar programs could cause electric bills everywhere to rise, especially amidst the heat waves Tampa had seen this summer. 'As TECO, Duke and FP&L ask for higher rate increases and your electric bills go up, part of the reason is because of the big ugly bill, and taking away the tax credits you were enjoying for cleaner, cheaper energy,' said Castor. According to the United States Department of Energy, solar panels may still be a good thing for your wallet with or without a 30 percent tax cut. Installation can increase the value of a home by an average of $15,000. Depending on a home's location, sunlight exposure, and climate, owners could still save hundreds of dollars a year, per the US Department of Energy.