Summary

Donald Trump has announced plans to impose 25% tariffs on the European Union, claiming the bloc was “formed to screw the United States.”

While details are pending, he suggested the levies would target cars and other imports. The EU, a major U.S. trading partner, has vowed immediate retaliation, with potential tariffs impacting $29.3 billion in exports.

French President Emmanuel Macron had attempted to dissuade Trump, urging focus on China instead.

Critics, including economists and conservative media, warn the tariffs could harm the U.S. economy.

  • jmsy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Based on an overwhelming amount of economic studies of tariffs in the last 100 years, the EU should ignore it. Why enact tariffs on American goods and make life more expensive for Europeans? Studies show EU businesses will raise prices accordingly. The citizens will be worse off.

    However, based on our knowledge of how politicians act, they’ll take the bait and retaliate, thus making things more expensive for EU citizens.

    • engene@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 hours ago

      This is what I’ve been thinking about for Canada’s reaction - do nothing! I can’t say how it will affect us now and in the immediate future but it seems the damage is already done anyway. BTW. this is my 1st post on Lemmy - thank you!

      • T00l_shed@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Maybe not “do nothing” but I like the remove certain products from shelves. Like stop the sale of American alcohol from shelves.

    • Lifter@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      I don’t get it. If we do retaliate, the US will have something to gain (back) by removing the tariffs.

      I don’t know what studies you are referring to (please leave a link) but it seems counterintuitive to not have that bargaining chip to force a quick end to the tarriffs (See US vs Canada 2025, US vs Mexico 2025).

      I don’t see how one could reasonably measure policies like these through time; of course it’s worse in the short term for all involved parties but should resolve the situation faster. If they only measure the time during active tarriffs of course it’s better through survivorship bias.