Connect with us

Business

Trump delays 50% EU tariffs after Brussels begs for more time

Published

4 minute read

MXM logo MxM News

Quick Hit:

President Donald Trump announced Sunday that he is postponing sweeping new tariffs on the European Union after a direct appeal from EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.

Key Details:

  • Trump had previously warned the EU it would face 50% tariffs by June 1st, calling the bloc “very difficult to deal with” and pressing for a deal.

  • On Truth Social, Trump confirmed he had “received a call today from Ursula von der Leyen…requesting an extension,” which he granted until July 9th.

  • Von der Leyen said the EU was ready to move “swiftly and decisively,” framing the talks as vital to preserving the “most consequential and close trade relationship” in the world.

Diving Deeper:

President Donald Trump on Sunday evening confirmed he has delayed the implementation of 50% tariffs on the European Union, following a direct request from European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen for more time to negotiate a trade agreement. The extension comes after Trump sharply criticized the EU for being “very difficult to deal with,” warning that steep tariffs would take effect by June 1st if Brussels failed to come to the table.

In a message posted on Truth Social, the president stated: “I received a call today from Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, requesting an extension on the June 1st deadline on the 50% Tariff with respect to Trade and the European Union. I agreed to the extension—July 9, 2025—It was my privilege to do so. The Commission President said that talks will begin rapidly.”

Von der Leyen echoed that sentiment in a post on X, calling it a “good call” with the president and affirming that “Europe is ready to advance talks swiftly and decisively.” She added, “To reach a good deal, we would need the time until July 9.”

The EU is already contending with a 10% blanket tariff and additional 25% duties on key exports like aluminum, automobiles, and steel. While countries such as the United Kingdom have reached bilateral deals with the Trump administration, Brussels has maintained a more rigid stance, citing the complexity of representing the varied interests of its 27 member states.

Trump has consistently criticized the European Union as a protectionist bloc designed to disadvantage the United States. In remarks earlier this year, he argued the EU “was formed to screw the U.S.,” referencing its origins in the European Coal and Steel Community, which aimed to create internal free trade while restricting third-country access—particularly from the U.S.

Trade negotiations are expected to center not only on reducing European tariffs and barriers against American goods but also on urging the EU to scale back its economic ties to Communist China. While the U.S. remained the EU’s largest trading partner in 2024, accounting for 17% of total trade, China closely followed at 15%. However, the EU imported significantly more goods from China—€520 billion—compared to €335 billion from the U.S.

With tariffs now delayed until July 9th, all eyes turn to whether the EU is serious about making meaningful concessions—or if Trump’s deadline extension will be the final one.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Alberta

Moving to single 8% provincial personal income tax rate would help restore the Alberta Advantage

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Ergete Ferede

Moving to a single eight per cent personal income tax rate for all working Albertans would dramatically improve the province’s competitiveness among
energy-producing jurisdictions, according to a new study published by the Fraser Institute, an independent, non-partisan Canadian public policy think-tank.

“It’s crucial to restore Alberta’s historic tax advantage and understanding how changes to personal income tax rates affect provincial revenues is critical for informed policy decisions,” said Ergete Ferede, Fraser Institute senior fellow and author of Revenue Effects of Tax Rate Changes in Alberta.

The report examines two potential tax reform scenarios and their impact on provincial revenue: an immediate adoption of an eight per cent single tax rate starting in 2025; and a gradual move to that same rate over three years.

An immediate switch to an eight per cent single personal income tax (PIT) rate would decrease PIT revenue by about $6.1 billion (a 35.6 per cent reduction) in the first year.

A gradual transition over three years would start with a smaller loss of $264 million (a 1.5 per cent reduction) in 2025 increasing to $6.9 billion (37.0 per cent reduction) by 2027. However, these estimates may overstate provincial revenue losses as they do not account for the potential positive economic effect of personal income tax reductions on other revenue sources.

Alberta’s current combined federal and provincial personal income tax rate stands at 48 per cent—ranking 10th highest out of 61 jurisdictions in North America—and is significantly higher than other energy-producing regions such as Texas or Wyoming. Implementing a single 8 per cent tax rate would help re-establish Alberta as a low-tax jurisdiction, lowering its rank to the 16th lowest among the 61.

“The potential to strengthen Alberta’s economic position through tax cuts must be considered along with the revenue implications for the government,” Ferede said.

Revenue Effects of Tax Rate Changes in Alberta

  • As recently as 2014, Alberta enjoyed a significant tax advantage, which included a single 10% personal income tax (PIT) rate, the lowest in Canada. However, in 2015, the newly elected NDP government introduced a progressive five-bracket PIT system with a top rate of 15%, eroding Alberta’s tax advantage.
  • Alberta’s top combined provincial and federal PIT rate is 48%, ranking it the tenth highest in North America. As well, its tax competitiveness is lower, compared with other energy-producing regions.
  • The main objective of this study is to examine the revenue implications of replacing Alberta’s current five-bracket PIT system with a single rate of 8%. The study analyzed three alternative reform scenarios: Immediate transition to an 8% single rate starting in 2025, gradual transition to 8% over three years, ending in 2027, and an immediate 20% across-the-board tax reduction in the current five-bracket system in 2025.
  • After accounting for the positive behavioural effects of reduced taxes, this study finds that if Alberta immediately switches to a single 8% PIT rate, PIT revenue would drop by $6.1 billion (a 35.6% reduction) in the first year. Gradual transition to a single 8% rate would initially reduce revenue by $264 million (1.5%), rising to $6.9 billion (a 37.0% decline) by 2027. In contrast, an immediate 20% across-the-board cut in the current PIT system would reduce provincial revenue by $5.1 billion (a 29.5% drop) in 2025.

 

Ergete Ferede

Professor of Economics, MacEwan University
Continue Reading

Banks

Canada Pension Plan becomes latest institution to drop carbon ‘net zero’ target

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Changes to the law require companies to more rigorously prove their environmental claims.

The investment group in charge of Canada’s governmental pension plan has ditched its “net zero” mandate, joining a growing list of major institutions doing the same.

According to the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) Investments’ latest annual report, the entity is no longer committed to carbon “net-zero” by 2050. The CPP’s ditching of the target comes after a number of major institutions, including the Royal Bank of Canada (RBC), Toronto-Dominion Bank (TD), Bank of Montreal (BMO), National Bank of Canada, and the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC), all made similar moves in recent months.

While ditching the net-zero effort, chief executive of CPP Investments John Graham maintained that it is still “really important to incorporate climate and incorporate sustainability” in its long-term investment portfolio.

The dropping of the “climate” target comes as recent changes to Canada’s Competition Act now mandate that companies prove any environmental claims they make, with Graham insinuating these changes were a factor in the decision.

“Recent legal developments in Canada have introduced, kind of, new considerations around how net-zero commitments are interpreted, so that’s caused us to change a little bit how we talk about it, but nothing’s changed on what we’re actually doing.”

Over the past decade, left-wing activists have used “net zero” and “environmental, social & governance” (ESG) standards to encourage major Canadian and U.S. corporations to take particular stands on political and cultural issues, notably in promotion of homosexuality, transgenderism, race relations, the environment, and abortion.

Outside of Canada, many major corporations have announced they are walking back DEI and other related policies. Some of the most notable include Lowe’sJack Daniel’s, and Harley Davidson. Other companies such as DisneyTarget, and Bud Light have faced negative sales due to consumers fighting back and refusing to patronize the businesses.

Since taking power in 2015, the Liberal government, first under Justin Trudeau and now under Mark Carney, has continued to push a radical environmental agenda in line with those promoted by the World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset” and the United Nations’ “Sustainable Development Goals.” Part of this push includes the promotion of so called net-zero energy by as early as 2035.

Continue Reading

Trending

X