-
President Donald Trump on Friday said he is “recommending a straight 50% Tariff on the European Union” after complaining that trade negotiations have stalled.
-
The EU “has been very difficult to deal with,” Trump wrote. “Our discussions with them are going nowhere!”
The European Union, which was formed for the primary purpose of taking advantage of the United States on TRADE, has been very difficult to deal with. Their powerful Trade Barriers, Vat Taxes, ridiculous Corporate Penalties, Non-Monetary Trade Barriers, Monetary Manipulations, unfair and unjustified lawsuits against Americans Companies, and more, have led to a Trade Deficit with the U.S. of more than $250,000,000 a year, a number which is totally unacceptable. Our discussions with them are going nowhere! Therefore, I am recommending a straight 50% Tariff on the European Union, starting on June 1, 2025. There is no Tariff if the product is built or manufactured in the United States. Thank you for your attention to this matter!
Another decision that benefits no one except Russia. Their asset sure is paying off.
Ironically, tariffs also crashes the price of oil which also hurts Russia.
Do you think Putin will want for anything for the rest of his life? Hurting Russia hurts the people, and the oligarchs are perfectly fine with that…
“recommending” to who? he is ruling alone and everyone know that.
His recommendation is to the apparently “beautiful face” in the mirror that his malignant narcissistic mind sees. The rest of us see an ugly old criminal tyrant with orange painted skin.
Not entirely. Congress and the Supreme Court are filled with his sycophants.
They mean he alone makes the decisions so he doesn’t need to “recommend” anything to anyone.
If he does that, the prices that rise most in the US will be medical products, medicines and motor vehicles.
The EU does have a trade surplus in goods with the US. The US has a nearly comparable surplus in trade of services.
If the EU were to respond by taxing US services harshly, we’d experience more expensive licenses and advertising costs. Year of the Linux desktop? Year of the dark red Google?
The EU will not tax products which are critical for the European economy until/unless there is a viable local alternative.
What I expect the EU to do is to subsidise those fledging local alternatives. And yes, this is against WTO rules, but I guess nobody cares about that anymore.
It certainly should. Of course they shouldn’t shoot themselves in the foot, like Trump is, but it’s like play chess with a pigeon. It’s not about normal tactics.
As a European software developer I would love to see that.
Unfortunately I’m afraid those most likely to cry foul aren’t Americans, but the majority of European tech businesses who are either reselling MSFT bullshit or completely locked in AWS/Azure/GCP. Open-source/sovereign software services are the exception, not the rule.
IIRC Trade Enforcement Regulation allows, among other options, for ignoring other country’s patents and trademarks until someone else says it’s time to stop. Correct me if I’m wrong.Edit: Seems like I misremembered, because I can’t find it mentioned in the regulation 654/2014, my bad
Edit 2: Okay, I think I’ve found it - 654/2014 was amended by 2021/167, and as far as I understand legalese THAT one allows for suspension of intellectual property rights. I’ll wait with un-stroking the original paragraph until someone more knowledgeable confirms (or denies) my understanding
Why is EU speaking german. Weird
My guess is language other than English was used to further differentiate it from America, and German was chosen for being I think second most used language on Lemmy
It’s also the biggest language (in terms of native speakers) in the EU. Not that it’s anywhere close to a majority…
Broken English perfectly differentiates itself from non Broken English that is spoken in US for example
No shit but I don’t see it fitting. Does “EU” suddenly speak Italian if an italian EU commission president came to power? It makes more sense what the people of EU commonly speak, aka broken English. As with all country memes are
deleted by creator
Christ on a cracker. We are not at war with anyone. Therefore every single one of these tariffs are illegal. He does not have the authority to be doing this shit and I am so fucking sick of it. Yes I am aware that the lapdog congress will do nothing to stop him. Yes I am still going to complain anyway.
I need to explain to people why this is so amazingly stupid:
You are literally giving Europe an excuse to put tariffs on American goods and services, which they want to anyway, to encourage domestic producers.
Also, you’re making it easier for them to buy directly from south Korea, Japan and even China, especially since those countries can’t sell as easily to the US.
For Europe this is an absolute win/win.
But honestly, this sounds like a way for Trump to put pressure on Europe to back off on Ukraine, as he probably thinks the EU is reliant on US LNG, which is kind of isn’t really.
Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution vests the power to lay and collect tariffs with Congress.
Are we going to just ignore it? Technically tarrifs are supposed to be imposed by an act of congress, not the orange manchild in chief.
If by “we” you mean the American people, yes it will be ignored as they seem to fall into 3 categories at the moment:
-
completely clueless to the reality around them
-
know this is bad but waiting for someone else to do the job or really entice them into action with a nice juicy carrot
-
completely in agreement with the orange turd
I am waiting for AOC to call for the assembling of an army to wage war upon the Dogey Confederates. Until then, I am now learning how to safely and effectively use a firearm, so that I can serve Free America. Had my first lesson a couple days ago, and will do my second after getting some extra magazines and ammo crates.
Given a year or so, I should be able to reliably miss the farmers and livestock that are several hundred meters beyond the impact berm.
-
Who gives a shit? Fuck the US. DJT is a pussy. See what just happened with China.
Gee, wouldn’t it be a surprise if a stock selloff by administration people had occurred just before this announcement? No one would expect that.
Right before a federal holiday weekend, too? Hmmmm…
The EU should use the Chinese method:
The US puts 50% The EU puts 50. The US puts 100 The EU puts 100 Trump says “I´m waiting for them to call me” The EU doesn´t call. Trump says 10%
Job done in 2 weeks.
just up our prices. No need to shoot ourselves in the foot. You want a 50% tarriff? I will increase the prices I sell my stuff to you by 50% too. That effectively turns their 50% into 125%. If you do this for stuff they can only get from here then they’ll quickly walk it back. Use their tarriffs against them, not do the same thing to our own citizens
You could do that by slapping export tariffs on things. It still harms whatever industry you do that to though.
Oh look, more grifting from the grifter in chief. Turning our government into an outright kleptocracy.
The fact that we the EU are still trying to negotiate with the US is pathetic. We should not be entertaining this clique.
Allies on paper, EU can’t simply tell tramp to go fuck himself like China can, for now.
Good point but why do they get to tell us to go fuck ourselves then? We are also their allies on paper.
Well, the alliance was not symmetric to start with, the US used to call the shots and the EU would follow if it wasn’t a stupid decision or sit on its hands otherwise. russia’s invasion and the US’s passivity is challenging that.
russia’s invasion and the US’s passivity is challenging that.
Passivity? As in the US should do more than use Ukraine as a proxy, but should get involved in a war with Russia to defend Ukraine?
All I’m saying is that Ukraine finally made strikingly clear that in the current configuration Europe is the junior partner in NATO and that Europe needs to have its own means in the future to defend its own interests (during the cold war, those interests were always aligned, so it was never a problem). But once that happens, Europe won’t remain the junior partner anymore.
As a lemm.ee user, you should be perfectly aware that if Ukraine is anyone’s proxy, then of Estonia: Ukraine is following Estonian doctrine on how to deal with Russia to a t.
Because someone needs to be the adult, and that person is never going to be Trump.
I mean europe just have to wait 4 years.
Hey people, looks like we have an optimist here! 😊
He still doesn’t know what a tariff is.
Also, I appreciate that every picture I see of Trump, even on official news sources, is an unflattering one. They always make sure to catch him with his mouth looking like what it is, that being an asshole.
He doesn’t need to know. His supporters hear that corporations and other countries pay and they believe it, despite evidence to the contrary slapping them in their slack-jawed, dull-eyed faces.
Also, I appreciate that every picture I see of Trump, even on official news sources, is an unflattering one.
Err… that’s Ursula von der Leyen
Well, he doesn’t know what a trade deficit is either, so he’s got that going for him, which is nice.
Dude just wants to crater the US economy, specifically the stock market, and kill what credibility the US has thrived on since WW2. Can’t help but feel Putin has a finger in this cause a weak US makes Russia look stronger.
Looks like that’d be bad for EU pharmaceuticals and auto manufacturers in particular.
WRT autos, it’d be doing the opposite of eliminating the chicken tax.
EDIT: Assuming (a) that tariffs go into force, (b) stay in place (with China they were cut to 30% before long), (c) exceptions don’t show up (with China, electric devices were exempted), (d) and disregarding price elasticity of demand and how readily a given good could be obtained from elsewhere, all of which might, I expect, be substantial factors in impact.
EDIT2:
European autos index sheds 3.6% after Trump 50% tariff threat on EU
I guess that’d support an argument of auto manufacturers being impacted.
goes looking for anything regarding a pharmaceutical breakdown
Washington sources around 80% of its active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) from China, India, and the EU. In 2024, pharmaceuticals were the top US import from the EU, including $127 billion (€117 billion) worth of semaglutide, a key component in popular weight-loss medications.
Hmm. That’s a lot. That single chemical was imported at three times the value of all motor vehicle imports.
goes looking
I think that Euronews must have that statistic wrong. Semaglutide is big, but not that big. And that doesn’t mesh with the above bar chart I provided from the European Commission at all.
https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/semaglutide-market-report
The global semaglutide market size was estimated at USD 28.43 billion in 2024 and is projected to grow at a CAGR of 10.47% from 2025 to 2035.
looks further
Oh, Euronews must have mixed up the value of the whole pharma import category with the specific chemical. Smooth, guys. CNBC looks like it has it correct:
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/02/13/trumps-tariffs-will-hit-these-european-union-products-hardest.html
The top U.S. import from the EU in 2024, by category and dollar value, was pharmaceutical products, according to data from the U.S. Trade Census analyzed by ImportGenius. Included in that $127 billion worth of EU imports was semaglutide, an ingredient used in the popular GLP-1 weight loss drugs from Novo Nordisk, Ozempic and Wegovy. The GLP-1 compound was the sixth-largest import from the EU to the U.S., at $15.6 billion.
I will say that, even so, a major price increase there seems like it’d be pretty rough for a lot of Trump voters. Like, semaglutide is something that you’d be given if you’re obese.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semaglutide
Semaglutide is an anti-diabetic medication used for the treatment of type 2 diabetes and an anti-obesity medication used for long-term weight management.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/10/health/ozempic-glp-1-survey-kff
1 in 8 adults in the US has taken Ozempic or another GLP-1 drug, KFF survey finds
https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/php/data-research/index.html
National Diabetes Statistics Report
Prevalence varied significantly by education level, which is an indicator of socioeconomic status. Specifically, 13.1% of adults with less than a high school education had diagnosed diabetes versus 9.1% of those with a high school education and 6.9% of those with more than a high school education (Appendix Table 3).
Trump’s rise back in 2016 was strongly supported by low-education voters in the Republican primaries; I remember people talking about demographic analysis:
Trump overwhelmingly leads rivals in support from less educated Americans
And presently, that’s also true for the Republican Party relative to the Democratic Party:
https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/14/politics/the-biggest-predictor-of-how-someone-will-vote
“The biggest single, best predictor of how someone’s going to vote in American politics now is education level. That is now the new fault line in American politics,” Sosnik told David Chalian on the “CNN Political Briefing” podcast.
Trump’s rise over the past three election cycles, Sosnik argued, “accelerated and completed this political realignment based on education that had been forming since the early ’70s, at the beginning of the decline in the middle class.”
As the US transitions to a 21st century economy, there’s a rift between the people who attain education – “that’s become the basic Democratic Party,” he said, comparing them with people who feel left behind, “that group of voters is now the modern Republican Party base.”
So you simultaneously have:
-
Low-education Americans having particularly supported Trump.
-
Medicaid (government medical services subsidy for low-income Americans) being slashed by the GOP, which transfers medical costs off taxpayers and more-heavily onto poor people who suffer from medical conditions; low-education Americans greatly disproportionately depend on this subsidy.
-
In theory, states could simply increase medical subisidy outside of Medicaid, but the fact that Medicaid provides federal funding causes fiscal transfers across states. Most of the states that pitch in to the federal budget are (wealthier) Democratic states. Aside from New Mexico, which is very Democratic and makes heavy use of Medicaid, most states that heavily use Medicaid are poorer Republican-voting states. West Virgina had the highest level of popular support for Trump in the last Presidential election, had every county get a majority vote for Trump, had the single county with the highest share of Trump support in the US…and the second-highest level of Medicaid dependence.
-
Tariffs that effectively amount to a substantial consumption tax on medicine are — assuming these Trump EU tariffs go into force — being put into place. Medicine has a low price elasticity of demand — one is pretty much going to have to pay for that whether it’s expensive or not — so I’d think that people who have to have medicine are going to likely have to pay such a tax. They can’t easily just not get medicine.
-
A major increase looks to be on a drug that is considerably-disproportionately needed by low-education Americans.
I have to say that this kind of adds to some observations that a number of high-profile Trump policies seem to be disproportionately financially bad for Trump supporters.
Started when I was noticing that the Trump administration seemed to be doing a lot of things that looked to be really negative for American agriculture. I’d intuitively expect a Republican trifecta to favor agriculture; rural states tend to vote Republican, and rural areas within states tend to vote Republican. But a lot of things, from crackdowns on illegal immigration (one of the most-economically-important areas for illegal immigrants is agricultural work that requires manual labor) to the likely impact of countertariffs (China has, in the past, targeted American soy farmers with countertariffs, and you normally want low barriers to trade if you’re globally competitive, which American agriculture generally is) seem to have real negatives for agriculture. Oh, and cutting SNAP (food stamps, a federal subsidy for food for low-income Americans). It used to be that federal subsidy for agriculture mostly took the form of subsidizing crop insurance, but I understand that over the decades, it shifted to SNAP to help build political support; this combines a subsidy for the poor and a subsidy for agriculture, so one can use political support from both factions.
https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/farm-economy/farm-commodity-policy/farm-bill-spending
Examples of Farm Act programs provided with mandatory funding include the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) as well as most commodity and conservation programs.
If you’re an American farmer and are looking at a pie chart like that, you probably don’t want to cut nutrition assistance…but that’s exactly what’s happening.
During the first Trump administration, the administration did send financial support to American farmers to help mitigate the damage from the trade war with China, and I was guessing that maybe that’d improve its popularity in the sense that Trump was sending very visible financial aid and the harm was indirect and harder to see, but the material I was able to find, including publications from generally-Republican farming regions, seemed to be pretty unenthusiastic about the prospect of trade wars.
I kind of feel like I’d like to see an economist who specializes in political economy kind of walk through this, because it’s left me more-than-a-little-puzzled. I can believe Trump burning someone who voted for him and maybe doesn’t have a great handle on the impact of his policies, but one would think that the Republican Congressional delegation would be expected to look out for constituent interests, and these don’t seem to do this. And agricultural industry associations like the Farm Bureau have not been happy either, and they’re going to have bean-counters who should know the relevant numbers and inputs taking a pretty close look at this:
https://www.fb.org/news-release/afbf-new-tariffs-will-impact-americas-farmers
American Farm Bureau President Zippy Duvall today expressed alarm about potential harm to farmers resulting from the order signed by President Trump imposing stiff tariffs on the United States’ top three agricultural markets by value. An economic emergency was declared to put duties of 25% on imports from Mexico and Canada, with limited exceptions, as well as 10% on all imports from China. Canada and Mexico both announced they would impose retaliatory measures.
“Farm Bureau members support the goals of security and ensuring fair trade with our North American neighbors and China, but, unfortunately, we know from experience that farmers and rural communities will bear the brunt of retaliation. Harmful effects of retaliation to farmers ripple through the rest of the rural economy.
“In addition, over 80% of the United States’ supply of a key fertilizer ingredient — potash — comes from Canada. Tariffs that increase fertilizer prices threaten to deliver another blow to the finances of farm families already grappling with inflation and high supply costs.
-
