Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BumRushDaShow

(171,432 posts)
Fri May 1, 2026, 03:30 PM Yesterday

Trump says he'll place 25% tariff on autos from the EU, accusing it of not complying with trade deal

Source: AP

Updated 3:11 PM EDT, May 1, 2026


WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump said on Friday that he will increase the tariffs charged on cars and trucks from the European Union next week to 25%, a move that could jolt the world economy at a fragile moment.

Trump said in a social media post that the EU “is not complying with our fully agreed to Trade Deal,” though he did not flesh out his objections in the post.

Asked by reporters on Friday about the increase in import taxes as he departed the White House for Florida, Trump said the EU was not “as usual” adhering to last year’s trade framework, without detailing the source of the tension. He added that he believed the shift to higher tariffs “forces them to move their factory production much faster” to the U.S.

Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen had agreed to the trade deal last July. It set a tariff ceiling of 15% on most goods, though the Supreme Court this year ruled against the legal authority that Trump had used to charge that tax. This left Trump looking for substitute authorities, and his administration has imposed a 10% tax while investigating trade imbalances and national security issues to put in new tariffs to make up for lost revenues.

Read more: https://apnews.com/article/trump-tariffs-eu-autos-trade-800e6ed469b73cd4c144edb65e40ba72

19 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Trump says he'll place 25% tariff on autos from the EU, accusing it of not complying with trade deal (Original Post) BumRushDaShow Yesterday OP
I thought the courts decided that El Bloat-O cannot impose tariffs - only congress. Marie Marie Yesterday #1
shitstain could never read past 3rd grade, at most. dave99 Yesterday #2
Republicans have never been ones to obey the law, and Democrats very seldomly hold them accountable LiberalArkie Yesterday #3
"Republicans have never been ones to obey the law, and Democrats very seldomly hold them accountable" BumRushDaShow Yesterday #7
I wasn't really thinking of now as much as in the past LiberalArkie 12 hrs ago #14
How far "in the past"? BumRushDaShow 11 hrs ago #15
Probably at least the Reagan administration. Dismantling public health, housing. The tax cuts, the LiberalArkie 5 hrs ago #17
During Raygun BumRushDaShow 4 hrs ago #18
Can't under International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) pat_k 23 hrs ago #9
hes already used the thirrd one worldwide moonshinegnomie 23 hrs ago #13
SCOTUS said it was unconstitutional to use the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs. Ms. Toad 23 hrs ago #11
what trade deal did they violate and how did they violate it? ChicagoTeamster Yesterday #4
The marmalade shartcannon is just butthurt.... Brother Buzz Yesterday #5
He wanted them to lose ships, troops, and aircraft as well as lose money in the strait of Hormuz ChicagoTeamster Yesterday #6
Well--how can Trump acuse The European Comm. of not folling the trade deal when the USSC said no dice??? riversedge Yesterday #8
This! "Deal" extorted by tariff imposed illegally is void. pat_k 23 hrs ago #10
Someone must have mentioned the Epstein files. n/t flvegan 23 hrs ago #12
Is this another direct order from Putin? notKeith 9 hrs ago #16
He gets itchy to impose tariffs same as he gets itchy to start wars struggle4progress 2 hrs ago #19

Marie Marie

(11,434 posts)
1. I thought the courts decided that El Bloat-O cannot impose tariffs - only congress.
Fri May 1, 2026, 04:54 PM
Yesterday

Is this a loophole or him just ignoring the laws - AGAIN!

LiberalArkie

(19,895 posts)
3. Republicans have never been ones to obey the law, and Democrats very seldomly hold them accountable
Fri May 1, 2026, 05:10 PM
Yesterday

So kind of like spoiling a kid really makes them keep upping the bar.

BumRushDaShow

(171,432 posts)
7. "Republicans have never been ones to obey the law, and Democrats very seldomly hold them accountable"
Fri May 1, 2026, 05:30 PM
Yesterday

Democrats most certainly HAVE tried to hold them accountable...and what happens? The COURTS.

See John Roberts as the #1 example as Chief Protector of all things criminal done by the GOP.

The GOP manages to get "the best 'due process' that money can buy".

BumRushDaShow

(171,432 posts)
15. How far "in the past"?
Sat May 2, 2026, 08:26 AM
11 hrs ago

Roberts was appointed Chief Justice in 2005. That's over 25 years"in the past".

After the 1994 election and Gingrich's "Contract AGAINST America", the GOP took over the House for the first time in 40 years. Democrats were finally able to wrest control back 12 years later in 2006, installing Nancy Pelosi as speaker, and she certainly wasn't a pushover.

The only period where I would agree with you is when Democrats ran away from Obama and the ACA, resulting in a doubled-down bloodbath in 2010, after JOHN ROBERTS delivered "Citizen's United" that same year.

LiberalArkie

(19,895 posts)
17. Probably at least the Reagan administration. Dismantling public health, housing. The tax cuts, the
Sat May 2, 2026, 02:11 PM
5 hrs ago

drastic increase of military spending. The Democratic Party now is a different creature than it was back then.
There are some of us that cry to go back to that time, just to be put in our place.
I even remember the Occupy Wall Street protests and Democratic people really not wanting to say anything (Except maybe Bernie, but he is not a "real Liberal" is he?)

It seems that when D candidates buck the corporate system they WIN.

BumRushDaShow

(171,432 posts)
18. During Raygun
Sat May 2, 2026, 03:11 PM
4 hrs ago

a large number of so-called "Democrats" ran away from the remarkable legacy of Jimmy Carter and switched parties, leaving the party a shell of itself, essentially jettisoning the ideals of "traditional liberalism", and moving towards a more "corporate-friendly "posture.

IOW, like 2016, they fell for a washed up actor who made bold promises, while colluding with the media to kneecap an opponent.

It's been over 40 years and the original thrust of Raygun has been handily thrown under the bus and crushed (although his original personal and corporate tax breaks for the wealthy live on), and it has been a chore to pivot away from classic messaging and campaigning, to have to deal with a bunch of fucking loons, scraped from the depths of an outdoor pit latrine.

pat_k

(13,704 posts)
9. Can't under International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA)
Fri May 1, 2026, 08:08 PM
23 hrs ago

It is only those tariffs imposed under IEEPA that were deemed illegal.

Here is Gemini's list of possible alternative authorities.

Imposing tariffs under one of the first two would certainly be challenged by somebody because there is no factual basis for the rationale. And since he's threatening 25% tariffs, he can't use the third.

Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962: This provision allows the president to impose tariffs if imports threaten national security. Trump has previously used this for steel/aluminum and is, as of May 2026, pivoting to this, as detailed in this Wikipedia article, to target specific sectors.

Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974: This gives the president authority to act against unfair foreign trade practices.

Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974: This allows for temporary (up to 150 days) import duties of up to 15% to address balance-of-payments issues, such as large trade deficits.

moonshinegnomie

(4,047 posts)
13. hes already used the thirrd one worldwide
Fri May 1, 2026, 08:48 PM
23 hrs ago

after te court threw out his first tariffs he used that option and they expire fairly soon.

Ms. Toad

(38,765 posts)
11. SCOTUS said it was unconstitutional to use the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs.
Fri May 1, 2026, 08:36 PM
23 hrs ago

It didn't say they couldn't be imposed under another authority.

ChicagoTeamster

(1,167 posts)
4. what trade deal did they violate and how did they violate it?
Fri May 1, 2026, 05:10 PM
Yesterday

Now that he posted his stupid screed about Germany, Italy, and Spain as a screen for abandoning our NATO allies, he needs an excuse to energize the MAGA base. He's an idiot who thinks that as long as he throws out simplistic explanations as he does things the idiots will just wave their MAGA and Trump flags and accept higher prices and more job losses. That's his fix to losing the mid terms.

Brother Buzz

(40,237 posts)
5. The marmalade shartcannon is just butthurt....
Fri May 1, 2026, 05:20 PM
Yesterday

Because EU didn’t jump in and support his war with Iran.

ChicagoTeamster

(1,167 posts)
6. He wanted them to lose ships, troops, and aircraft as well as lose money in the strait of Hormuz
Fri May 1, 2026, 05:24 PM
Yesterday

so that they wouldn't have the resources to fight Vlad. They wouldn't fall for it and now he's implementing Vlad's follow up plan.

riversedge

(81,360 posts)
8. Well--how can Trump acuse The European Comm. of not folling the trade deal when the USSC said no dice???
Fri May 1, 2026, 07:56 PM
Yesterday



...........Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen had agreed to the trade deal last July. It set a tariff ceiling of 15% on most goods, though the Supreme Court this year ruled against the legal authority that Trump had used to charge that tax..

pat_k

(13,704 posts)
10. This! "Deal" extorted by tariff imposed illegally is void.
Fri May 1, 2026, 08:14 PM
23 hrs ago

I have no idea what was actually signed -- if anything (seems some of the felon's announced "deals" have never been put in writing or signed by anyone) but I can't imagine how it would have been framed that would not result in it being rendered void when the tariff imposed to extort the "deal" was struck down.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Trump says he'll place 25...