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 years 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
Marie Marie
(11,434 posts)Is this a loophole or him just ignoring the laws - AGAIN!
dave99
(145 posts)LiberalArkie
(19,895 posts)So kind of like spoiling a kid really makes them keep upping the bar.
BumRushDaShow
(171,432 posts)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".
LiberalArkie
(19,895 posts)BumRushDaShow
(171,432 posts)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)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)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)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 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)after te court threw out his first tariffs he used that option and they expire fairly soon.
Ms. Toad
(38,765 posts)It didn't say they couldn't be imposed under another authority.
ChicagoTeamster
(1,167 posts)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)Because EU didnt jump in and support his war with Iran.
ChicagoTeamster
(1,167 posts)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)...........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)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.
flvegan
(66,442 posts)notKeith
(156 posts)Curious minds want to know.