EU Policy

EU lawmakers in Brussels are worried that the bloc is drifting into the crosshairs of US domestic politics, as the White House launched new trade investigations into EU goods accusing the European Union is “implementing close to zero” of trade commitments.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Next week could prove decisive for the EU–US trade deal struck last summer.

Washington has stepped up pressure on the EU in recent days to implement the agreement cut last summer cut between the head of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen and President Donald Trump, tripling tariffs on the EU.

Still, MEPs have kept the implementation process, which also includes investment pledges from the Europeans in the US, frozen, seeking clarity after the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in February that US tariffs imposed in 2025 were illegal.

The fate of the deal remains uncertain after the White House launched new investigations into EU products this week that could lead to tariffs exceeding the 15% ceiling agreed under the pact.

“It is domestic politics and the worst-case scenario has happened: we got involved,” Croatian MEP Željana Zovko, lead negotiator for the European People’s Party, told Euronews.

She added: “We were waiting for the Supreme Court’s decision but now of course this administration will do its utmost to do it its own way.”

In the days following the court’s ruling, the US administration has looked for new legal grounds for tariffs and invoked Section 122 to impose fresh duties of 10% on EU goods, on top of the 4.8% tariffs already in place under most-favored nation regime.

The provision allows temporary duties for a maximum of 150 days, after which the US Congress would need to agree an extension. The Supreme Court suggested in its initial ruling that the President had exceeded his powers under emergency grounds.

As Washington looks for a way to make the tariff salvo permanent, it is also increasing the pressure on allies by opening new investigations into trading partners including the EU over alleged unfair trade practices. China and India were also targeted.

The probes could pave the way for tariffs above the 15% ceiling agreed in the deal struck in July 2025 by Ursula von der Leyen and Donald Trump in Turnberry, Scotland.

Next week will be pivotal for the EU-US deal

“Now uncertainty is increasing even more for our businesses,” Zovko said.

Since the court ruling, the EU has sought clarity from Washington on whether the Turnberry agreement signed last year still stands or has been broken.

US officials assured EU trade chief Maroš Šefčovič they would stick to the deal, though they have not detailed how the 10% tariffs after the court ruling will be replaced in the long-term. In return, the US expects the EU to implement the agreement fully and quickly.

US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer raised the temperature on Wednesday, lashing at the Europeans on the basis that “the EU has done approximately zero percent of what they were supposed to do for their trade deal with us.”

This week’s investigations should be taken seriously, German MEP Bernd Lange (S&D) told Euronews, despite the erratic moves by the US administration since the court ruling.

“Section 301 will allow the US to differentiate between countries and therefore add pressure to each of them,” he said.

Next week could be pivotal for the EU–US trade deal.

Italian MEP Brando Benifei (S&D) will travel to Washington hoping to meet Greer. He may be joined by Lange, the chair of the EU trade committee, on Monday although a decision has not been made yet.

The trip comes as negotiators in the European Parliament must decide whether to resume work on the agreement or postpone the vote once more. A vote is required to cut EU duties on US goods to zero, as foreseen in the Turnberry deal.

But political groups remain divided.

“When I read what the socialists are saying, I’m losing hope that we will have a vote, despite reassurance given by Iratxe García Pérez [Spanish MEP, chair of the S&D] and Bernd Lange,” a source at the EPP told Euronews.

Benifei said the EU needs a clear political signal from Washington that it will stick to the deal, otherwise “there is no way we can vote on the file.”

Published on
07/03/2026 – 8:00 GMT+1

France will push back against a European Commission plan to fast-track ratification of trade agreements by circulating only English-language versions during talks with EU governments and lawmakers, skipping translation into the bloc’s 24 official languages, according to several sources.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

The slow ratification of the contentious EU–Mercosur trade deal has frustrated the Commission, which wants to accelerate negotiations and bring deals into force more quickly as it seeks new markets amid rising geopolitical tensions.

Translating the agreements into every official EU language can take months due to the legal scrubbing required before the ratification process begins. The EU executive has confirmed to Euronews that trade chief Maroš Šefčovič told EU trade ministers in February that the trade deal with India concluded on 27 January could serve as a test case for using English as the main language during ratification.

“We lost almost €300 billion by not having the Mercosur agreement in place since 2021, if it comes to the GDP, and more than €200 billion in export opportunities,” Šefčovič told journalists after meeting ministers on 20 February, adding that once negotiations end it can take up to 2.5 years before businesses can operate in partner countries.

“In today’s world, we cannot simply lose the time,” he said.

Šefčovič said the Commission would ensure the agreements are translated into all 24 official EU languages once published in the Official Journal, i.e. after ratification. He added the proposal was backed by at least seven member states at the meeting, though not all countries had time to speak.

French sources who spoke to Euronews were insistent that Paris would vigorously oppose the move to English-only agreements if necessary.

“As a matter of principle, we defend the use of all the languages of the Union, and in particular French, which is one of the EU’s working languages,” one official told Euronews.

‘Transparency, precision and understanding’

Language policy in the bloc’s institutions remains politically sensitive for countries such as France, whose language has declined sharply over the past decades as English massively dominates daily work in the European Union institutions – despite French, German and English being the three working languages.

“Switching entirely to English raises a legal and democratic issue, and the Commission is well aware of it,” an EU diplomat told Euronews.

On its website, the European Commission says linguistic diversity is essential and that the EU promotes multilingualism in its institutional work.

The bloc once even had a commissioner dedicated to multilingualism, though the portfolio was gradually merged with others and eventually disappeared.

“I have the impression that in some cases the Commission seizes the opportunity to push the idea that English has a superior status, and that the other official languages are translation languages that can come later,” Michele Gazzola, expert in language policy, said.

He added that relying only on English during ratification could pose problems for members of the European Parliament, and even more so if national parliaments are involved.

“It’s a matter of transparency, precision and understanding.”

After its failure to strike a deal to tap into the EU’s defence for loan scheme, the UK is now on a charm offensive to secure “Made in Europe” access for its industry.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

UK Business and Trade Secretary Peter Kyle is in Brussels on Wednesday and Thursday to press the case for UK involvement in the European preference scheme the Commission is drafting, as speculation circulates that it will be limited to EU countries only.

“We have a shared challenge on the continent of Europe about economic security,” Kyle told journalists after meeting Commission Vice President Teresa Ribera, adding that “the continent of Europe should come together” to build “resilience” at a time of increasing worldwide economic tensions.

The UK fears Brussels’ push to favour “Made in Europe” products will shut London out of EU public procurement and state aid, escalating post-Brexit trade tensions.

London argues that the EU and UK economies are too deeply intertwined to withstand a strict EU-only European Preference.

The EU’s “Made in Europe” strategy is set to feature in the long-delayed Industrial Accelerator Act, held up for months by divisions among member states and within the European Commission. Baltic and Nordic countries have warned that the plan could curb innovation and restrict access to non-EU technologies, joining Germany in calling for a broad definition of “Made in Europe” that includes the bloc’s “trusted” trade partners.

France, by contrast, wants to limit eligibility to members of the European Economic Area – including Norway, Liechtenstein and Iceland – as well as countries with reciprocal procurement agreements with the EU.

Limits of participation

London has previously sought to secure preferential access to the EU’s €150-billion Security Action for Europe (SAFE) defence loan scheme – so far, to no avail.

That programme also contains a European preference, with member states required to ensure that at least two-thirds of the weapon systems they buy using loaned EU money are manufactured in an EU or EEA/EFTA country or Ukraine. Third-country participation is capped at 35%.

Talks to bring the UK to the same level as a member state collapsed last November when they failed to find a compromise over how much London would have to contribute financially.

Euronews understands that those talks fell apart over a major gap between the two sides: whereas the final offer on the table from the EU was around €2 billion, the UK estimated it ought to contribute just over €100 million.

But the UK also wants to participate in the EU’s €90 billion loan to Ukraine, two-thirds of which is earmarked for military assistance.

Starmer said last month that “whether it’s SAFE or other initiatives, it makes good sense for Europe in the widest sense of the word – which is the EU plus other European countries – to work more closely together.”

But the British premier is walking a difficult political tightrope. His Labour party is consistently polling several points behind the right-wing populist Reform UK, led by arch-Brexiteer Nigel Farage.

Yet, a recent YouGov poll showed that a majority of British people (58%) now believe that it was wrong for the UK to leave the EU, with 54% supporting rejoining the bloc. An even bigger majority – 62% – support having a closer relationship without rejoining the EU, the Single Market, or the Customs Union.

Brussels, however, has always been clear that the UK cannot pick and choose privileged access to the Single Market without accepting the EU’s “four freedoms”: the full freedom of movement of goods, services, capital and people – the latter of which would feed into Farage’s anti-immigration platform.

Published on 23/02/2026 – 13:58 GMT+1•Updated
14:24

EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič is set to meet G7 trade ministers on Monday after United States President Donald Trump upped the pressure on trading partners with a 15% across-the-board tariffs on imports entering the American market.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Trump’s move came after a US Supreme Court ruling last week struck down several global duties he had imposed from the White House last year, overturning a central part of his trade policy.

Brussels is now demanding legal clarity. The EU is bound to Washington by a trade pact clinched in July 2025 by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Trump, setting tariffs on EU exports at 15% while committing the bloc to slash its own duties to zero.

“Full clarity on what these new developments mean for the EU-US trade relationship is the absolute minimum that is required in order for us the EU to make a clear-eyed assessment and decide on next steps,” Commission deputy spokesperson Olof Gill said on Monday.

Key Parliament vote expected

Šefčovič’s G7 talks come ahead of a closed-door meeting of EU ambassadors to assess the fallout from the latest developments in the US.

Some member states, including France, are prepared to deploy the bloc’s Anti-Coercion Instrument – the so-called “trade bazooka” that allows restrictions on public procurement, licenses and intellectual property rights if necessary to push back against external pressure.

Attention is now shifting to the European Parliament, which was set to vote Tuesday on implementing the EU-US agreement by cutting tariffs on US goods, as included in the deal. Instead, MEPs are meeting on Monday afternoon to decide on the future enforcement of the agreement.

The Parliament has led resistance to the US administration, arguing the deal signed in Scotland last summer was unbalanced.

German MEP Bernd Lange, who chairs the Parliament’s Committee on International Trade, said on Sunday that he will urge negotiators to suspend the agreement. But Zeljana Zovko, lead negotiator for the EPP – the Parliament’s largest group – struck a cooler tone, telling Euronews that MEPs “keep calm and do our [their] part.”

“No need to add any more fuel to an already existing fire,” she said.

Published on 20/02/2026 – 12:34 GMT+1•Updated
12:35

European steel shipments to the US declined 30% between June and December 2025 compared with the same period a year earlier, according to recent Eurostat data compiled by Eurofer, the Brussels-based industry group.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

The decline underscores the impact of the US’s 50% tariffs on EU steel, even after the EU and US signed a trade agreement in July 2025 agreeing a blanket 15% US tariff on EU goods. Steel was carved out of that deal and talks to ease duties remain stuck.

“A 30% drop in steel exports to the US within just six months is a clear signal that the blunt 50% tariffs imposed by the US government on EU steel are damaging our industry,” Eurofer Director general Axel Eggert said.

“The US decision to include EU downstream steel products, such as machinery, will have another huge negative impact on us and our European customers,” he added.

Washington imposed 50% tariffs on EU steel and aluminium in June 2025 and extended the measures to more than 400 steel and aluminium products in August.

Steel talks tied to EU-US trade deal enforcement

The US has framed the tariffs as a shield against Chinese overcapacity flooding global markets, including Europe.

With Chinese exports increasingly redirected from the US to the EU, the European Commission proposed on 7 October 2025 to halve the volume of steel allowed into the bloc duty-free and to levy a 50% tariff on imports exceeding a quota of 18.3 million tons a year.

The proposal steel needs to be adopted by the EU legislator. Meanwhile Brussels itself hopes to reopen talks with the White House to secure lower duties on EU steel.

But US negotiators have linked any resumption of discussions to the implementation of last summer’s EU-US trade deal, struck by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and President Donald Trump. Under that pact, the EU agreed to cut its tariffs on US goods to zero while accepting 15% duties on its exports to the US.

With the EU legislative process still requiring approval from lawmakers and member states, Washington’s patience is wearing thin. Tensions could rise further after EU lawmakers introduced amendments that may complicate talks with capitals.

The European Parliament is expected to vote on the deal in March, paving the way for negotiations with member states.

The talks stalled on the European side after the US threatened to annex Greenland militarily from Denmark in January. Although the US has softened its language, it led to delays. The administration’s continuous lobbying for less stringent rules when it comes to digital legislation in Europe has also added obstacles to the talks.

Published on
19/02/2026 – 17:39 GMT+1

The European Commission’s push to embed a so-called European preference in public procurement is triggering heavy lobbying from EU capitals and foreign partners, Euronews has learned.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

The proposal, designed to counter Chinese and US competition, would see products made in Europe officially favoured in public contracts and support schemes. Critics have branded it protectionist, and several member states have sought to water down the definition of “made in Europe” to ensure access for like-minded countries.

According to EU officials, the Industrial Accelerator Act (IAA), which is set to define what made in Europe means, is likely to face another delay despite appearing on the Commission’s agenda for presentation on 26 February. The strategy was first delayed in November 2025.

A leaked draft of the IAA text seen by Euronews lists strategic sectors targeted for a European preference, including chemicals, automotive, AI and space. It also proposes EU-origin thresholds of 70% for EVs, 25% for aluminium and 30% for plastics used in windows and doors.

The draft has drawn intense pushback. Nordic and Baltic states warn that a strict made in Europe regime could deter investment and limit EU companies’ access to cutting-edge technologies from non-EU countries.

In a separate leak reported by Euronews last week, the Commission appeared to lean toward the German position: a European preference open to like-minded partners with reciprocal procurement commitments and those contributing to “the Union’s competitiveness, resilience and economic security objectives”.

Britain concerned about protectionism

The UK is among the partners wary of a protectionist turn, with British officials stressing that the EU and UK economies are highly intertwined.

“It’s not the moment to mess with what is already working,” one official told Euronews.

In particular, the EU remains the largest export market for British cars, while several European manufacturers produce vehicles in the UK, which in 2024 was the EU’s second-largest export destination after the US.

“Almost half of our trade is with the European Union. We trade almost as much with the EU as the whole of the rest of the world combined,” UK Chancellor Rachel Reeves said last week.

British sources also argue that London’s deep capital markets could help the EU secure investment to revive its industry – unless the bloc closes its market.

The Commission is weighing its next move, aiming to table a proposal ahead of March’s EU summit focused on competitiveness. But pressure is also mounting from within, with pushback from the Trade Directorate-General – traditionally a staunch defender of an open EU market.

Paris, a long-time champion of a made in Europe strategy, says the concept has gained sufficient traction in Brussels to become reality and that the debate has now shifted to its implementation.

EU industry chief Stéphane Séjourné, who is overseeing the file, said on Tuesday that the European preference “entails quite a change of Europe’s economic doctrine”.

“It is therefore no surprises that it takes time and efforts to get to a common and smart version,” he added.

Published on
17/02/2026 – 8:00 GMT+1

Four years after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the European Union is still importing Russian steel – and not everyone is happy about it.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Next week, MEPs and EU member states will begin negotiations on whether to ban Russian steel outright. What began as a sanctions debate has morphed into a high-stakes political fight.

Swedish lawmaker Karin Karlsbro is preparing to take on the EU council, which represents the member states, with Belgium, Italy, the Czech Republic and Denmark all arguing that they still need imports of unfinished steel for major construction projects.

“It is a big provocation that we haven’t done everything possible to limit Putin’s war chest,” Karlsbro told Euronews. “The Russian steel industry is a backbone of Russian war, it is the Russian war machinery.”

Finished Russian steel was banned in 2022, but semi-finished steel, a key input for further processing, was spared after a number of countries secured an exemption until 2028 to cushion the blow to their industries.

“Unfinished steel can’t be produced anywhere in the EU,” a European diplomat from one of those countries told Euronews, “while it is required for big infrastructures.”

Three million tonnes

Karlsbro says she was astonished to learn that EU imports of Russian steel amount to nearly 3 million tonnes a year, roughly equivalent to Sweden’s entire annual output and worth around €1.7 billion.

For her, the type of steel is beside the point.

“There is absolutely no argument that this is special steel or highly qualified steel with any essential quality. There is simply no additional reason to buy this steel,” she said.

To bypass the unanimity required for the adoption of EU sanctions by the member states, Karlsbro inserted a ban on Russian steel into a separate European Commission proposal aimed at shielding the bloc from global steel overcapacity, as US tariffs divert excess supply toward Europe.

The European Parliament’s trade committee approved the move on 27 January.

The procedural shift is crucial. Unlike sanctions, the trade file requires onlythe support ofa qualified majority of EU countries, potentially sidelining governments that might otherwise veto a full ban.

“The Parliament is playing politics on this,” an industry source familiar with the file told Euronews.

Another diplomat from a country dependent on Russian semi-finished steel said the ban was important for his government, which is why the 2028 deadline has been set – highlighting the dilemma the EU faces as it balances industrial needs with the need to confront the full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

The talks are beginning as the fourth anniversary of Russia’s invasion approaches, and the clock is ticking. By June, the EU must adopt the Commission’s plan to shield its market from a glut of global steel.

One diplomat insisted the two files – banning Russian steel and protecting the EU market from overcapacity – pursue “totally different goals”.

Still, the same diplomat acknowledged the ban could pass, as there are not enough member states pushing to maintain a phase-out only by 2028.