Agri-food industry raises serious doubts over latest EU-US trade pact agreements
The EU and US yesterday took the next steps to formalize their trade pact, detailing plans for tariffs across the agri-food industry in an updated framework agreement.
Although the deal brings “improved market access” for the sale of US agricultural goods that the EU needs, according to President Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, several organizations are not convinced that the details of this deal will bring relief to farmers, food producers, and exporters who will be hit hardest.
The new level of customs duties for European exports to the US has been raised to 15% for products that previously benefited from lower duties (4.8% on average).
The level will be maintained for those previously taxed at higher rates, except for a few sectors that appear to have a better deal than agri-food, such as pharmaceuticals, chemicals, and the automobile and aircraft industries.
While the EU and US insist that yesterday’s joint statement will usher in “certainty and stability” while “strengthening transatlantic relations,” others are not so sure.
The EU intends to eliminate tariffs on all US industrial goods and to provide preferential market access for a wide range of US seafood and agricultural goods, including tree nuts, dairy products, fresh and processed fruits and vegetables, processed foods, planting seeds, soybean oil, and pork and bison meat.
Doubts over deal
According to Farm Europe — a network of European farmers and their partners — the situation is seriously worrying and imbalanced for the agri-food sector, and many doubts remain about future trade relations.
They believe that during yesterday’s trade talks, the Commission failed to defend EU agri-food offensive interests, claiming that possible exceptions for agriculture are not clarified in the joint statement, while vague concessions are made to US imports in some key EU agricultural sectors, including dairy, fruit and vegetables, and pig meat.
Farm Europe reiterates concerns over SPS certificates, trade documents certifying that imported products, such as food, plants, or animals, meet the sanitary and phytosanitary (health and safety) standards of the destination country, ensuring human, animal, and plant health.
This is not the first time stakeholders in the EU agri-food sector have raised concerns over possible “preferential access” to some US agri-food products and the health and safety standards they will be subject to.
“The European Commission switched positions since the Trump-von der Leyen meeting in Scotland, accepting the US narrative of an imbalanced trade flow, narrowing the assessment to goods, excluding services. This is a major blow to the EU’s positioning, putting at risk offensive sectors such as agri-food. Beyond tariffs, we are very concerned by the wording on SPS certificates and will look very closely at those developments,” Luc Vernet, Farm Europe secretary general, tells Food Ingredients First.
Agri-food second-best?
Vernet says that EU negotiators prioritized other sectors like cars and aviation. The risk is now for each member state to try to seek its own priorities via bilateral direct contacts with the Trump administration.
“We already have signs showing that this is what Washington is looking for. The European Commission should put back agri-food as a core priority at the top of the agenda, not a second-best alternative.”
“The topic of sanitary and phytosanitary standards is a very sensitive one. There are fields where the EU should move forward, like new breeding techniques for seeds, and others where the EU cannot compromise. This is the case when it comes to consumers’ protection, such as hormones or chlorinated poultry. Those rules reflect our approach to the food supply chain and food quality for all. It must not be undermined by those discussions.”
Vernet concludes that “once again, agriculture seems to be treated as a spare wheel and a bargaining chip, while the interests of some sectors such as the automotive industry seem to have been the main concern of the EU negotiators.”
Wine and spirits
spiritsEUROPE also expressed “deep disappointment” over yesterday’s EU-US joint statement. They say it has failed to deliver the long-overdue restoration of the zero-for-zero framework for spirits, leaving EU spirits exports to the US exposed to a 15% import tariff.
Originally agreed in 1997, the zero-for-zero deal eliminated tariffs on virtually all spirits traded between the EU and the US. It drove a 450% surge in trade over two decades, strengthened cross-investment, and supported thousands of jobs in both markets.
spiritsEUROPE says that its absence now risks setting back these gains and undermining confidence in the transatlantic partnership.
“This was a critical moment to reaffirm and reinvigorate our shared commitment to fair and reciprocal trade and give the transatlantic spirits sector the boost it needs to get back on a stronger growth path,” says Hervé Dumesny, director general of spiritsEUROPE.
“While we appreciate the progress made in de-escalating broader trade tensions, every month of delay in restoring the zero-for-zero tariff agreement for spirits holds back growth, investment, and consumer choice on both sides of the Atlantic.”
“We urge both sides to remain at the negotiating table and deliver a swift, full return to zero-for-zero. This means reaffirming the support for our sector across the Atlantic by removing US tariffs on EU spirits and lifting any suspended EU retaliatory measures on US products.”
“Restoring this agreement and predictability in transatlantic spirits trade is essential for enabling our sector to thrive through fair and reciprocal trade that benefits farmers, distillers, retailers, hospitality workers, and consumers alike.”
