US-EU deal sets 15% tariff on most goods and averts threat of trade war
The announcement came after Mr Trump and European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen met briefly at Mr Trump's Turnberry golf course in Scotland.
Advertisement
Their private meeting was a culmination of months of bargaining, with the White House deadline of August 1 approaching for imposing punishing tariffs on the 27-member EU.
'It was a very interesting negotiation. I think it's going to be great for both parties,' Mr Trump said.
The agreement, he said, was 'a good deal for everybody' and 'a giant deal with lots of countries'.
Ms von der Leyen said the deal 'will bring stability, it will bring predictability that's very important for our businesses on both sides of the Atlantic'.
Advertisement
Mr Trump said the EU had agreed to buy some 750 billion dollars' (£558 billion) worth of US energy and to invest 600 billion dollars (£446 billion) more in America, as well as making a major purchase of military equipment.
Mr Trump played golf at his Trump Turnberry golf course in South Ayrshire (Jane Barlow/PA)
The US leader said: 'We are agreeing that the tariff straight across for automobiles and everything else will be a straight across tariff of 15%.
'We have a tariff of 15%. We have the opening up of all of the European countries.'
Ms von der Leyen said the 15% tariffs were 'across the board, all inclusive' and that 'indeed, basically the European market is open'.
Advertisement
Before the meeting began, Mr Trump pledged to change what he characterised as 'a very one-sided transaction, very unfair to the United States'.
'I think both sides want to see fairness,' the Republican President told reporters.
His EU Commission counterpart spoke of rebalancing. Ms von der Leyen said the US and EU combined have the world's largest trade volume, encompassing hundreds of millions of people and trillions of dollars. She added that Mr Trump was 'known as a tough negotiator and dealmaker'.
'But fair,' Mr Trump added.
Advertisement
Together, the EU and the US are a market of 800 million people.
And nearly 44 percent of global GDP.
It's the biggest trade deal ever ↓
https://t.co/rG3cHebXEk
— Ursula von der Leyen (@vonderleyen)
July 27, 2025
For months, Mr Trump has threatened most of the world with large tariffs in hopes of shrinking major US trade deficits with many key trading partners.
More recently, he had hinted that any deal with the EU would have to 'buy down' the currently scheduled tariff rate of 30%.
During his comments before the deal was announced, he pointed to a recent US agreement with Japan that set tariff rates for many goods at 15% and suggested the EU could agree to something similar.
Asked then if he would be willing to accept tariff rates lower than that, Mr Trump said 'no'.
Advertisement
Joining Ms von der Leyen were Maros Sefcovic, the EU's chief trade negotiator; Bjorn Seibert, the head of von der Leyen's Cabinet; Sabine Weyand, the commission's directorate-general for trade, and Tomas Baert, head of trade and agriculture at the EU's delegation to the US.
The US and EU seemed close to a deal earlier this month, but Mr Trump instead threatened the 30% tariff rate. The deadline for the Trump administration to begin imposing tariffs has shifted in recent weeks but is now firm, the administration insists.
Mr Trump hailed the deal (AP)
'No extensions, no more grace periods. August 1, the tariffs are set, they'll go into place, Customs will start collecting the money and off we go,' US commerce secretary Howard Lutnick told Fox News on Sunday.
He added, however, that even after that 'people can still talk to President Trump. I mean, he's always willing to listen'.
Without an agreement, the EU said it was prepared to retaliate with tariffs on hundreds of American products, ranging from beef and car parts to beer and Boeing planes.
If Mr Trump eventually followed through on his threat of tariffs against Europe, it could have made everything from French cheese and Italian leather goods to German electronics and Spanish pharmaceuticals more expensive in the United States.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
23 minutes ago
- The Independent
Rachel Reeves admits Labour has ‘disappointed' people while in government
Rachel Reeves admits Labour has 'disappointed' people while in government. The politician said she understood that being Chancellor meant making unpopular decisions. She told an audience at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival that Labour had got the balance right between tax, spending and borrowing. But she said that balancing the books meant making tough decisions, even if the are unpopular. Appearing on the Iain Dale All Talk fringe show, she said: 'The reason people voted Labour at the last election is they want to change and they were unhappy with the way that the country was being governed. 'They know that we inherited a mess. They know it's not easy to put it right, but people are impatient for change. 'I'm impatient for change as well, but I've also got the job of making sure the sums always add up – and it doesn't always make you popular because you can't do anything you might want to do. You certainly can't do everything straight away, all at once.' Ms Reeves pointed to Labour's £200 million investment in carbon capture in the north east of Scotland, which she said was welcomed by the industry. At the same time, Labour's windfall tax, she said, was not liked by the sector. 'I can understand that that's extra tax that the oil and gas sector are paying, but you can't really have one without the other,' she said. Defending Labour's record, she said her party had the 'balance about right'. 'But of course you're going to disappoint people,' she added. 'No-one wants to pay more taxes. 'Everyone wants more money than public spending – and borrowing is not a free option, because you've got to pay for it. 'I think people know those sort of constraints, but no-one really likes them and I'm the one, I guess, that has to sort the sums up.' Ms Reeves said Labour had to deliver on its general election campaign of change, adding that her party did not 'deserve' to win the next election if it does not deliver the change it promised.
Daily Mirror
24 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
Benjamin Sesko's agent's clear message to Man Utd as enormous transfer offer made
Benjamin Sesko has been linked with a move to Manchester United, and the striker's agent has already outlined the key criteria that he and his client will look for when deciding on his future Benjamin Sesko's agent, Elvis Basanovic, claims the 22-year-old wants a "special project with a special coach" as he targets a potential move to the Premier League. This news comes as Newcastle United table a huge £65.5million bid for the RB Leipzig striker, amidst the ongoing Alexander Isak transfer drama. Manchester United are also in the race to sign the towering centre-forward, with Ruben Amorim keen to get a No.9 in the door to front his attacking line. United are progressing with a deal to sign the Slovenian international after picking him as their preferred target over Ollie Watkins, but Newcastle could put a stop to this with their bid. Sesko has not commented on the prospect of a switch to the Premier League previously, meaning he has not given any clues or indications. Given this, it could all come down to who can provide the striker with the most attractive overall package, and that doesn't simply mean financially. Basanovic discussed the possibility of Sesko making a move to England earlier this summer, stating that the striker will be looking for a range of things before deciding where to play. The agent, who met former United football director John Murtough back in 2022 to talk about a potential move to Old Trafford, said: "It's not correct to speak about the names of clubs that are interested in Sesko, but maybe it is right to clarify a few things. "Let me tell you: Sesko is not competing with anyone. It's him vs him every day. We have a clear plan for the future and media speculation doesn't affect us. His numbers at his age are comparable to some strikers with already great careers. "That confirms my words. He will move from RB Leipzig only when we recognise a special club. A special project with a special coach." United are currently working on 'Project 150', an ambitious scheme launched last year with the target of clinching the Premier League crown again by 2028 for their 150th anniversary. Speaking about the initiative in June, United chief executive Omar Berrada said: "It's establishing a series of targets within a timeframe so we can focus our efforts and energy on that goal. Can the team win the Premier League title by 2028? Of course. "We've just finished 15th and it seems an impossible task. But why not aim for it? Why not do everything in our power?" However, Eddie Howe is keen to make an impression on Sesko it seems, as Newcastle's project focuses on making the club a permanent fixture in the top five of the league table. It remains to be seen where Sesko will decide to go - if he moves at all - but the transfer battle is looking likely to heat up between the north east and north west giants of the Premier League.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Blow for Trump's ICE raids as court upholds ban on snatching people based on appearance or job
The Trump administration suffered another blow to its mass deportation agenda on Friday after an appeals court upheld a lower court's ruling that prevents Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents from detaining a person based on their appearance, native language, or job. A three-judge panel on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Los Angeles said the plaintiffs, a cohort of five individuals and three immigration advocacy organizations, were likely to succeed on their claim that ICE agents violated the Fourth Amendment by relying on four factors to form reasonable suspicion to support detention stops. Those four factors include apparent race or ethnicity, speaking Spanish or English with an accent, presence at a particular location such as a laborer pick-up site, and the type of work a person does. Three plaintiffs who are day laborers said in their original lawsuit against Trump administration officials that they were waiting to be picked up to go to a construction site job when ICE agents swooped in and intimidated them. The plaintiffs said the immigration law enforcement officers never identified themselves, stated they had arrest warrants, nor informed the plaintiffs of the bases for the arrests. The Ninth Circuit panel upheld a previous temporary injunction set by District Court Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong in June. In keeping with Trump's mass deportation agenda, immigration law enforcement officers were deployed throughout Southern California to begin conducting sweeping raids. Many of those raids, according to the lawsuit, were conducted at 'certain types of businesses' such as car washes, because immigration law enforcement officials determined those businesses were more likely to hire people without legal documentation. Plaintiffs in the lawsuit referred to those as 'roving patrols' and said they were being detained without reasonable suspicion. The Fourth Amendment protects people from unreasonable search and seizures. The raids, which led to protests in downtown Los Angeles back in May, have been challenged by multiple individuals and immigration advocacy groups. One plaintiff, Jason Brian Gavidia, said ICE agents stopped him in June after he stepped onto the sidewalk outside of a tow yard in Montebello, California. Gavidia, who is an American citizen, identifies as Latino and said ICE agents pushed him up against a chain-link fence and interrogated him. Even after Gavidia gave ICE agents his Real ID, they seemingly did not believe him. In her earlier ruling, Frimpong said Gavidia and other plaintiffs were likely to succeed 'in proving that the federal government is indeed conducting roving patrols without reasonable suspicion and denying access to lawyers.' Frimpong ordered immigration law enforcement not to rely solely on the four factors 'except as permitted by law.' While the appeals court panel upheld much of Frimpong's ruling, they did strike the 'except as permitted by law,' saying that language was too vague.
