The milestone has been reached. Donald Trump has indicated that he wants 50% tariffs on products from the European Union as of June 1st. This tariff, announced on April 2nd at 20%, was revised downward to 10% on April 9th.
The scale is unprecedented, but France is protected. Its exports to the US represent 1.5% of GDP, compared to 4% in Germany and 3% in Italy.
A 10% tariff would have an impact of slightly more than 0.1%. This is limited. With a rate multiplied by 5, the shock will be significant. We cannot multiply the effect by 5, because behaviors will inevitably be different, particularly on the part of American consumers. Not everything will be affected by price, but there will be effects on company margins and/or reductions in overseas deliveries.
The macroeconomic model will no longer be the same.
This renewed announcement of tariffs maintains uncertainty about what the White House might do in the future. This will exacerbate the detrimental effect on investment.
An article published this morning in the Financial Times reported an impasse in negotiations between Brussels and Washington, with Europe unwilling to open its market to the United States, as the White House would like. A return to the 20% rate was discussed, and negotiators were scheduled to meet again in a month. Since then, time has accelerated.
- * * *
This change in Donald Trump’s attitude confirms the rift between Europe and the United States. There will therefore be no common front against China. The Old Continent finds itself alone in this new model of the global economy.
Therefore, priorities must be rethought and strengthened and the hierarchy of policies rediscussed.
This often-discussed subject of autonomy is now here, facing us, Europeans.
The challenge is economic, as it will be necessary to cushion the initial shock of customs duties and the subsequent reduced boost from international trade. It will also be necessary to face, alone, the very cheap Chinese productions.
The issue is also political, because such an attitude from the White House towards the Europeans suggests that NATO is truly a thing of the past and that we must accelerate military momentum. This must force us to make more radical choices regarding conflicts in Europe and not wait for them to be resolved by someone who only wants their mineral wealth.
Europe is different.
Europeans must quickly rethink their model. History has accelerated beyond what was perceived. Europe must focus on its capacity to produce and generate income. Priorities can no longer be the same if the objective is to maintain the well-being of Europeans. The safety nets of the global economy are becoming too broad.
A 50% tariff is a bit of a shock to Europeans.