From the Europeans’ point of view, it would be a success if the week with the American visitors went off without any major upsets. After US Vice-President JD Vance was in Paris yesterday, the new US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth is eagerly awaited in Brussels today. The American is traveling to Brussels for a meeting of the Ukraine Contact Group before the alliance partners meet in the North Atlantic Council on Thursday.
Unlike his predecessor, Pete Hegseth will not be chairing this afternoon’s meeting in the Ramstein format. In his place, British Defense Secretary John Healey will chair the meeting, a first. At NATO headquarters, this will not be seenas a bad omen or a sign that the new US administration wants to withdraw from supporting Ukraine. Organizational reasons are said to be the decisive factor. It is also unclear whether there will be any rotation at all in the future or whether the US Secretary of Defense will take over again once he has been trained.
For the time being, the dominant hope is that Hegseth will commit to both continued support for Ukraineand thetransatlantic alliance at the two-day meeting. The Europeans will do a lot to put the Americans in a favorable mood. They are aware that they will have to take on greater burdens within NATO and also in supporting Ukraine in the future. They also want to make this clear to the newcomer.
However, it is quite possible that the Trump administration’s plans will not be clear until Friday, when Europeans and Americans meet at the Munich Security Conference.
Get the day off to a good start.
Your Stephan Israel
Feature
Steel tariffs: What consequences Trump’s announcement could have for Europe
“I deeply regret the US decision to impose tariffs on European steel and aluminum exports,” said Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in a statement on Tuesday morning. On Monday, US President Donald Trump signed a proclamation stating that the 25 percent tariffs on steel and aluminum will come into force on March 12.
“Unjustified tariffs against the EU will not go unanswered – they will trigger decisive and proportionate counter-reactions,” said von der Leyen. Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič, who spoke in Parliament in Strasbourg, expressed similar sentiments. “We will always protect our interests from unjustified measures,” he said. “That time has come.”
Commission wants to avoid escalation
The Commission has not yet announced any specific measures, partly because the declaration signed by Trump does not yet have the force of law. On the one hand, not all details of the US measures are yet known and, on the other, the timing of the communication of potential countermeasures is also part of the EU strategy, said a Commission spokesperson.
By communicating cautiously, the Commission wants to avoid escalating the impending trade conflict itself – and thus providing Trump with a template. If the US President imposes higher tariffs on certain product groups, the Commission wants to respond proportionally to comparable import volumes of US goods. Always combined with the signal that it is prepared to negotiate.
Bernd Lange (SPD), Chairman of the EU Parliament’s Trade Committee, was more explicit: “If we have not reached an agreement by March 12 – we will of course negotiate now – then there will be these counter-tariffs from April 1,” said Lange in Strasbourg.
Even higher US tariffs this time
He is referring to currently suspended special tariffs on US products such as jeans, bourbon whiskey, motorcycles, and peanut butter, which the EU had already agreed to in the first tariff dispute with Trump in 2018. Following an agreement with the Biden administration, the EU temporarily lifted the tariffs. However, they will come back into force at the end of March without the need for a new decision.
In 2018, Trump also imposed a 25 percent tax on steel, but only ten percent on aluminum. Now he has announced 25% on both product groups. The EU would therefore have a reason to further tighten its countermeasures. On Wednesday afternoon, the EU trade ministers will meet in a video conference, before which the Committee of Permanent Representatives will discuss the issue.
Von der Leyen met with US Vice-President JD Vance yesterday, Tuesday, following the AI Action Summit in Paris. During the meeting, the Commission President emphasized that the EU is committed to fair trade relations, according to a statement from the Commission. Both politicians also reaffirmed the strength of relations between the EU and the USA.
Steel industry concerned about increasing import pressure
For the European steel industry, US tariffs are making exports to the most important customer region outside the EU more difficult. According to the industry association Eurofer, European companies sold 3.7 million tons of steel, or 16% of their exports, to the USA in 2024. In the first tariff dispute in 2018, steel exports to the USA had already halved once. After the interim agreement, these deliveries increased again, but did notreach the previous volume.
European steel manufacturers are even more concerned about whether they will now face even more competition from abroad as a result of the US tariff policy, as the US tariffs also affect supplier countries such as Canada, Mexico and Brazil. The German Steel Federation (WV Stahl), for example, fears that these “traditional steel supplier countries will now lose their sales opportunities” in the USA “and increasingly focus on the open EU market”.
The industry observed a similar effect when Chinese exports to the USA were restricted. According to WV Stahl, EU imports from Asia, including a large proportion from China, increased by 187% between 2013 and 2023. Experts refer to this as detour effects.
Steel manufacturers are therefore hoping that the EU Commission will soon respond to the demands for protectionist measures that they have been making for some time. These include a revision of the “EU Safeguards”, which have been in place since 2018 and will initially apply until mid-2026. These protective measures provide for preferential import quotas, while imports into the EU that exceed these quotas are subject to customs duties.
“Over the last six years, the safeguard clause has lost its effectiveness,” said Eurofer President Henrik Adam on Tuesday. The quotas for preferential imports are too high. Adam also called for “a comprehensive customs system” to protect the domestic steel industry from global overcapacity.
Trump wants to impose reciprocal tariffs
The US President also announced on Sunday that he would impose reciprocal tariffs. This means that he will raise tariffs where the US currently charges less than its trading partners. However, the details are still unknown. At the time of going to press, Trump had not yet carried out his threat of reciprocal tariffs. There are tariff differences between the USA and the EU, particularly in the automotive industry. The EU imposes a tariff of ten percent, while the USA only charges 2.5%. In addition to the direct effect of higher tariffs on EU exporters, there is also a risk that reciprocal tariffs will have a redirection effect from other US trading partners to the EU.
The levying of reciprocal tariffs contradicts the WTO’s “Most Favored Nation” (MFN) principle, according to which a state (or a federation of states) must treat all trading partners equally when levying tariffs unless otherwise agreed in a free trade agreement.
It is well known that Trump does not attach much importance to WTO rules. However, by imposing reciprocal tariffs, he is also making it more difficult for other countries to adhere to the MFN principle. For example, if the EU wanted to prevent the US from imposing reciprocal tariffs on cars by lowering the tariff on US cars, it would theoretically have to do the same for all other trading partners.
Duties
Industry
Steel
Trade
Trade policy
USA
Translation missing.
Klaus Iohannis: Why the President is stepping down after ten years in office
Klaus Iohannis on Romania’s national holiday in Bucharest: Nationalist parties have been trying to impeach the president for some time. Now he is resigning.
In order to avoid impeachment proceedings, Romania’s President Klaus Iohannis has announced his resignation as of today, Wednesday. The proceedings had been initiated by nationalist parties. This marks the end of a 25-year era in Romanian politics, at least for the time being.
It began at the start of this millennium when Iohannis was elected mayor of Sibiu. In just a few years, the Transylvanian Saxon managed to develop his hometown at the foot of the Southern Carpathians into a kind of model city for Romania. He also attracted investors from Germany, rapidly renovated the old town, renewed the city’s infrastructure and made Sibiu internationally renowned as the European City of Culture in 2007. Three times, the residents confirmed him in office as mayor with a large majority.
Many held him responsible for the political crisis in the country
The popularity he gained locally radiated nationally. He initially took over the chairmanship of the National Liberal Party (PNL) and was elected President of Romania in 2014. During the presidential election campaign, he presented himself as a fighter against corruption and for the rule of law. However, during his two terms in office in the Cotroceni presidential palace, a different image also emerged. On several occasions, Romanian media reported on supposedly luxurious trips abroad, thereby tarnishing his righteous image.
The nationalist parties initiated impeachment proceedings against him back in November 2021. Reason: alleged “repeated violations of the constitution”. Surveys at the time showed that a good third of Romanians considered him responsible for the political crisis in their country. This ultimately led to the formation of the left-right coalition between the post-communist Social Democratic Party (PSD) and the PNL, which is once again in power today.
Sharp criticism not only from the far right
Four years later, the nationalist forces led by the far-right and Russia-friendly Călin Georgescu celebrated the resignation of President Iohannis as a “victory for the Romanian people”. Georgescu had won the first round of the presidential election, which was annulled shortly afterwards. The fact that Iohannis had extendedhis term of office, which ends on Dec. 21, 2024, until the election of a new head of state in May 2025, makes him an anti-constitutional “usurper” in their eyes. Now it is “time to return to the rule of law and resume the second round of presidential elections”, Georgescu demanded on X.
Elena Lasconi, chairwoman of the liberal Union for the Salvation of Romania (USR), which is regarded as an anti-corruption party, made similarly harsh comments. She had come second behind Georgescu in the canceled run-off election for the office of head of state. In her opinion, Iohannis’ resignation came “far too late to be considered honorable“. Nor did he provide an answer to the question that has been plaguing the country for two months, namely why the elections were canceled. As “someone who believed in him”, she notes that “after ten years of Iohannis in the Cotroceni, Romania is unfortunately more vulnerable than ever”. Romanian democracy had crumbled during his presidency, which was “unforgivable”.
Government coalition has probably suggested that Iohannis resign
PSD Chairman and Prime Minister Marcel Ciolacu has declared on behalf of the governing coalition that it had no knowledge of the president’s intention to resign. But many doubt this. In an interview with Radio Free Europe Romania, political analyst Radu Magdin said that he was convinced that it was not only pressure from the nationalist and liberal opposition that prompted Iohannis to resign. “For sure”, he had “received signals from the coalition”. His resignation was also in the interests of the ruling coalition’s joint presidential candidate. Crin Antonescu is now free of the “political burden on his shoulders” in the upcoming presidential election campaign.
Iohannis’ predecessor in office, Traian Băsescu, also delivered a harsh verdict, although his arguments went in a different direction from those of the opposition parties. “A president does not abdicate, only kings abdicate. A president completes his term,” he said in an interview with Euronews Romania, calling Iohannis’ resignation an “act of cowardice”. Until a new head of state is elected, the current President of the Senate and PNL leader Ilie Bolojan will lead Romania as interim president.
Demokratie
Translation missing.
News
EU budget: Commission calls for radical reform and more own resources
The Commission is calling for directional decisions from the member states on the new Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF). “The repayment of Next Generation EU and an EU budget that lives up to our ambitions cannot be reconciled with stable national financial contributions and the lack of new own resources,” reads the Commission’s draft communication on the MFF, which is to be published today and was made available to Table.Briefings.
The repayment of loans from the Corona recovery program alone will consume around EUR 25 to 30 billion per year, which corresponds to almost 20 percent of the current EU annual budget. The Commission is therefore calling on governments to pave the way for new EU own resources. Negotiations on this have been stuck in the Council for a long time.
‘Status quo is not an option’
As was already leaked in the fall, the Commission is also in favor of a far-reaching reform of financial planning. “The status quo is not an option”, the paper states. At the beginning of the current 2021-2027 fiscal period, more than 90 percent of the expenditure from the MFF and Next Gen EU had been firmly allocated. This lacks the necessary flexibility to react appropriately to unforeseen developments and crises. In addition, the more than 50 spending programs pursue partly overlapping objectives.
As an alternative, the Commission proposes bundling the funds per member state in a plan that also links the funds to structural reforms and investments. The regions and municipalities are to be involved in this. A newly created competitiveness fund is to bundle investments in strategic sectors. There is to be a further fund for relations with third countries. At the same time, the rule of law conditionalities in the joint budget are to be strengthened.
The communication is intended to kick-start the debate on the next MFF. The Commission’s concrete proposal is expected in the summer. tho
EU-Haushalt
AI Action Summit: Vance does not sign final declaration
US Vice-President JD Vance was clear in his speech at the AI Action Summit in Paris. “I’m not here this morning to talk about AI safety, which was the title of the conference a few years ago. I’m here to talk about AI opportunities,” said Vance. In particular, he spoke about AI opportunities in the USA. Commission President Ursula von der Leyen also focused on the word action. She made it clear that Europe also wants to become a leading AI continent. This means adopting a way of life in which AI is everywhere.
The two-day summit on artificial intelligence in Paris brought together around 1,500 participants from around 100 countries. These included heads of state and government, representatives of companies, and NGOs. At the end of the summit, around 60 countries called for the transparent and sustainable use of AI with internationally valid regulations. Germany, the EU and China are among the signatories, but the USA and the UK are not. At the summit, further investments worth billions in AIwere also announced.
Vance criticizes EU regulations
Vance outlined the Trump administration’s “America First” agenda. He stated that the US intends to remain the dominant force in AI and will strongly oppose the European Union’s much tougher regulatory approach. He warned that excessive regulation of the AI sector could bring the transformative industry to a standstill. Vance criticized the “massive regulations” of the Digital Services Act (DSA) and the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation, which meant endless compliance costs for smaller companies.
The US Vice-President was also critical of China. “From CCTV to 5G devices, we are all familiar with cheap technologies on the market that are heavily subsidized and exported by authoritarian regimes.” He added that partnering with such regimes meant chaining his country to an authoritarian master who was trying to undermine the information technology infrastructure.
Von der Leyen announces InvestAI
The EU Commission President warned that Europe must not be too late in the global race for AI. She emphasized that Europe should invest in its own strengths and build on what it does best, namely its scientific and technological expertise. “We want AI to be a force for good and for growth,” said von der Leyen. “We are doing this with our own European approach, which is based on openness, collaboration, and excellent talent.” However, the approach still needs to gain strength.
To this end, von der Leyen announced the “InvestAI” initiative. This unique public-private partnership, as she called it, will enable scientists and companies to “develop the most advanced, very large models needed to make Europe an AI continent”. The aim of the initiative is to mobilize EUR 200 billion of investment in AI. This includes a new European fund of EUR 20 billion for AI gigafactories. vis
Artificial Intelligence Regulation
Digital policy
Digital Services Act
Ursula von der Leyen
Consumer advocates demand ban on personalized advertising
The Federation of German Consumer Organizations (VZBV) is calling for a ban on tracking and profiling for advertising purposes. These practices pose serious risks for consumers and society. “Consumers are powerless against the practices of the advertising industry,” said Michaela Schröder, Head of Consumer Policy at the VZBV. The existing laws are not enough. “A ban on tracking and profiling is the only way to protect consumers in the long term.”
In its position paper, the VZBV writes that the EU should introduce a new horizontal legal framework to counter the risks posed by profiling and tracking for advertising purposes. Such a framework should set clear limits for data processing, prescribe appropriate transparency measures, and strengthen enforcement mechanisms.
“The exploitation of digital asymmetries and vulnerabilities requires protective measures that go beyond the limited instrument of individual consent,” says the paper,which is available to Table.Briefings. This is the only way to safeguard the interests of society and fundamental rights in the digital age.
Expert opinion: DSA and GDPR are not sufficient for protection
The association commissioned an expert report to support its position. The authors Max von Grafenstein and Nina Elisabeth Herbort come to the conclusion that tracking and profiling for advertising purposes lead to manipulation, discrimination and a loss of trust. The authors argue that existing laws such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and theDigital Services Act (DSA)do not effectively curb these risks.
Although Article 25 of the GDPR (data protection by design) is a powerful tool to counteract the practical limitations of informed consent, it is not sufficient. The authors therefore recommend shifting the focus from consent to a ban on personalized advertising.
Ban is the last resort
The authors also discuss more specific prohibition approaches, for example in relation to certain types of data, certain groups or actors. They consider a ban on the processing of personal data of vulnerable groups to be particularly acceptable. However, a general ban is the ultima ratio if the risks cannot be effectively contained due to the coordination effort of specific bans.
The report argues that a ban would create a level playing field. Although this would lead to economic losses and disregard for heterogeneous preferences, the need for effective consumer protection should be valued more highly. vis
Verbraucherschutz
Omnibus: Gesamtmetall calls for the procedure to be extended
The Confederation of Metal and Electrical Industry Employers’ Associations, Gesamtmetall, is calling for the omnibus procedure to be extended. In an analysis of seven EU directives and regulations, which is available to Table.Briefings, it concludes that the overlaps between the laws are greater than previously assumed.
“According to the EU Commission’s current plans, the omnibus is just a cab with three seats. Limiting the upcoming Omnibus Regulation to the Sustainability Reporting and Supply Chain Directive and the Taxonomy Regulation is not nearly enough,” said Managing Director Oliver Zander to Table.Briefings.
Accordingly, the Forced Labor Products, Deforestation, Conflict Minerals and Batteries Regulations should also be included. “The product-related due diligence obligations contained therein are superfluous and must be deleted, as they are already covered by the Supply Chain Directive.”
Gesamtmetall: It is unclear which regulation applies
According to the Gesamtmetall analysis, there are also contradictions in the texts. For example, the European Supply Chain Directive (CSDDD) refers in part to the fact that specifications in the Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) are “authoritative”. In turn, the EUDR states that other legal acts of the Union “may not be excluded”. It therefore remains unclear which regulation is applicable.
Zander: “The EU Commission must now present a comprehensive proposal on all seven legal acts if it is really serious about reducing bureaucracy for companies. The cab must become a fully-fledged omnibus.”
Gesamtmetall has not considered whether the laws are not sufficiently coordinated in terms of climate and environmental action.
Commission rejects criticism of fast-track procedures
Meanwhile, the EU Commission rejects criticism of the implementation of the omnibus fast-track procedure. Last week, environmental and social organizations described it as “chaotic” and “undemocratic” because, among other things, there was no formal consultation procedure. The Commission is also not sufficiently investigating the possible consequences of the planned simplification of sustainability laws and is ignoring previous results.
A spokesperson for the Commission has now informed Table.Briefings that “extensive” impact assessments have already been carried out on the laws. In view of the pressing challenges facing many companies, “swift action” is needed instead. However, an analysis report is planned, according to the spokesperson. This approach would be in line with its own Better Regulation Policy, as this is an urgent case.
For trade unions and NGOs, however, the results of the recently conducted impact assessments are a major reason to doubt the fast-track procedure. For example, the impact assessment on theEU Supply Chain Directive (CSDDD) came to the conclusion that although the law would put companies at a competitive disadvantage in the short term, the additional costs for them would still be “relatively low”. According to the Commission’s statement at the time, they could evenexpect competitive advantages in the medium and long term. maw, lei
Europäische Kommission
Sorgfaltspflichten
Dessert
The Commission’s work program makes it official: The time change is here to stay
It happens twice a year: The debate about the time change. Many Germans don’t like having to change the clocks in spring and fall. According to a survey conducted by YouGov in 2023, 75% of Germans would abolish the time change.
Some people, however, including the author, find the eternal discussion about clock times more tiring than the missing hour of sleep at the start of summertime. This may also be the case for the Commission: it has removed a planned directive to abolish the clock change from its to-do list. This emerges from the draft work programfor 2025, which is available to Table.Briefings. The reason: “An agreement is not in sight.” There have been no talks on this topic since 2019.
The then Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker sounded very determined when he announced in 2018 that the time changeover would soon be history. This was preceded by a non-representative survey conducted by the Commission, in which more than 80 percent of participants were in favor of abolishing it. Under Juncker, the Commission presented a proposal for a directive. However, the Council could not agree on whether to say goodbye to summer or winter time. And so nothing happened.
New attempt by Parliament
Last year, EU parliamentarians made another attempt and called on Juncker’s successor Ursula von der Leyen in a letter to promote the abolition of the time changeover. The current system is outdated, they said. Over 60 MEPs from various countries and political groups signed the letter.
But apparently that didn’t help. This is bad news for a majority in Germany – but perhaps not so much for people in other countries. In Spain, for example, only 46% would like to see it abolished. The Commission’s survey from 2018 also very clearly reflects the attitude here, with the majority of respondents coming from Germany.
But one of them now wants to get serious: A few weeks ago, US President Donald Trump announced his intention to abolish daylight saving time. Sarah Schaefer
From the Europeans’ point of view, it would be a success if the week with the American visitors went off without any major upsets. After US Vice-President JD Vance was in Paris yesterday, the new US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth is eagerly awaited in Brussels today. The American is traveling to Brussels for a meeting of the Ukraine Contact Group before the alliance partners meet in the North Atlantic Council on Thursday.
Unlike his predecessor, Pete Hegseth will not be chairing this afternoon’s meeting in the Ramstein format. In his place, British Defense Secretary John Healey will chair the meeting, a first. At NATO headquarters, this will not be seenas a bad omen or a sign that the new US administration wants to withdraw from supporting Ukraine. Organizational reasons are said to be the decisive factor. It is also unclear whether there will be any rotation at all in the future or whether the US Secretary of Defense will take over again once he has been trained.
For the time being, the dominant hope is that Hegseth will commit to both continued support for Ukraineand thetransatlantic alliance at the two-day meeting. The Europeans will do a lot to put the Americans in a favorable mood. They are aware that they will have to take on greater burdens within NATO and also in supporting Ukraine in the future. They also want to make this clear to the newcomer.
However, it is quite possible that the Trump administration’s plans will not be clear until Friday, when Europeans and Americans meet at the Munich Security Conference.
Get the day off to a good start.
Your Stephan Israel
Feature
Steel tariffs: What consequences Trump’s announcement could have for Europe
“I deeply regret the US decision to impose tariffs on European steel and aluminum exports,” said Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in a statement on Tuesday morning. On Monday, US President Donald Trump signed a proclamation stating that the 25 percent tariffs on steel and aluminum will come into force on March 12.
“Unjustified tariffs against the EU will not go unanswered – they will trigger decisive and proportionate counter-reactions,” said von der Leyen. Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič, who spoke in Parliament in Strasbourg, expressed similar sentiments. “We will always protect our interests from unjustified measures,” he said. “That time has come.”
Commission wants to avoid escalation
The Commission has not yet announced any specific measures, partly because the declaration signed by Trump does not yet have the force of law. On the one hand, not all details of the US measures are yet known and, on the other, the timing of the communication of potential countermeasures is also part of the EU strategy, said a Commission spokesperson.
By communicating cautiously, the Commission wants to avoid escalating the impending trade conflict itself – and thus providing Trump with a template. If the US President imposes higher tariffs on certain product groups, the Commission wants to respond proportionally to comparable import volumes of US goods. Always combined with the signal that it is prepared to negotiate.
Bernd Lange (SPD), Chairman of the EU Parliament’s Trade Committee, was more explicit: “If we have not reached an agreement by March 12 – we will of course negotiate now – then there will be these counter-tariffs from April 1,” said Lange in Strasbourg.
Even higher US tariffs this time
He is referring to currently suspended special tariffs on US products such as jeans, bourbon whiskey, motorcycles, and peanut butter, which the EU had already agreed to in the first tariff dispute with Trump in 2018. Following an agreement with the Biden administration, the EU temporarily lifted the tariffs. However, they will come back into force at the end of March without the need for a new decision.
In 2018, Trump also imposed a 25 percent tax on steel, but only ten percent on aluminum. Now he has announced 25% on both product groups. The EU would therefore have a reason to further tighten its countermeasures. On Wednesday afternoon, the EU trade ministers will meet in a video conference, before which the Committee of Permanent Representatives will discuss the issue.
Von der Leyen met with US Vice-President JD Vance yesterday, Tuesday, following the AI Action Summit in Paris. During the meeting, the Commission President emphasized that the EU is committed to fair trade relations, according to a statement from the Commission. Both politicians also reaffirmed the strength of relations between the EU and the USA.
Steel industry concerned about increasing import pressure
For the European steel industry, US tariffs are making exports to the most important customer region outside the EU more difficult. According to the industry association Eurofer, European companies sold 3.7 million tons of steel, or 16% of their exports, to the USA in 2024. In the first tariff dispute in 2018, steel exports to the USA had already halved once. After the interim agreement, these deliveries increased again, but did notreach the previous volume.
European steel manufacturers are even more concerned about whether they will now face even more competition from abroad as a result of the US tariff policy, as the US tariffs also affect supplier countries such as Canada, Mexico and Brazil. The German Steel Federation (WV Stahl), for example, fears that these “traditional steel supplier countries will now lose their sales opportunities” in the USA “and increasingly focus on the open EU market”.
The industry observed a similar effect when Chinese exports to the USA were restricted. According to WV Stahl, EU imports from Asia, including a large proportion from China, increased by 187% between 2013 and 2023. Experts refer to this as detour effects.
Steel manufacturers are therefore hoping that the EU Commission will soon respond to the demands for protectionist measures that they have been making for some time. These include a revision of the “EU Safeguards”, which have been in place since 2018 and will initially apply until mid-2026. These protective measures provide for preferential import quotas, while imports into the EU that exceed these quotas are subject to customs duties.
“Over the last six years, the safeguard clause has lost its effectiveness,” said Eurofer President Henrik Adam on Tuesday. The quotas for preferential imports are too high. Adam also called for “a comprehensive customs system” to protect the domestic steel industry from global overcapacity.
Trump wants to impose reciprocal tariffs
The US President also announced on Sunday that he would impose reciprocal tariffs. This means that he will raise tariffs where the US currently charges less than its trading partners. However, the details are still unknown. At the time of going to press, Trump had not yet carried out his threat of reciprocal tariffs. There are tariff differences between the USA and the EU, particularly in the automotive industry. The EU imposes a tariff of ten percent, while the USA only charges 2.5%. In addition to the direct effect of higher tariffs on EU exporters, there is also a risk that reciprocal tariffs will have a redirection effect from other US trading partners to the EU.
The levying of reciprocal tariffs contradicts the WTO’s “Most Favored Nation” (MFN) principle, according to which a state (or a federation of states) must treat all trading partners equally when levying tariffs unless otherwise agreed in a free trade agreement.
It is well known that Trump does not attach much importance to WTO rules. However, by imposing reciprocal tariffs, he is also making it more difficult for other countries to adhere to the MFN principle. For example, if the EU wanted to prevent the US from imposing reciprocal tariffs on cars by lowering the tariff on US cars, it would theoretically have to do the same for all other trading partners.
Duties
Industry
Steel
Trade
Trade policy
USA
Translation missing.
Klaus Iohannis: Why the President is stepping down after ten years in office
Klaus Iohannis on Romania’s national holiday in Bucharest: Nationalist parties have been trying to impeach the president for some time. Now he is resigning.
In order to avoid impeachment proceedings, Romania’s President Klaus Iohannis has announced his resignation as of today, Wednesday. The proceedings had been initiated by nationalist parties. This marks the end of a 25-year era in Romanian politics, at least for the time being.
It began at the start of this millennium when Iohannis was elected mayor of Sibiu. In just a few years, the Transylvanian Saxon managed to develop his hometown at the foot of the Southern Carpathians into a kind of model city for Romania. He also attracted investors from Germany, rapidly renovated the old town, renewed the city’s infrastructure and made Sibiu internationally renowned as the European City of Culture in 2007. Three times, the residents confirmed him in office as mayor with a large majority.
Many held him responsible for the political crisis in the country
The popularity he gained locally radiated nationally. He initially took over the chairmanship of the National Liberal Party (PNL) and was elected President of Romania in 2014. During the presidential election campaign, he presented himself as a fighter against corruption and for the rule of law. However, during his two terms in office in the Cotroceni presidential palace, a different image also emerged. On several occasions, Romanian media reported on supposedly luxurious trips abroad, thereby tarnishing his righteous image.
The nationalist parties initiated impeachment proceedings against him back in November 2021. Reason: alleged “repeated violations of the constitution”. Surveys at the time showed that a good third of Romanians considered him responsible for the political crisis in their country. This ultimately led to the formation of the left-right coalition between the post-communist Social Democratic Party (PSD) and the PNL, which is once again in power today.
Sharp criticism not only from the far right
Four years later, the nationalist forces led by the far-right and Russia-friendly Călin Georgescu celebrated the resignation of President Iohannis as a “victory for the Romanian people”. Georgescu had won the first round of the presidential election, which was annulled shortly afterwards. The fact that Iohannis had extendedhis term of office, which ends on Dec. 21, 2024, until the election of a new head of state in May 2025, makes him an anti-constitutional “usurper” in their eyes. Now it is “time to return to the rule of law and resume the second round of presidential elections”, Georgescu demanded on X.
Elena Lasconi, chairwoman of the liberal Union for the Salvation of Romania (USR), which is regarded as an anti-corruption party, made similarly harsh comments. She had come second behind Georgescu in the canceled run-off election for the office of head of state. In her opinion, Iohannis’ resignation came “far too late to be considered honorable“. Nor did he provide an answer to the question that has been plaguing the country for two months, namely why the elections were canceled. As “someone who believed in him”, she notes that “after ten years of Iohannis in the Cotroceni, Romania is unfortunately more vulnerable than ever”. Romanian democracy had crumbled during his presidency, which was “unforgivable”.
Government coalition has probably suggested that Iohannis resign
PSD Chairman and Prime Minister Marcel Ciolacu has declared on behalf of the governing coalition that it had no knowledge of the president’s intention to resign. But many doubt this. In an interview with Radio Free Europe Romania, political analyst Radu Magdin said that he was convinced that it was not only pressure from the nationalist and liberal opposition that prompted Iohannis to resign. “For sure”, he had “received signals from the coalition”. His resignation was also in the interests of the ruling coalition’s joint presidential candidate. Crin Antonescu is now free of the “political burden on his shoulders” in the upcoming presidential election campaign.
Iohannis’ predecessor in office, Traian Băsescu, also delivered a harsh verdict, although his arguments went in a different direction from those of the opposition parties. “A president does not abdicate, only kings abdicate. A president completes his term,” he said in an interview with Euronews Romania, calling Iohannis’ resignation an “act of cowardice”. Until a new head of state is elected, the current President of the Senate and PNL leader Ilie Bolojan will lead Romania as interim president.
Demokratie
Translation missing.
News
EU budget: Commission calls for radical reform and more own resources
The Commission is calling for directional decisions from the member states on the new Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF). “The repayment of Next Generation EU and an EU budget that lives up to our ambitions cannot be reconciled with stable national financial contributions and the lack of new own resources,” reads the Commission’s draft communication on the MFF, which is to be published today and was made available to Table.Briefings.
The repayment of loans from the Corona recovery program alone will consume around EUR 25 to 30 billion per year, which corresponds to almost 20 percent of the current EU annual budget. The Commission is therefore calling on governments to pave the way for new EU own resources. Negotiations on this have been stuck in the Council for a long time.
‘Status quo is not an option’
As was already leaked in the fall, the Commission is also in favor of a far-reaching reform of financial planning. “The status quo is not an option”, the paper states. At the beginning of the current 2021-2027 fiscal period, more than 90 percent of the expenditure from the MFF and Next Gen EU had been firmly allocated. This lacks the necessary flexibility to react appropriately to unforeseen developments and crises. In addition, the more than 50 spending programs pursue partly overlapping objectives.
As an alternative, the Commission proposes bundling the funds per member state in a plan that also links the funds to structural reforms and investments. The regions and municipalities are to be involved in this. A newly created competitiveness fund is to bundle investments in strategic sectors. There is to be a further fund for relations with third countries. At the same time, the rule of law conditionalities in the joint budget are to be strengthened.
The communication is intended to kick-start the debate on the next MFF. The Commission’s concrete proposal is expected in the summer. tho
EU-Haushalt
AI Action Summit: Vance does not sign final declaration
US Vice-President JD Vance was clear in his speech at the AI Action Summit in Paris. “I’m not here this morning to talk about AI safety, which was the title of the conference a few years ago. I’m here to talk about AI opportunities,” said Vance. In particular, he spoke about AI opportunities in the USA. Commission President Ursula von der Leyen also focused on the word action. She made it clear that Europe also wants to become a leading AI continent. This means adopting a way of life in which AI is everywhere.
The two-day summit on artificial intelligence in Paris brought together around 1,500 participants from around 100 countries. These included heads of state and government, representatives of companies, and NGOs. At the end of the summit, around 60 countries called for the transparent and sustainable use of AI with internationally valid regulations. Germany, the EU and China are among the signatories, but the USA and the UK are not. At the summit, further investments worth billions in AIwere also announced.
Vance criticizes EU regulations
Vance outlined the Trump administration’s “America First” agenda. He stated that the US intends to remain the dominant force in AI and will strongly oppose the European Union’s much tougher regulatory approach. He warned that excessive regulation of the AI sector could bring the transformative industry to a standstill. Vance criticized the “massive regulations” of the Digital Services Act (DSA) and the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation, which meant endless compliance costs for smaller companies.
The US Vice-President was also critical of China. “From CCTV to 5G devices, we are all familiar with cheap technologies on the market that are heavily subsidized and exported by authoritarian regimes.” He added that partnering with such regimes meant chaining his country to an authoritarian master who was trying to undermine the information technology infrastructure.
Von der Leyen announces InvestAI
The EU Commission President warned that Europe must not be too late in the global race for AI. She emphasized that Europe should invest in its own strengths and build on what it does best, namely its scientific and technological expertise. “We want AI to be a force for good and for growth,” said von der Leyen. “We are doing this with our own European approach, which is based on openness, collaboration, and excellent talent.” However, the approach still needs to gain strength.
To this end, von der Leyen announced the “InvestAI” initiative. This unique public-private partnership, as she called it, will enable scientists and companies to “develop the most advanced, very large models needed to make Europe an AI continent”. The aim of the initiative is to mobilize EUR 200 billion of investment in AI. This includes a new European fund of EUR 20 billion for AI gigafactories. vis
Artificial Intelligence Regulation
Digital policy
Digital Services Act
Ursula von der Leyen
Consumer advocates demand ban on personalized advertising
The Federation of German Consumer Organizations (VZBV) is calling for a ban on tracking and profiling for advertising purposes. These practices pose serious risks for consumers and society. “Consumers are powerless against the practices of the advertising industry,” said Michaela Schröder, Head of Consumer Policy at the VZBV. The existing laws are not enough. “A ban on tracking and profiling is the only way to protect consumers in the long term.”
In its position paper, the VZBV writes that the EU should introduce a new horizontal legal framework to counter the risks posed by profiling and tracking for advertising purposes. Such a framework should set clear limits for data processing, prescribe appropriate transparency measures, and strengthen enforcement mechanisms.
“The exploitation of digital asymmetries and vulnerabilities requires protective measures that go beyond the limited instrument of individual consent,” says the paper,which is available to Table.Briefings. This is the only way to safeguard the interests of society and fundamental rights in the digital age.
Expert opinion: DSA and GDPR are not sufficient for protection
The association commissioned an expert report to support its position. The authors Max von Grafenstein and Nina Elisabeth Herbort come to the conclusion that tracking and profiling for advertising purposes lead to manipulation, discrimination and a loss of trust. The authors argue that existing laws such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and theDigital Services Act (DSA)do not effectively curb these risks.
Although Article 25 of the GDPR (data protection by design) is a powerful tool to counteract the practical limitations of informed consent, it is not sufficient. The authors therefore recommend shifting the focus from consent to a ban on personalized advertising.
Ban is the last resort
The authors also discuss more specific prohibition approaches, for example in relation to certain types of data, certain groups or actors. They consider a ban on the processing of personal data of vulnerable groups to be particularly acceptable. However, a general ban is the ultima ratio if the risks cannot be effectively contained due to the coordination effort of specific bans.
The report argues that a ban would create a level playing field. Although this would lead to economic losses and disregard for heterogeneous preferences, the need for effective consumer protection should be valued more highly. vis
Verbraucherschutz
Omnibus: Gesamtmetall calls for the procedure to be extended
The Confederation of Metal and Electrical Industry Employers’ Associations, Gesamtmetall, is calling for the omnibus procedure to be extended. In an analysis of seven EU directives and regulations, which is available to Table.Briefings, it concludes that the overlaps between the laws are greater than previously assumed.
“According to the EU Commission’s current plans, the omnibus is just a cab with three seats. Limiting the upcoming Omnibus Regulation to the Sustainability Reporting and Supply Chain Directive and the Taxonomy Regulation is not nearly enough,” said Managing Director Oliver Zander to Table.Briefings.
Accordingly, the Forced Labor Products, Deforestation, Conflict Minerals and Batteries Regulations should also be included. “The product-related due diligence obligations contained therein are superfluous and must be deleted, as they are already covered by the Supply Chain Directive.”
Gesamtmetall: It is unclear which regulation applies
According to the Gesamtmetall analysis, there are also contradictions in the texts. For example, the European Supply Chain Directive (CSDDD) refers in part to the fact that specifications in the Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) are “authoritative”. In turn, the EUDR states that other legal acts of the Union “may not be excluded”. It therefore remains unclear which regulation is applicable.
Zander: “The EU Commission must now present a comprehensive proposal on all seven legal acts if it is really serious about reducing bureaucracy for companies. The cab must become a fully-fledged omnibus.”
Gesamtmetall has not considered whether the laws are not sufficiently coordinated in terms of climate and environmental action.
Commission rejects criticism of fast-track procedures
Meanwhile, the EU Commission rejects criticism of the implementation of the omnibus fast-track procedure. Last week, environmental and social organizations described it as “chaotic” and “undemocratic” because, among other things, there was no formal consultation procedure. The Commission is also not sufficiently investigating the possible consequences of the planned simplification of sustainability laws and is ignoring previous results.
A spokesperson for the Commission has now informed Table.Briefings that “extensive” impact assessments have already been carried out on the laws. In view of the pressing challenges facing many companies, “swift action” is needed instead. However, an analysis report is planned, according to the spokesperson. This approach would be in line with its own Better Regulation Policy, as this is an urgent case.
For trade unions and NGOs, however, the results of the recently conducted impact assessments are a major reason to doubt the fast-track procedure. For example, the impact assessment on theEU Supply Chain Directive (CSDDD) came to the conclusion that although the law would put companies at a competitive disadvantage in the short term, the additional costs for them would still be “relatively low”. According to the Commission’s statement at the time, they could evenexpect competitive advantages in the medium and long term. maw, lei
Europäische Kommission
Sorgfaltspflichten
Dessert
The Commission’s work program makes it official: The time change is here to stay
It happens twice a year: The debate about the time change. Many Germans don’t like having to change the clocks in spring and fall. According to a survey conducted by YouGov in 2023, 75% of Germans would abolish the time change.
Some people, however, including the author, find the eternal discussion about clock times more tiring than the missing hour of sleep at the start of summertime. This may also be the case for the Commission: it has removed a planned directive to abolish the clock change from its to-do list. This emerges from the draft work programfor 2025, which is available to Table.Briefings. The reason: “An agreement is not in sight.” There have been no talks on this topic since 2019.
The then Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker sounded very determined when he announced in 2018 that the time changeover would soon be history. This was preceded by a non-representative survey conducted by the Commission, in which more than 80 percent of participants were in favor of abolishing it. Under Juncker, the Commission presented a proposal for a directive. However, the Council could not agree on whether to say goodbye to summer or winter time. And so nothing happened.
New attempt by Parliament
Last year, EU parliamentarians made another attempt and called on Juncker’s successor Ursula von der Leyen in a letter to promote the abolition of the time changeover. The current system is outdated, they said. Over 60 MEPs from various countries and political groups signed the letter.
But apparently that didn’t help. This is bad news for a majority in Germany – but perhaps not so much for people in other countries. In Spain, for example, only 46% would like to see it abolished. The Commission’s survey from 2018 also very clearly reflects the attitude here, with the majority of respondents coming from Germany.
But one of them now wants to get serious: A few weeks ago, US President Donald Trump announced his intention to abolish daylight saving time. Sarah Schaefer
