The European Union has announced that it will postpone the entry into force of the counter-dati to the USA by 6 months. These countermeasures would have been adopted if the United States had actually imposed duties of 30% starting from 1 August. The agreement between Donald Trump and Ursula von der Leyen should have avoided this hypothesis.
The final text of the commercial agreement between the EU and the USA, however, does not yet exist. There are still many open issues, from the web tax to possible shares on drugs, to exemption lists, to the implementation of the agreements on weapons and energy, on which Brussels has no competence.
The EU has postponed the counter-tooth
The news of the postponement of the European counter-to-date was expected. However, analysts expected a suspension without any future deadline, while the commission preferred to put a six -month limit. Far in time but still fixed, demonstrating the fact that there is no total trust between the EU and the USA.
A written agreement is still missing. The statements of Trump and Von der Leyen remain a commitment, but the open issues that could complicate the signature of the commercial agreement are still different. Some are very sensitive, others instead need details to be clarified from a practical point of view.
The web tax
The most delicate of outstanding issues is the web tax, the tax on digital services. It is a tax levy that would affect companies that provide this type of services in Europe. It would be international, therefore valid throughout the EU territory. This measure, which is still pending in Europe, would have several effects:
- It would prevent large multinationals, such as Apple, Alphabet (Google), Meta (Instagram, Facebook) and Amazon, to pay taxes mainly in countries with advantageous tax regimes, such as Ireland;
- It would balance the financial surplus that the United States companies derive from Europe, which is equal to 108.6 billion dollars, exactly as the duties should balance the commercial surplus of 198 billion dollars that the EU has towards the USA.
Trump has said he was repeatedly against the European web tax and would like the final agreement to exclude it completely. Approaching it would still be complicated for the EU. A European tax requires the approval of all 27 member countries, and certainly were as Ireland, Malta, the Netherlands and Luxembourgs would oppose.
Pharmaceutical products
Another question remained open is that of pharmaceutical products. Trump immediately said they would stay out of the agreement and had a higher customs rate. A problem in particular for Italy, which in 2024 exported more than 10 billion euros of these products in the USA.
Also sources close to the drafting of the agreement, cited by the press agency Handlereport some confusion on the subject. The still points remain:
- a general duty on drugs of 15%;
- The possibility that some products have higher duties.
It is not clear, however, if it will be a separate agreement, to be signed later, or if these rates will also enter the definitive text of the intended signed in Scotland. It is not known even if the duties at 15% on drugs will start from tomorrow 1 August or from another date.
The agreement on weapons and gas
Finally there are the two financial commitments made by the EU in Scotland. In all 1.35 billion dollars, divided into:
- 600 billion dollars of investments in American products, including armaments;
- 750 billion dollars in gas purchases and other American energy products by European companies.
On these themes the main problem is practical. Neither the EU nor much less European states can force, given their laws, private companies to buy products from a specific state. It would be a violation of the rules that regulate the free market. Furthermore, if a purchase scheme of weapons for Ukraine may include in investments, there seems to be a lot of confusion on energy.
In an analysis, the Financial Times He defined the numbers that emerged in Scotland as “spans in the air” and described several reasons why the energy agreement is completely impractical:
- The EU is no longer focusing on gas, but on renewables as a source of energy;
- The American gas, liquefied, transported by sea and then rejoiced, costs much more than the Azero or Algerian one, which arrive via Gasdotto;
- As already explained, the EU cannot force companies to buy gases or energy from a specific source.
