
John Whelan: Trade war leaves Ireland's booming aviation sector vulnerable
However, having been caught off guard by a letter threatening the 30% duty on EU goods the weekend before last, the European Commission last week quickly tabled a plan to put counter tariffs worth €72bn on imports of US goods.
Inevitably, this will hit the European Union's own economy, with Ireland potentially being one of the most impacted.
The proposed EU retaliatory tariffs target imports of industrial goods from the US, including aircraft and aircraft parts, machinery, automotives, chemicals and plastics, and medical devices and equipment. Potential EU countermeasures on aircraft imports, coupled with retaliation from the US administration, could risk Ireland's position as a world-leading hub in aviation.
Aviation is a highly important part of the Irish trading base, covering aircraf and parts and set to be heavily impacted by EU countermeasures. Potential EU import restrictions on these goods, worth nearly €14bn, according to a document from the Central Statistics Office, would be very damaging to many companies in the sector, including the lucrative aircraft leasing sector. A recent report by aviation investment group Irelandia said the industry in Ireland accounts for 37% of the global commercial fleet, making Ireland a central player in the world's air transport infrastructure.
Within the EU member states, the country with the biggest US aircraft imports in 2024 was Ireland, followed by France, the Netherlands, and Germany.
Ryanair, Europe's largest airline, imports new aircraft on a regular basis. A 30% import duty would significantly increase the cost of acquiring these new planes.
Increased import costs would also likely lead to higher operating expenses for Ryanair. This could affect their ability to maintain their low-cost model and potentially lead to fare increases or reduced profitability.
If the cost of new aircraft becomes prohibitive, it could also delay Ryanair's expansion plans, potentially affecting the addition of new routes and increased flights on existing routes. Furthermore, increased costs might lead to a reduction in the number of aircraft available for service, potentially impacting their operational efficiency.
Ryanair has already threatened to cancel orders for hundreds of Boeing aircraft if a US tariff war leads to materially higher prices, and said it could look at alternative suppliers, including Chinese plane maker COMAC.
However, this will still leave Ryanair exposed to higher costs on Boeing-related maintenance, repair, and overhaul, all increasingly critical with the growth of their fleet. A new import tariff would add to these challenges, potentially exacerbating existing operational difficulties.
Aviation between the US and EU is a highly interconnected sector. French multinational aerospace and defence company Thales with a manufacturing base in Northern Ireland, and supplies US-based Boeing and European competitor Airbus with flight management systems and cockpit displays. In exchange, US aerospace giant Honeywell provides flight management systems for Airbus.
Hence, the EU's potential retaliatory tariffs on US-made aircraft could escalate the trade war to impact a wider range of aviation products exported to the US. Eurostat figures show Boeing earned €7.5bn of its revenues from Europe in 2024. Airbus had sales of €16bn to the US last year. Future sales would likely be caught in the crossfire.
Ireland is already facing a serious hit to its economy due to potentially high tariffs on exports to the US after the August 1 deadline. After Germany, Ireland could be the most affected economies in the EU. Retaliatory actions by the EU could then be more damaging than increased US tariffs on exports.
Brussels says it is still seeking a deal to avoid a tit-for-tat escalation in the trade war but is poised to retaliate if needed. Preparations for retaliation are underway.
Some commentators believe it is time for the EU to put its guns on the table in the tariff spat and show strength and determination. But there may be extensive consequences. Brussels-based think tank Bruegel has estimated that Ireland's cumulative real GDP loss, due to the total impact of US tariffs, could be 3% by 2028.
Hashtags

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

The Journal
2 hours ago
- The Journal
Ryanair's Michael O'Leary takes heat for 'insulting' comments calling Metrolink a 'waste of money'
RYANAIR CHIEF EXECUTIVE Michael O'Leary has been criticised for his 'insulting' comments on a metro for Dublin, which he called a 'waste' of taxpayer money. The 18.8km rail line, most of which will be underground, is to run from north of Swords to Charlemont in the south of Dublin city centre. Various metro projects for the capital have been proposed in recent decades but none have proceeded to build stage. On Tuesday, the government announced that the MetroLink project would get a €2 billion boost in funding as part of the national development plan, in what Taoiseach Micheal Martin said was 'a very definitive commitment to the metro'. While Finance Minister Paschal Donohoe indicated the latest estimated cost for the MetroLink was €11 billion, O'Leary claimed it would cost €20 billion, 'so about a billion a kilometre'. 'Dublin Airport doesn't need it, Dublin Airport passengers won't use it – they're already well-served by buses,' he told RTÉ Radio on Wednesday, while claiming that less than a third of the airport's passengers use buses. He said that while the tube in London runs from Heathrow and through 'all of London', the Metro will only serve a section of Dublin city's residents – around 100,000 people, he claimed. 'Here's the madness of this. This thing is going to start at Stephen's Green in the morning. If you want to get to our first wave of departures, which leave at about 6.30 in the morning, you need to be at the airport at 5.30am. 'Are you seriously going to drive into the centre of Stephen's Green, where there's no car parking, to get this metro to get to Dublin Airport for 5.30 in the morning? No, you're not. Advertisement 'Let me give you the alternative scenario: for €100 million, this year we could buy 400 buses, and 400 buses would provide exactly the same capacity as this metro from Dublin Airport, in through Ballymun, in through Drumcondra, on bus lanes that already exist.' He claimed the plan had not been properly costed and hit out at the government's handling of public finances. This government wasted €330,000 on a bike shed, imagine what they do with an 18-kilometre underground train from an airport? He also criticised comments by Martin, who said the Irish capital will not be sustainable without a metro. 'Does he not understand that the buses actually will all be electrified by the end of this decade, which will actually be greener than light rail?' Labour TD Duncan Smith said O'Leary's criticisms of public infrastructure were as sure 'as night follows day'. 'Dubliners are stuck in daily gridlock. MetroLink is their best chance at affordable, reliable transport that serves communities, not corporate profits. 'As a consistent advocate for MetroLink in Swords, I find it insulting to hear this kind of drive-by commentary from someone who clearly doesn't rely on public transport to get to work. 'Dublin deserves better than a transport plan from a billionaire whose only experience with buses is when he is pretending to be one.' When asked about his endorsement of Enterprise Minister Peter Burke and junior minister Robert Troy during the general election campaign, O'Leary claimed 'they're not in government' and criticised Martin again. 'I endorsed Peter Burke, who actually topped the poll despite the criticism. I also endorsed Robert Troy – and they're not the government.'


RTÉ News
2 hours ago
- RTÉ News
PayPal to create 100 jobs at new AI and fraud centre in Dublin
Payments company PayPal has announced the creation of 100 new data science roles at its Dublin office. The expansion is linked to the establishment of a new AI and fraud data science centre. PayPal said it is continuing to evolve its Dublin site beyond its roots as a customer service hub into a centre for innovation. The new roles will span a range of disciplines, including AI engineering, data science, software development, risk modeling, and cybersecurity. The positions will support areas such as loss prevention and enhancing customer experiences. "As we shape the next generation of digital payments, the talent and innovation coming from Ireland will play a critical role," said Aaron J Webster, Global Chief Risk Officer at PayPal. "This expansion reflects both our confidence in the local ecosystem and our ambition to build an AI-driven, data-powered future that embeds trust and safety in every transaction," Mr Webster said. The job expansion by PayPal is being supported by the Government through IDA Ireland. "The creation of 100 highly skilled roles in cutting-edge fields like AI and data science reinforces our status as a global hub for innovation, and I would like to commend PayPal for its ongoing partnership with IDA Ireland," said Peter Burke, Minister for Enterprise, Tourism and Employment. Michael Lohan, CEO of IDA Ireland welcomed the job announcement. "This is a testament to Ireland's enduring appeal as a location for high-value investments," Mr Lohan said. Last year, PayPal cut 290 jobs at its Irish operation. In March 2023, the company announced 62 redundancies in Dundalk and Dublin, and the closure of its Dundalk office.


Irish Examiner
2 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
Natural resource endowments more a curse than blessing for developing nations
The world's superpowers have developed a seemingly insatiable appetite for the critical minerals that are essential to the ongoing energy and digital transitions, including rare earth metals (for semiconductors), cobalt (for batteries), and uranium (for nuclear reactors). The International Energy Agency forecasts that demand for these minerals will more than quadruple by 2040 for use in clean-energy technologies alone. However, in their race to control these vital resources, China, Europe, and the US risk causing serious harm to the countries that possess them. As it stands, China is leading the pack — having gained ownership or control over an estimated 60-80% of the critical minerals that are needed for industry (such as for magnets) and the green transition. This control extends across the supply chain: China is heavily invested in mining across Africa, Central Asia, and Latin America, and has been building up its processing capabilities. For Western powers, China's quasi-monopoly over critical minerals looks like an economic and national-security threat. This fear is not unfounded. In December 2024, China restricted exports of critical minerals to the US in retaliation for US restrictions on exports of advanced microchips to China. Since then, US president Donald Trump has forced Ukraine to relinquish a significant share of its critical minerals to the US in what he presents as repayment for American support in its fight against Russia. Trump also wants US sovereignty over mineral-rich Greenland, to the dismay of Denmark. He has suggested that Canada, with all its natural resources, become America's 51st state. The EU, for its part, has sought its own mining contracts such as in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) — touted as the 'Saudi Arabia of critical minerals.' From the Scramble for Africa in the 19th century to Western attempts to claim Middle Eastern oil in the 20th century, such resource grabs are hardly new They reflect a fundamental asymmetry: Less industrialised developing economies tend to consume fewer resources than they produce, whereas the opposite is true for developed economies and, nowadays, China. In principle, this asymmetry creates ideal conditions for mutually beneficial agreements: Industrialised economies get the resources they desire and non-industrialised economies get a windfall, which they can use to bolster their own development. However, in reality, vast natural-resource endowments have proven to be more of a curse than a blessing, with resource-rich countries often developing more slowly than their resource-poor counterparts. A key reason for this is that developed economies have more economic clout, advanced technology, and military might — all of which they bring to bear to acquire the resources they seek. For example, European imperial powers used steam-engine technology to help them explore and exploit Africa for resources such as copper, tin, rubber, timber, diamonds, and gold in the 19th century. Fair compensation This — together with more advanced weaponry and other technologies — meant that, far from offering local communities fair compensation for their valuable resources, European powers could subjugate those communities and use their labour to extract and transport what they wanted. However, even countries that are exporting their resources for a profit have often struggled to make progress on development, not only because of imbalanced deals with more powerful resource importers, but also because their governments have often mismanaged the associated bonanzas. It does not help that resource-rich countries and regions often grapple with internal and external conflicts. Consider the mineral-rich provinces of the DRC, such as Katanga and North Kivu, which have long suffered from violence and lawlessness, fuelled by neighbors such as Rwanda and Uganda. Today, the advance of the Rwanda-backed M23 rebels is fuelling bloodshed in eastern Congo, and creating an opportunity for outside powers to gain access to critical minerals. The DRC-Rwanda peace agreement brokered by the Trump administration promises precisely such access to the US in exchange for security guarantees. The resource curse is not inescapable, especially for countries with strong outward-facing institutions to manage the economy's external relations, including its resource sector's ability to attract investment and generate revenues for the state, and inward-facing institutions to govern how those revenues are used. If a country is to translate its resource endowments into economic development and improvements in human well-being, both have a critical role to play Outward-facing institutions must negotiate fair and transparent mining contracts with multinational corporations and strengthen local governments' ability to do the same. Such contracts should include local-content requirements, which keep more high-value-added processing activities at home, increase local employment, and strengthen the capacity of local suppliers and contractors. Since acquiring a 15% stake in De Beers, Botswana has sought to ensure that diamond cutting — not just mining — occurs domestically, which requires inward-facing institutions to deliver adequate investment in these capabilities. Inward-facing institutions must also manage risks raised by resource extraction, from health and environmental damage (deforestation, biodiversity loss, pollution) to labour rights violations (including child labour). Unfortunately, as it stands, many mineral-rich countries are falling far short, leading some to advocate boycotts of critical minerals coming from conflict zones or countries using forced labour. While such boycotts are unlikely to sway these governments, they could convince multinationals and foreign states to demand better enforcement of environmental and social standards from countries they deal with. Ultimately, it is up to mineral-rich countries to defend their interests and make the most of their endowments. This starts with strengthening institutions. Rabah Arezki, a former vice president at the African Development Bank, is director of research at the French National Center for Scientific Research and a senior fellow at Harvard Kennedy School. Rick van der Ploeg is a professor of economics at the University of Oxford and professor of environmental economics at the University of Amsterdam. Project Syndicate, 2025 Read More Government must stand firm on Israel's illegal occupation and genocide in Gaza Strip