The EU must resist Trump’s tariff bullying and defend its agri-food sector

On 4 March, in his first joint address to Congress since reclaiming office, Donald Trump doubled down on his protectionist trade agenda, vowing to shield American farmers from foreign competition. With new, potentially 25%, tariffs on agricultural imports set to take effect on April 2, European producers are on high alert, bracing for a trade war that could hit some of the continent’s most prized exports.

Trump’s rhetoric on agricultural trade is nothing new, with his latest threats reflecting disputes from his first term. In 2017, Washington notably slapped tariffs on Spanish black olives, triggering a four-year legal battle at the WTO. Now, concerns are mounting that fresh tariffs could hit other iconic European exports, including French wine, spirits and dairy, placing further strain on transatlantic ties.

In this increasingly hostile trade environment, the EU must stand firm in defending its agri-food sector. With the new Commission adopting a decidedly more farmer-friendly policy approach in its opening months, Brussels's decision-makers will need to stay focused on delivering this vision, offering the regulatory protections that its producers need while removing unnecessary barriers that hinder their global competitiveness.

Trump 2.0 sparking global chaos

The Trump administration's looming tariffs on EU agri-food products arrive amid a wider global trade offensive that has seen Canada, Mexico and China caught in the crosshairs. Canada and China have swiftly imposed countermeasures on US agri-food exports, with the former targeting products such as dairy, oilseeds and grains, and the latter slapping fresh duties on $21 billion worth of American agricultural goods, including soybeans.

Regarding the EU, Trump has long decried its trade surplus with the US, conveniently overlooking the key role of consumer preferences and regulations that render this gap inevitable for the agri-food trade. American buyers simply have more appetite for European products than vice versa, while the EU’s stricter food safety and geographical indication (GI) protections make it virtually impossible for Europe to abide by Trump’s ‘Buy American’ demands.

For example, European GI staples like Parmesan and Asiago cheese must come from their designated regions in Europe, meaning that generic US-made cheeses carrying these labels are barred from sale in the EU. While the US considers GI protections a trade barrier, this crucial regulatory framework is in fact a cornerstone of Europe’s food heritage and quality assurance.

GI-protected foods are precisely the EU products on the front lines of Trump's misguided trade war. Indeed, he will find that his singular focus on tariffs will fail to override the deeply ingrained culinary, phytosanitary and political factors shaping EU-US food trade – as Politico recently quipped, “not even his ‘Art of the Deal’ can vanquish Europe’s Art of the Meal.”

EU’s Nutri-Score U-turn protecting heritage foods

Encouragingly, EU Agriculture Commissioner Christophe Hansen sounded the alarm over the threat of impending US tariffs, urging Brussels to take a more proactive trade stance and recognizing the strategic importance of and imperative to protect certain European agricultural exports – particularly wines, spirits and dairy.

In the recently unveiled ‘Vision for Agriculture and Food,’ the Commission marks a decisive shift towards a farmer-friendly agenda, pledging to both defend EU food exports and tighten standards for imports. Equally revealing of this vital pivot following the failure of the last Commission's 'Farm to Fork' strategy are the initiatives that the EU executive has dropped. Exhibit A: the harmonized nutrition label, which threatened to impose France's polarising Nutri-Score on the bloc's producers.

Signals of Nutri-Score’s demise have only grown stronger, with a Commission spokesperson notably declining to reaffirm support for the labeling system at an early March press conference – a silence widely seen as confirmation that Nutri-Score has been shelved. In recent years, Nutri-Score has faced mounting opposition from countries like Greece, Poland and Portugal, which argue that its algorithm unfairly penalises geographical indication (GI) products like cheeses and cured meats, distorting consumer perception and further undermining Europe’s food competitiveness.

Reacting to this development, food law expert Katia Merten-Lentz noted that the Commission opting not to adopt Nutri-Score is unlikely to have a public health impact given that existing labeling rules already protect consumers, adding that scrapping Nutri-Score would come as a "relief to most businesses." Within scientific circles, Nutri-Score is equally losing ground, with researchers increasingly questioning its ability to genuinely promote balanced diets while raising concerns over the lack of independence in studies backing the system.

Even in France, Agriculture Minister Annie Genevard has publicly distanced herself from Nutri-Score, delivering yet another blow to a system now on the brink of irrelevance.

Expanding innovative, fair trade relations

Dropping Nutri-Score is a step in the right direction, but the EU must go further to safeguard the food products at the heart of its global agricultural power. As Commissioner Hansen has rightly asserted, deepening trade ties with Ukraine and Mercosur nations could provide crucial alternatives if US trade tensions escalate, helping Europe to navigate economic and geopolitical shifts while maintaining a competitive agricultural sector.

Ukraine’s integration into the EU brings clear strategic benefits, particularly in bolstering Europe’s food production and trade leverage. However, its vast agricultural sector will require a reform of EU farm subsidies, a challenge Brussels must address as membership talks progress. Similarly, US tariff threats reinforce the urgency of finalising the EU-Mercosur trade, which would offer European farmers a lifeline of stable market access. Meanwhile, China’s retaliatory tariffs on US farm goods will significantly impact global trade flows, opening new opportunities for Europe to expand exports of meat, dairy and grains.

Yet, amid mounting anti-free trade farmer protests at home, Brussels must not only open new markets but also include reciprocal protections, ensuring fair competition and upholding EU food standards on the global stage. Defending Europe’s food exports isn’t just about countering Trump’s tariffs – it’s about securing the future of a sector that embodies economic strength, cultural heritage and global influence. Moving forward, the EU executive – working in lockstep with national governments and industry stakeholders – must decisively navigate these stormy trade waters to shield its food producers.

Share this article: