3 ms·

The EU recognized that the US placed a large tax on American consumers and saw no reason to place a similar tax on European consumers. They'll just ramp up eco

The EU recognized that the US placed a large tax on American consumers and saw no reason to place a similar tax on European consumers. They'll just ramp up economic production and turn toward China like we're seeing with BYD penetration.

petcat 1y ago
> US placed a large tax on American consumers The 15% flat tariff (with 0% reciprocal tariff), was only a small part of the agreement. > They'll just ramp up economic production and turn toward China like we're seeing with BYD penetration. EU also agreed to $750 billion in USA energy purchases over the next three years and another $600 billion in miscellaneous investments in USA companies and industries.
- sasvari 1y ago
  That's not really up for the EU to decide on.
  - petcat 1y ago
    The EU negotiates as a bloc. If the trade deal includes $750 billion in energy purchases and $600 billion in investments, those commitments came from the EU's negotiating mandate, not from separate members acting on their own. Maybe some of the EU member states don't like how the "union" operates. In that case, they should pull a Brexit. We already saw it happen once.
    - sasvari 1y ago
      Neither the EU, nor its member states, have the power to make investment decisions on behalf of private companies. https://www.politico.eu/article/eus-600bn-us-investment-will-come-exclusively-from-private-sector/ https://www.politico.eu/article/eus-600bn-us-investment-will... The extra investments pledged under the trade deal would come from private companies, which Brussels conceded it has no power to control.
      - petcat 1y ago
        Politico? We aren't quoting Politico
        lossolo 1y ago
        "EU companies have expressed interest in investing at least $600 billion (ca. €550 billion) in various sectors in the US by 2029"[1] 1. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_25_1930 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_...
    - CogitoCogito 1y ago
      I'm not sure where you're getting your information, but this is a quote from the European Commission itself: > The political agreement of 27 July 2025 is not legally binding. Beyond taking the immediate actions committed, the EU and the US will further negotiate, in line with their relevant internal procedures, to fully implement the political agreement. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_25_1930 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_... You might consider updating your mistaken prior beliefs. Edit: I see another comment made the same point. I'll have to presume that after you've been presented with this new information, you'll realize that you are in fact very wrong.
- ants_everywhere 1y ago
  That stuff isn't legally binding and is unlikely to happen. > The European Union's pledge to buy $250 billion of U.S. energy supplies per year is unrealistic because it would require the redirection of most U.S. energy exports towards Europe [0, emphasis mine] [0] https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/boards-policy-regulation/eus-250-billion-per-year-spending-us-energy-is-unrealistic-2025-07-28/ https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/boards-policy-regulat...
- underlipton 1y ago
  America also agreed to quite a few things, alongside the EU, with the Iranian nuclear deal. Then, we left the EU hanging when we pulled out. One could be forgiven for thinking that "done deals" are renegotiable in the current paradigm.
- ben_w 1y ago
  > EU also agreed to $750 billion in USA energy purchases over the next three years and another $600 billion in miscellaneous investments in USA companies and industries. Kinda. The EU have no power to make that happen, so it was more of an agreement to aim for that. But even if the EU buys, say, $750bn oil and natural gas from the USA, because of how interchangeable most (but not all) of that stuff is, even if they did agree to it in an enforceable manner it would only really mean the EU wouldn't buy the same stuff from somewhere else and also the USA wouldn't sell the same stuff to someone else.
corimaith 1y ago
They'll turn toward China by increasing imports and thus reduce their surplus in response to US tariffs that were aimed to reduce said surplus?

petcat 1y ago

> US placed a large tax on American consumers The 15% flat tariff (with 0% reciprocal tariff), was only a small part of the agreement. > They'll just ramp up economic production and turn toward China like we're seeing with BYD penetration. EU also agreed to $750 billion in USA energy purchases over the next three years and another $600 billion in miscellaneous investments in USA companies and industries.

sasvari 1y ago
That's not really up for the EU to decide on.
- petcat 1y ago
  The EU negotiates as a bloc. If the trade deal includes $750 billion in energy purchases and $600 billion in investments, those commitments came from the EU's negotiating mandate, not from separate members acting on their own. Maybe some of the EU member states don't like how the "union" operates. In that case, they should pull a Brexit. We already saw it happen once.
  - sasvari 1y ago
    Neither the EU, nor its member states, have the power to make investment decisions on behalf of private companies. https://www.politico.eu/article/eus-600bn-us-investment-will-come-exclusively-from-private-sector/ https://www.politico.eu/article/eus-600bn-us-investment-will... The extra investments pledged under the trade deal would come from private companies, which Brussels conceded it has no power to control.
    - petcat 1y ago
      Politico? We aren't quoting Politico
      - lossolo 1y ago
        "EU companies have expressed interest in investing at least $600 billion (ca. €550 billion) in various sectors in the US by 2029"[1] 1. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_25_1930 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_...
  - CogitoCogito 1y ago
    I'm not sure where you're getting your information, but this is a quote from the European Commission itself: > The political agreement of 27 July 2025 is not legally binding. Beyond taking the immediate actions committed, the EU and the US will further negotiate, in line with their relevant internal procedures, to fully implement the political agreement. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_25_1930 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_... You might consider updating your mistaken prior beliefs. Edit: I see another comment made the same point. I'll have to presume that after you've been presented with this new information, you'll realize that you are in fact very wrong.
ants_everywhere 1y ago
That stuff isn't legally binding and is unlikely to happen. > The European Union's pledge to buy $250 billion of U.S. energy supplies per year is unrealistic because it would require the redirection of most U.S. energy exports towards Europe [0, emphasis mine] [0] https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/boards-policy-regulation/eus-250-billion-per-year-spending-us-energy-is-unrealistic-2025-07-28/ https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/boards-policy-regulat...
underlipton 1y ago
America also agreed to quite a few things, alongside the EU, with the Iranian nuclear deal. Then, we left the EU hanging when we pulled out. One could be forgiven for thinking that "done deals" are renegotiable in the current paradigm.
ben_w 1y ago
> EU also agreed to $750 billion in USA energy purchases over the next three years and another $600 billion in miscellaneous investments in USA companies and industries. Kinda. The EU have no power to make that happen, so it was more of an agreement to aim for that. But even if the EU buys, say, $750bn oil and natural gas from the USA, because of how interchangeable most (but not all) of that stuff is, even if they did agree to it in an enforceable manner it would only really mean the EU wouldn't buy the same stuff from somewhere else and also the USA wouldn't sell the same stuff to someone else.

corimaith 1y ago

They'll turn toward China by increasing imports and thus reduce their surplus in response to US tariffs that were aimed to reduce said surplus?