Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

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.



> 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.


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-regulat...


That's not really up for the EU to decide on.


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.


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...

The extra investments pledged under the trade deal would come from private companies, which Brussels conceded it has no power to control.


Politico? We aren't quoting Politico


"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_...


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_...

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.


> 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.


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.


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?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: