Sittings · Document

REPORT (COM(2025)0471 – C100193/2025 – 2025/0261(COD)) 2026-03-19

On the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the adjustment of customs duties on the import of certain goods originating in the United States of America and opening of tariff quotas for imports of certain goods originating in the United States of America

Committee on International Trade · Rapporteur: Bernd Lange

Official HTML ↗ PDF DOCX

PR_COD_1amCom

Symbols for procedures

* Consultation procedure

*** Consent procedure

***I Ordinary legislative procedure (first reading)

***II Ordinary legislative procedure (second reading)

***III Ordinary legislative procedure (third reading)

(The type of procedure depends on the legal basis proposed by the draft act.)

Amendments to a draft act

Amendments by Parliament set out in two columns

Deletions are indicated in bold italics in the left-hand column. Replacements are indicated in bold italics in both columns. New text is indicated in bold italics in the right-hand column.

The first and second lines of the header of each amendment identify the relevant part of the draft act under consideration. If an amendment pertains to an existing act that the draft act is seeking to amend, the amendment heading includes a third line identifying the existing act and a fourth line identifying the provision in that act that Parliament wishes to amend.

Amendments by Parliament in the form of a consolidated text

New text is highlighted in bold italics. Deletions are indicated using either the ▌symbol or strikeout. Replacements are indicated by highlighting the new text in bold italics and by deleting or striking out the text that has been replaced.

By way of exception, purely technical changes made by the drafting departments in preparing the final text are not highlighted.

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the adjustment of customs duties on the import of certain goods originating in the United States of America and opening of tariff quotas for imports of certain goods originating in the United States of America

(COM(2025)0471 – C100193/2025 – 2025/0261(COD))

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

– having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2025)0471),

– having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 207(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C100193/2025),

– having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

– having regard to the budgetary assessment by the Committee on Budgets,

– having regard to Rule 60 of its Rules of Procedure,

– having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development,

– having regard to the report of the Committee on International Trade (A10-0069/2026),

1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Amendment 1

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(1a) In Executive Order 14257 of 2 April 2025 entitled "Regulating Imports With a Reciprocal Tariff To Rectify Trade Practices That Contribute to Large and Persistent Annual United States Goods Trade Deficits", the President of the United States, Donald J. Trump, declared a national emergency arising from conditions reflected in large and persistent annual United States goods trade deficits and that the United States aimed to rebalance global trade flows by imposing an additional ad valorem duty on all imports from all trading partners, with the possibility of exceptions. Those United States tariff measures included a baseline 10 % tariff on all imports, with additional country-specific tariffs calculated based on bilateral trade balances. For the Union, this meant a 20 % tariff on most products, with effect from 9 April 2025, on top of previously reinstated 25 % tariffs on steel and aluminium implemented on 12 March 2025. On 9 April 2025, President Trump announced a 90-day pause on the full implementation of those tariffs, reducing the Union’s tariff rate from 20 % to the baseline of 10 %. The 25 % tariffs on steel, aluminium, and automobiles remained in place and were subsequently raised from 25 % to 50 %, with effect from 4 June 2025. Moreover, on 12 July 2025, President Trump announced new 30 % tariffs on Union goods, with effect from 1 August 2025. These developments underscored the importance of establishing a stable framework ultimately leading to the Joint Statement on a European Union – United States Framework Agreement on Reciprocal, Fair and Balanced Trade of 21 August 2025.

Amendment 2

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 1 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(1b) As a result of the United States tariff measures adopted and those envisaged, it has been estimated by economic analyses that the Union could face a gross domestic product (GDP) reduction of between 0,2 % and 0,8 %. The impact on financial markets has been evident through increased volatility, with particular risks to Union sectors heavily dependent on exports to the United States, such as the automotive, pharmaceutical and machinery sectors.

Amendment 3

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 1 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(1c) Moreover, the Union is facing an acute and growing threat, as underscored in the Joint White Paper on European Defence Readiness 2030, linked to the return of full-scale conflict in Europe. In response to that escalating challenge, it is imperative for the Union to take decisive action to ensure its defence capacities, including by consolidating its deep and comprehensive transatlantic partnership in the fields of security, resilience and industrial cooperation while simultaneously strengthening its own technological and industrial base, including in sectors relevant to the Union’s security and defence industries. Such enhanced capabilities require stability and predictability in cooperation with key partners, particularly the United States. Only through a reliable and adaptable partnership can the Union ensure its collective preparedness and respond effectively to the current geopolitical challenges in full respect of its essential security interests. Moreover, reducing tariffs on the import of industrial and technologically advanced products from the Union to the United States would significantly strengthen the transatlantic industrial base and enhance cooperation in developing innovative and interoperable capabilities. Such a step would help to ensure a more balanced and mutually beneficial trade relationship in this strategic sector, while contributing to Union’s overall economic competitiveness and security resilience. Lowering those tariffs would also provide the stability and predictability necessary for joint transatlantic action in protecting our shared strategic interests in the current geopolitical context, and would represent a valuable step towards deeper cooperation in the future development of a comprehensive transatlantic agreement.

Amendment 4

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 1 d (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(1d) The Union reiterates its unwavering commitment to a transparent, fair and rules-based multilateral trading system grounded in the principles of the World Trade Organization (WTO). In line with the Treaties, the Union remains devoted to advancing its values and interests on the global stage, particularly through the promotion of open and equitable trade and the reinforcement of international law. The WTO remains the cornerstone of the global trading order and the primary forum for developing, implementing, and enforcing international trade rules. Close cooperation with like-minded partners, in particular the United States, is essential to uphold and strengthen that system, to safeguard a predictable and rules-based global trading environment, to advance necessary WTO reform and to achieve a well-functioning dispute settlement mechanism.

Amendment 5

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 1 e (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(1e) While certain commercial tensions persist, they are now being managed within newly established framework of dialogue and coordination. The Union remains committed to ensuring that the Union-United States trade and investment relationship will evolve in the longer term in line with the principles of free and fair trade between the parties, and in line with the WTO rules-based trading system without undermining other trade policy measures including in the areas of trade defence. The objective is to encompass additional sectors of strategic significance for the Union and conclude an agreement anchored in a multilateral framework and consistent with the WTO’s rules-based trading system.

Amendment 6

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 1 f (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(1f) In view of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, as well as other conflicts in the Union’s neighbourhood that undermine the security of the Union and its citizens, it is imperative for the Union to maintain and further strengthen its partnership with a key ally at a time when such relations are of critical importance. In that exceptional context, the Union is required to adopt extraordinary and temporary measures, duly justified under Article XXI of the GATT (Security Exceptions). However, such unilateral measures should not set a precedent and should remain strictly exceptional, proportionate and time-limited, reflecting their specific nature as actions justified on security grounds.

Amendment 7

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(3) The Union and the United States intend the Joint Statement to be a first step in a process that can be further expanded over time to cover additional areas and continue to improve market access and increase their trade and investment relationship. The Union remains committed to continue engaging in negotiations with the United States with a view to reaching a mutually beneficial agreement for other important sectors of its economy, such as agri-food products, as well as industrial goods, during the period of full or partial suspension of tariff preferences or tariff quotas granted to the United States.

Amendment 8

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 5 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(5a) The adoption of this Regulation should be without prejudice to the right of the Union to apply countermeasures in response to unjustifiable measures adopted by the United States.

Amendment 9

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6) The adjusted customs duties and the tariff quotas should apply for as long as the United States is effectively implementing the Joint Statement.

(6) As the Joint Statement's main objective is to establish a clear framework for transatlantic trade that brings much - needed stability and predictability for Union exporters, any actions by the United States that threaten to undermine that stability and predictability, whether by threatening to diverge or diverging from its commitments under the Joint Statement, or any other action that goes against the spirit of the Joint Statement or with the interference in the legitimate sovereign choices of the Union or a Member State, should lead to a suspension of the Union's commitments under the Joint Statement. Hence, the adjusted customs duties and the tariff quotas should apply only if and for as long as the United States is effectively implementing the Joint Statement. Any new tariff as a result of any ongoing or future US Section 232 investigation or based on any other similar legal basis, entering into force after the signature of the Joint Statement, and that exceeds the all-inclusive 15 % tariff ceiling, would undermine the spirit of the Joint Statement and the goal of stability and would therefore be seen as a breach of the Joint Statement, and should lead to the suspension of the application of this Regulation.

Amendment 10

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 6 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6a) Given that the Union’s sovereign and democratic right to regulate, and the acquis communautaire, cannot form part of negotiations with any third country, the application of Article 1 or Article 2 of this Regulation should be suspended in the event of any attempt by the United States to use economic coercion, within the meaning of Article 2(1) of Regulation (EU) 2023/2675 of the European Parliament and of the Council1a , for example through the application or the threat of the application of additional tariffs or of any other measure affecting trade or investment in order to prevent or obtain the cessation, modification or adoption of a particular act by the Union or a Member State, to then interfere in the legitimate sovereign choices of the Union or a Member State. In addition to the suspension of the application of Article 1 or Article 2 of this Regulation, the Union should determine and examine these threats or measures used by the United States in accordance with Articles 4 and 5 of Regulation (EU) 2023/2675 and, where relevant, adopt response measures in accordance with Article 8 of that Regulation.

_____________

1a Regulation (EU) 2023/2675 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 November 2023 on the protection of the Union and its Member States from economic coercion by third countries (OJ L, 2023/2675, 7.12.2023, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/2675/oj).

Amendment 11

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 6 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6b) The measures laid down in this Regulation should be conditional on the continued alignment of the United States with the security interests of the Union. Should the United States take action in a manner that directly undermines the essential security interests of the Union or its Member States, including their territorial integrity and their economic dimension, and their foreign and defence policies, the suspension mechanisms under this Regulation should be available to ensure that the Union’s trade policy remains consistent with its external policy and security objectives.

Amendment 12

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 6 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6c) This Regulation grants the United States broad and exceptional tariff preferences and tariff quotas, which could potentially lead to increases in imports of the goods covered by those preferences and quotas, which could have a significant impact on Union industry. Furthermore, this Regulation has been adopted without an accompanying impact assessment, so its potential economic impact is difficult to estimate at the time of its adoption. For that reason, a safeguard mechanism should be established, the aim of which should be to protect Union industry and the agricultural sector, in the event that the tariff preferences and tariff quotas granted by this Regulation would lead to such increases of imports of certain goods as to cause or threaten to cause serious injury to Union industry. Where an increase in volume of more than 10 % of the imports of a certain good is recorded, the Commission should conduct an examination to determine whether that increase causes or threatens to cause serious injury to Union industry.

Amendment 13

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 6 d (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6d) The Joint Statement does not provide for the application of the 15 % tariff ceiling to steel and aluminium, therefore the 50 % duty rates previously introduced by the United States remain in place. The Union and the United States have expressed their intention, in the Joint Statement, to consider the possibility to cooperate on ring-fencing their respective domestic markets from steel and aluminium overcapacity, while ensuring secure supply chains between each other, including through tariff quota solutions.

Amendment 14

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 6 e (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6e) On 19 August 2025, the United States Department of Commerce announced the addition of 407 product categories to the list of “derivative” steel and aluminium products covered by Section 232 sectoral tariffs. As a result, the steel and aluminium content of those products is subject to a duty rate of 50 %. The imposition of those tariffs and of the cumbersome administrative and customs requirements, after the signature of the Joint Statement, has increased the level of instability in trade between the Union and the United States and has led to serious economic consequences for the Union companies concerned and for their workers. Those tariffs also disproportionately affect the Union’s small and medium-sized enterprises and downstream industries, undermining their competitiveness in the United States market and leading to potential long-term loss of market share and to lasting damage to transatlantic industrial supply chains. The Union and the United States should reach a swift and mutually beneficial conclusion to the ongoing negotiations aimed at resolving these tariff disputes and restoring stable transatlantic trade relations. In this context, the suspension of customs duties on imports of those products should cease to apply six months from the start date of application as referred to in Article 6, third paragraph unless before the end of that date sustainable and mutually acceptable solutions on the trade of steel, aluminium and their derivative products are found in cooperation with the United States. Moreover, in the context of the proposed Union instrument addressing the negative trade-related effects of global overcapacity on the Union steel market, the elimination of tariffs on steel products should be consistent with that new instrument.

Amendment 15

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 6 f (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6f) The Joint Statement does not cover heavy-duty vehicles and their parts. In the context of the ongoing implementation of the Joint Statement, the Union and the United States should treat heavy-duty vehicles and their parts in the same manner as passenger cars and its parts, with the goal to include them under the 15 % flat tariff, and for all relevant measures to ensure fair and proportionate treatment in line with the objectives of the Joint Statement.

Amendment 16

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(7) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission to suspend the application of this Regulation in specific circumstances. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and the Council3.

(7) In order to determine the start date of application of the tariff preferences or the tariff quotas granted to the United States by this Regulation, suspend in whole or in part the tariff preferences or the tariff quotas and amend the list of goods for which the tariff preferences have been granted, the power to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making3. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council3a receive all documents at the same time as Member States' experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts.

_________________

3 Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13 ELI: ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2011/182/oj).

3a OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/agree_interinstit/2016/512/oj

Amendment 17

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 8 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8a) Access to the Union market is and should remain conditional on compliance with any applicable Union law, including with the EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, the Corporate Sustainable Due Diligence Directive and Anti-deforestation rules, regardless from which jurisdiction products originate.

Amendment 18

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 8 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8b) The Commission should assess, on a regular basis, the effects of this Regulation on trade flows, production levels, and price dynamics, resulting from the implementation of Articles 1 and 2. The Commission should work in close coordination with Member States and relevant sectors of Union industry, ensuring systematic data collection and regular information exchange to enable timely identification of any market distortions or imbalances.

Amendment 19

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 8 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8c) This Regulation constitutes an urgent response to an exceptional and volatile situation and may have far-reaching consequences. Its application should therefore be limited. A first evaluation report on the impact of this Regulation on Union industry and on seafood and agricultural goods producers, as well as on consumers, should be published by ... [six months from the date of entry into force of this Regulation]. By ... [six months before the date of the end of application of this Regulation], the Commission should present an additional comprehensive impact assessment, where appropriate, accompanied by a legislative proposal to extend the application of this Regulation. That impact assessment should determine, inter alia, whether this Regulation has created injuries and imbalances in specific sectors including with respect to prices and market stability, how Union trade patterns have changed as a consequence of Union-United States trade as well as the impact of and forecasts relating to this Regulation on the Union’s and national budgets, given the reduction in tariff revenues collected.

Amendment 20

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 8 d (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8d) The European Parliament and the Council should be kept fully, regularly and in a timely manner informed of relevant developments in the application of this Regulation and should be duly consulted throughout the process.

Amendment 21

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 9

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(9) In view of the importance of avoiding disruption of the trade and investment relationship between the Union and the United States, this Regulation should enter into force on the day following that of its publication. However, in the aftermath of the ruling of the US Supreme Court on the use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act for the imposition of baseline tariffs on United States trading partners and the changes to tariff levels on some Union products exceeding the ceilings agreed in the Joint Statement, and after the launching of new Section 301 and ongoing Section 232 investigations and potential use of any other legal basis, together with the ongoing trade uncertainty, it is necessary to provide that the tariff preferences and the tariff quotas granted by the Union to the products originating in the United States covered by this Regulation are to start to apply only from the date determined by a delegated act, when the conditions laid down in this Regulation have been fulfilled.

Amendment 22

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 9 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(9a) The implications of this Regulation for the Union budget have been assessed+ pursuant to Article 310(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. Sufficient financial and human resources should be provided for its implementation, while considering the impact of the financing on other Union programmes or policies and ensuring its compatibility with the multiannual financial framework, the system of own resources and the corresponding interinstitutional agreement, as well as with the budgetary principles laid down in Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council[1].

____________________

+ Pro memoria: Budgetary assessment of the European Parliament’s Committee on Budgets of 11 December 2025 on the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the adjustment of customs duties on the import of certain goods originating in the United States of America and opening of tariff quotas for imports of certain goods originating in the United States of America (COM(2025)0471).

[1] Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2024 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union (OJ L, 2024/2509, 26.9.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/2509/oj).

Amendment 23

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Adjustment of customs duties

Suspension of customs duties

Amendment 24

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The applicable customs duties of the Common Customs Tariff on imports into the Union of the goods classified under the Combined Nomenclature (CN) codes listed in Annex I and originating in the United States shall be 0 %.

Amendment 25

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2a. Without prejudice to Article 4b, the suspension of customs duties referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article shall cease to apply from the date of the end of application of this Regulation referred to in Article 6, second paragraph.

Amendment 26

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Suspension

Suspension of the application

Amendment 27

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The Commission may adopt an implementing act suspending in whole or in part the application of Article 1 or Article 2 in the following circumstances:

The Commission is empowered to adopt, in accordance with Article 4c, delegated acts amending Annex I, Annex II or Annex III to this Regulation in order to suspend in whole or in part the application of Article 1 or Article 2, after an examination based on substantiated information gathered on its own initiative or received from any reliable source, including a Member State, the European Parliament or Union producers in the following circumstances:

Amendment 28

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) where the United States fails to implement the Joint Statement or otherwise undermines the objectives of improving the trade and investment relationship between the Union and the United States and the objectives pursued by the Joint Statement to promote reciprocal, fair and balanced trade, or undermines access of Union economic operators to the United States market, discriminates against or targets Union economic operators aiming to operate, or already operating, in the United States or otherwise disrupts the trade and investment relationship between the Union and the United States;

Amendment 29

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(aa) where the United States imposes additional tariffs on goods imported from the Union that exceed the 15 % tariff ceiling, or in any other way raises or imposes new customs duties or other duties, taxes or fees on Union goods while the terms of the Joint Statement remain applicable, or modifies the product classification with the effect of raising the tariff level;

Amendment 30

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) where there are sufficient indications that the United States will act in the manner referred to in point (a) in the future;

(b) where there are sufficient indications that the United States will act in the manner referred to in point (a) or point (aa) in the future;

Amendment 31

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c) where the adjustment of the customs duties referred to in Article 1, or the opening of tariff quotas referred to in Article 2, results in the importation of a good originating in the United States in such increased quantities, in absolute terms or relative to domestic production, and under such conditions as to cause or threaten to cause serious injury to the domestic industry of the Union;

deleted

Amendment 32

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) where a change of objective circumstances has occurred with regard to those existing at the time the Joint Statement was issued.

(d) where a change of objective circumstances has occurred with regard to those existing at the time the Joint Statement was issued, in particular regarding serious breaches of human rights, fundamental principles of democracy and the rule of law, as well as threats to the essential security interests of the Union or its Member States, including their territorial integrity and their economic dimension, and to their foreign and defence policies.

Amendment 33

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

That implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 4(2).

Where the Commission suspends the application of Article 1 or Article 2 in part, it shall amend Annex I, Annex II or Annex III by modifying the applicable tariff rates, the tariff quotas or the scope of the goods covered respectively.

Amendment 34

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1a. Without prejudice to Regulation (EU) 2023/2675 of the European Parliament and of the Council, where the United States applies or threatens to apply additional tariffs or any other measure affecting trade or investment in order to prevent or obtain the cessation, modification or adoption of a particular act by the Union or a Member State, thereby interfering in the legitimate sovereign choices of the Union or a Member State, the Commission shall, where appropriate, carry out an examination based on substantiated information gathered on its own initiative or received from any reliable source, including a Member State, the European Parliament or Union producers. Where the examination leads to such conclusion, the Commission is empowered to adopt, in accordance with Article 4c, delegated acts amending Annexes I, II or III to this Regulation in order to suspend in whole or in part the application of Article 1 or Article 2 of this Regulation.

Amendment 35

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 1 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1b. Where, in the case of a sudden change of circumstances with regard to those existing at the time the Joint Statement was issued, seriously affecting the essential security interests of the Union or its Member States, including their territorial integrity and their economic dimension, imperative grounds of urgency so require, the procedure provided for in Article 4d shall apply to delegated acts adopted pursuant to this Article.

Amendment 36

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The implementing act referred to in paragraph 1 shall apply for as long as the circumstances referred to in paragraph 1 persist.

2. The delegated acts referred to in paragraphs 1, 1a and 1b of this Article shall apply for as long as the circumstances referred to in paragraphs 1, 1a and 1b of this Article, respectively, persist and in any event no longer than until the date of the end of application of this Regulation referred to in Article 6, second paragraph. Where the Commission finds that the reasons justifying a suspension no longer apply, it is empowered to adopt delegated acts, in accordance with Article 4c, to amend Annex I, Annex II or Annex III to this Regulation in order to reinstate the application of Article 1 or Article 2, or, in the case referred to in paragraph 1, second subparagraph, of this Article, reinstate the original applicable tariff rates, the tariff quotas or the scope of the goods listed in Annex I, Annex II or Annex III, respectively.

Amendment 37

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 4

deleted

Committee procedure

1. The Commission shall be assisted by the Trade Barriers Committee established by Article 7 of Regulation (EU) No 2015/1843 of the European Parliament and of the Council5 .

2. Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply.

_________________

5 Regulation (EU) 2015/1843 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 October 2015 laying down Union procedures in the field of the common commercial policy in order to ensure the exercise of the Union’s rights under international trade rules, in particular those established under the auspices of the World Trade Organization (codification) (OJ L 272, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2015/1843/oj).

Amendment 38

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 4a

Safeguard mechanism

1. The Commission shall regularly monitor the impact of this Regulation on Union markets. The Commission is empowered to adopt, in accordance with Article 4c, delegated acts amending Annex I, Annex II or Annex III to this Regulation in order to suspend temporarily in whole or in part the application of Article 1 or Article 2, after an examination based on substantiated information gathered on its own initiative or received from any reliable source, including a Member State, the European Parliament or Union producers where the application of Article 1 or Article 2 results in the import of a good originating in the United States in such increased quantities, in absolute terms or relative to domestic production, and under such conditions as to cause or threaten to cause serious injury to Union industry.

2. Without prejudice to paragraph 1, the Commission shall, as a rule, treat, in the absence of contrary indications, an increase in volume of more than 10 % year-on-year of the imports of a good covered by Annex I, Annex II or Annex III, as prima facie evidence of serious injury or the threat of serious injury to Union industry. Where such an increase in import volumes is recorded, the Commission shall without delay initiate an examination to determine whether the increase in the volume of imports causes or threatens to cause serious injury to Union industry. The examination shall be concluded within three months after its initiation. Where the examination leads to the conclusion that the increase in the volume of imports causes or threatens to cause serious injury to Union industry, the Commission shall adopt a delegated act, in accordance with Article 4c.

3. When adopting a delegated act as referred to in paragraph 1 or 2, the Commission shall:

(a) as regards the goods covered by Annexes I and II: amend Annex I or Annex II accordingly in order to suspend the tariff preferences referred to in Article 1 for imports of the goods concerned; or

(b) as regards the goods covered by Annex III: amend Annex III accordingly in order to suspend the application of the tariff quota opened for the goods concerned.

4. The delegated acts referred to in paragraph 3 of this Article shall apply until the date of the end of application of this Regulation referred to in Article 6, second paragraph. Where the Commission finds that the reasons justifying a suspension no longer apply, it is empowered to adopt delegated acts, in accordance with Article 4c, in order to amend Annex I, Annex II or Annex III to this Regulation, respectively, in order to reinstate the application of Article 1 or Article 2.

5. For the purpose of this Article, “Union industry” means either the Union producers as a whole of the like or directly competitive product who operate within the territory of the Union, or Union producers whose collective output of the like or directly competitive product normally constitutes more than 50 % and in exceptional circumstances not less than 25 % of the total production of such product. The term “Union producers” shall include Union producers of industrial goods, as well as Union producers of seafood and agricultural goods covered by this Regulation.

Amendment 39

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 4b

Specific provisions with respect to steel, aluminium, and their derivative products

1. For the categories of goods referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article, the suspension of customs duties referred to in Article 1(1) shall cease to apply six months from the start date of application of Articles 1, 2, 3, 4a and 4b referred to in Article 6, third paragraph.

2. The categories of goods concerned shall be the following:

(a) goods falling under Combined Nomenclature code 72;

(b) goods falling under Combined Nomenclature code 73;

3. If, before the end date of application, referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, the United States have reduced to maximum 15 %, including the US Most Favored Nation (MFN) tariff, their respective tariffs on products originating from the Union with a content of steel and aluminium above 50 %, the Commission is empowered to adopt, in accordance with Article 4c, a delegated act in order to defer the end date of application, referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, to a date not later that the end date of application of this Regulation referred to in Article 6, second subparagraph.

The Commission shall not adopt such a delegated act, as long as any of the circumstances for suspension of the application referred to in Article 3(1) or (1a) persist.

Amendment 40

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 ba (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 4ba

Determination of the start date of application

1. The Commission shall adopt, in accordance with Article 4c, a delegated act amending Article 6, third paragraph, in order to determine the date from which Articles 1, 2, 3, 4a and 4b shall be applicable. It shall adopt such a delegated act when, and only if, all of the following conditions have been fulfilled:

(a) the United States applies a tariff rate not higher than either the US Most Favored Nation (MFN) tariff rate or a tariff rate of a maximum of 15 %, including the US MFN tariff, on goods originating from the Union;

(b) the United States applies only the US MFN tariff to the following products of the Union: unavailable natural resources, including cork, all aircraft and aircraft parts, generic pharmaceuticals and their ingredients, and chemical precursors;

(c) the United States applies a tariff rate of a maximum of 15 %, including the US MFN tariff, on the following goods originating from the Union: pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, lumber, automobiles and automobile parts;

(d) the United States applies a tariff rate of a maximum of 15 % on products with a content of steel and aluminium below 50 %;

Furthermore, when adopting the delegated act referred to in the first subparagraph, the Commission shall assess whether the United States has provided formal, clear and precise assurances that the conditions referred to in points (a) to (d) of that subparagraph have been fulfilled and that those conditions will continue to be fulfilled in the future.

2. The Commission shall not adopt a delegated act in accordance with paragraph 1, first subparagraph, of this Article as long as any of the circumstances for suspension of this Regulation referred to in Article 3(1) or (1a) persist.

Amendment 41

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 4c

Exercise of the delegation

1. The power to adopt delegated acts is conferred on the Commission subject to the conditions laid down in this Article.

2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 3(1), (1a) and (2), Article 4a, Article 4b and Article 4ba shall be conferred on the Commission from ... [the date of entry into force of this Regulation] until ... [the date of the end of application of this Regulation referred to in Article 6, second paragraph].

3. The delegation of power referred to in Article 3(1), (1a) and (2), Article 4a, Article 4b and Article 4ba may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force.

4. Before adopting a delegated act, the Commission shall consult experts designated by each Member State in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making.

5. As soon as it adopts a delegated act, the Commission shall notify it simultaneously to the European Parliament and to the Council.

6. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 3(1), (1a) and (2), Article 4a, Article 4b and Article 4ba shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed by either the European Parliament or by the Council within a period of two months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.

Amendment 42

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 d (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 4d

Urgency procedure

1. Delegated acts adopted under this Article shall enter into force without delay and shall apply as long as no objection is expressed in accordance with paragraph 2. The notification of a delegated act to the European Parliament and to the Council shall state the reasons for the use of the urgency procedure.

2. Either the European Parliament or the Council may object to a delegated act in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 4c(6). In such a case, the Commission shall repeal the act immediately following the notification of the decision to object by the European Parliament or by the Council.

Amendment 43

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 5a

Evaluation and reporting

1. By ... [six months from the date of entry into force of this Regulation], the Commission shall carry out an impact assessment on the economic and security impacts of this Regulation. The impact assessment shall examine:

(a) the impact of the application of this Regulation on all imports and exports between the Union and the United States; and

(b) trade-flow changes and distributional effects across Member States and sectors.

2. By ... [six months before the date of the end of application of this Regulation], the Commission shall present an additional comprehensive impact assessment. That impact assessment shall examine, inter alia:

(a) the impact of the application of this Regulation on all imports and exports between the Union and the United States;

(b) trade-flow changes and distributional effects across Member States and sectors;

(d) effects on competitiveness, Union producers, including on Union producers of agri-food products, and SMEs;

(e) the political developments of the trade and investment relationship between the Union and the United States since the entry into force of this Regulation;

(f) the level of progress in negotiations between the Union and the United States towards achieving the commitments outlined in the Joint Statement, including the implementation of those commitments;

(g) whether the Regulation has created injuries and imbalances in specific sectors including with respect to prices;

(h) how Union trade patterns have changed with respect to trade with third countries as a consequence of United States trade policy and United States bilateral agreements with third countries;

(i) the impact and forecasts of this Regulation on the Union and national budgets, given the reduction in tariff revenues collected;

(j) the implications for the Union’s security interests as well as external policy, including that of WTO membership;

(k) the costs of the regulatory burden stemming from the compliance with United States tariffs, including with respect to Section 232 duties.

The Commission shall make the underlying data and methodology of its impact assessments available to the public.

Where appropriate, the impact assessment referred to in the first subparagraph shall be accompanied by a legislative proposal for extension of the application of this Regulation. In that case, the impact assessment shall assess all of the reasons for such an extension, including in relation to the security interests of the Union and its Member States.

3. The Commission shall keep the European Parliament and the Council informed, regularly at every stage and in a timely manner, of relevant developments in the application of this Regulation. In light of the information received, the European Parliament or the Council may invite, where appropriate, the Commission for an exchange of views.

Amendment 44

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Entry into force

Entry into force and application

Amendment 45

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 2 (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

It shall apply from … [the date of entry into force of this Regulation] until 31 March 2028.

Amendment 46

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 3 (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

However, Articles 1, 2, 3, 4a and 4b shall apply only from the date determined by a delegated act adopted in accordance with Article 4ba.

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

Introduction

This legislative proposal constitutes the main instrument through which the Commission intends to implement the commitments undertaken by President von der Leyen at the meeting with United States President Donald Trump in Turnberry, Scotland, on 27 July 2025, and subsequently formalised through the Joint Statement on a United States–European Union framework for an agreement on reciprocal, fair and balanced trade of 21 August 2025.

Despite its title, the commitments resulting from the Joint Statement do not appear to be reciprocal, fair, or balanced. On the contrary, the Joint Statement consolidates an asymmetry that favours United States producers and merchandise over those of the Union.

The European Parliament was not involved in the deliberations that led to the Turnberry meeting. However, through the ordinary legislative procedure, it is now indirectly called upon to determine whether the benefits of the Joint Statement outweigh its drawbacks.

The Commission strongly defends the agreement, emphasising in particular that the United States has lowered tariffs on cars and car parts following the presentation of the legislative proposal under consideration. It also notes that United States tariffs are now limited to 15 % for goods subject to ongoing Section 232 investigations (pharmaceuticals, timber, semiconductors). Furthermore, from 1 September, the United States applies only MFN tariffs—and not the 15 % duty—to unavailable natural resources (such as cork), to all aircraft and parts, to generic pharmaceuticals and their precursors, and to certain chemicals.

The Commission further maintains that this is the most favourable trade arrangement the United States has extended to any partner, thereby ensuring the continued competitiveness of Union exports to the US market. Nevertheless, its main argument is that the agreement should be assessed on the basis of the stability it provides in comparison with the unquantifiable risks and damages of a potential spiralling trade war in the absence of an accord.

The Rapporteur acknowledges that there is some merit in the Commission’s reasoning. However, any assessment of the agreement should be more nuanced and balanced and, above all, subject to continuous reassessment in light of United States policies and their impact on the Union economy, industry, and consumers. There is a conspicuous absence of any impact assessment and of public or stakeholders' consultation prior to the presentation of the proposal to Parliament. This is clearly not in line with the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making which provides that an impact assessment is required for Commission proposals with an economic or social impact.

Before expressing a position on the proposal, the Rapporteur considers it necessary to recall certain contextual elements concerning EU–US trade relations at the beginning of the second Trump administration.

EU–US Trade before Turnberry

The Rapporteur is firmly convinced that the EU–US trade relationship prior to the second Trump administration was a fair and balanced one, evenly distributed between exchanges of goods and services. The Rapporteur rejects the notion that only trade in goods should be considered when assessing the balance of trade. Trade in services and capital flows should be considered as well. Furthermore, prior to the imposition of United States tariffs, the average tariff rate applied by both sides was very low, and United States producers benefited from low entry barriers and high levels of investment protection in the Union.

Despite this balanced situation, President Trump targeted the Union from the outset. The Rapporteur recalls that the initial baseline tariff was set at 20 % for the Union on 2 April, subsequently reduced to 10 % following the announced ‘pause’ on 9 April. President Trump later threatened to raise the baseline tariff to 50 % on 23 May, then set it at 30 % in his letter of 12 July. Before the meeting between President von der Leyen and President Trump, the Union had also been subject to a 25 % tariff of steel and aluminium, which was then doubled to 50 %. Union exporters were also subject to an additional 25 % tariff on cars and car parts. Before Turnberry, President Trump also announced a 50 % tariff on copper imports and implemented it at the beginning of August.

The Rapporteur notes that, while tariffs continued to accumulate on Union exporters, the Commission and the Member States consistently postponed any form of retaliation. The Union did not implement rebalancing measures in response to the United States steel and aluminium tariffs, even after these duties were doubled by the United States on 3 June 2025. Nonetheless, the Rapporteur also recognises the geopolitical circumstances in which the Union operates and acknowledges that no easy alternative was available.

On the Limits of the Joint Statement

President Trump’s subsequent tariff announcements and measures from August 2025 onwards clearly demonstrate the limits of the argument that the Turnberry deal provides stability and legal certainty. In the joint statement there is no "standstill" clause.

Since Turnberry, the United States has continued to announce new Section 232 investigations, including on robotics and industrial machinery, personal protective equipment and medical devices, pharmaceuticals, medium- and heavy-duty trucks, upholstered furniture, kitchen cabinets, bathroom vanities and timber. Italian pasta has also been targeted by an antidumping investigation that may result in additional duties of up to 92 %. The US also implemented US Section 232 tariffs on copper and their derivatives as a result of an investigation that started in February 2025.

Of all these announcements, the most problematic is that of 18 August 2025, when the Department of Commerce added 407 product categories to the list of “derivative” steel and aluminium products covered by Section 232 tariffs. Consequently, the steel and aluminium content of these products is now subject to a 50 % duty. The timing, content, and procedure of this measure raise serious concerns. It was announced after the Turnberry meeting and only days before the publication of the Joint Statement. The measure affects approximately USD 56 billion worth of Union exports, ranging from wind turbines to mobile cranes, bulldozers, furniture, compressors, pumps, agricultural machinery, engines, injection molding machines, motorbikes, and cosmetics. Despite the United States’ criticism of Union regulatory burdens, the administrative burden imposed by this measure on Union exporters is enormous, as calculating the steel and aluminium content of each product is both complex and costly. A wrong declaration of a product could lead to a 200 % tariff. If a clear calculation is not possible, the products are subject to a full 50 % tariff. This means that a lot of European products will de facto be excluded from the US market and puts the viability of many European manufacturers at risk. Moreover, Union exports of these goods pose no conceivable security risk to the United States. Despite the deal, in September 2025 a new public consultation was launched for the potential inclusion of further new products and the list could further be extended every 4 months.

Another major concern relates to the blow dealt to the WTO and the international rules-based system. The most-favoured-nation principle has clearly been disregarded in the Joint Statement. On the Union’s side, it must be made clear that these measures are exceptional and are accepted only because of the United States’ disregard for international norms. It must also be stated unambiguously that the United States’ systematic undermining of the WTO does not constitute global leadership; rather, it further weakens the very system it helped establish. Turnberry did not create a coherent framework but an ad hoc arrangement that should not serve as a model for future trade relations with third countries.

Regulatory autonomy is another area requiring constant vigilance by the European Parliament. President Trump has repeatedly expressed his opposition to Union regulations. The Joint Statement explicitly refers to those that are most problematic for the United States administration: sanitary and phytosanitary standards, the EU Deforestation Regulation, the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), and the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD). Although the Digital Services Act (DSA), the Digital Markets Act (DMA), and the AI Act are not mentioned explicitly, United States opposition to them is equally well documented. In the Joint Statement, the Commission carefully balanced the commitment to cooperation with the preservation of the Union’s regulatory sovereignty. While cooperation is welcome, changes to the Union acquis remain a sovereign prerogative and cannot be subject to negotiation. In a post on Truth Social of 26 August 2025, President Trump made clear that he is willing to impose “substantial additional tariffs” on countries with digital regulations.

To the credit of both sides, the Joint Statement does shield Union exports of semiconductors, timber and pharmaceuticals from the newly announced or future tariffs, and these benefits are tangible. However, the Rapporteur believes that President Trump is unlikely to fully stabilise the use of tariffs against the Union. The United States administration regards tariffs as an exceptional revenue-generating tool. According to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, monthly tariff revenue has more than tripled—from USD 7 billion late last year to approximately USD 25 billion in July—and is projected to rise further. The new tariffs are expected to generate USD 1.3 trillion in net new revenue by the end of President Trump’s term before accounting for economic effects. Another stated objective is to reduce the persistent United States trade deficit in goods. The administration seeks to reduce import demand to address this imbalance. Tariffs have also been used to pursue non-trade objectives, including migration control, counter-narcotics, and support for political allies.

Even if these objectives are at times contradictory, the Joint Statement is unlikely to end their pursuit. It may, however, moderate their most destabilising effects. In other words, the Joint Statement will not ensure stability and security in transatlantic trade but may help limit the worst forms of instability.

Main Elements of the Draft Report

In light of the above, the Rapporteur considers it premature to issue a definitive judgement on the merits of the Joint Statement and therefore does not support granting the Commission a blank cheque, especially in light of its early reluctance to apply any form of rebalancing. At the same time, the Union should honour its commitments under the Joint Statement for as long as the United States does likewise.

Accordingly, the Rapporteur proposes several targeted amendments to the Commission proposal to strengthen parliamentary scrutiny of the implementation of the Joint Statement and to narrow the discretionary powers of the Commission and the Council, while safeguarding the Union’s own commitments. These amendments can be summarised as five “S”: Steel, Sunset Mechanism, Standstill Clause, Safeguard Provision, and a strengthened Suspension provision.

Steel (and Aluminium) – On steel, aluminium, and derivative products, the Union and the United States have expressed their intention to cooperate in addressing global overcapacity while ensuring secure supply chains between them, potentially through tariff-rate quota solutions. However, even after the political agreement on tariffs and trade, the United States’ 19 August 2025 unilateral decision to extend 50 % tariffs to 407 additional categories of derivative steel and aluminium products has increased instability in transatlantic trade, further affecting entire European industrial sectors already severely hit by previous tariffs. The rapporteur is of the opinion that this decision risks hollowing out the value of the Joint Statement and represents a breach of the spirit of the agreement. In this context, the elimination of tariffs on these products by the Union should occur only once sustainable and mutually acceptable arrangements have been reached. The Rapporteur therefore proposes the deletion of the Steel and Aluminium entries from the Annex and is of the opinion that, in the event of a satisfactory solution in this regard, the Commission could consider reintroducing the Steel and Aluminium CN codes in the Annex via a Delegated Act.

Sunset – This Regulation constitutes an urgent response to an exceptional and volatile situation and may have far-reaching consequences. Its application should therefore be limited to 18 months. A first evaluation report on the impact of the regulation on Union industry and seafood and agricultural goods producers as well as consumers should be published after 6 months after its entry in force. After 12 months of its entry into force, the Commission shall, where appropriate, present a legislative proposal, accompanied by a comprehensive impact assessment, to extend the duration of the regulation. The impact assessment should determine, among others, whether the Regulation has created injuries and imbalances in specific sectors including with respect to prices, how EU trade patterns have changed as a consequence of the EU-US trade as well as the impact and forecasts of the deal on the EU and national budgets, given the diminished tariff revenues collected. Such a sunset clause is important also in light of the WTO rules. If there is no further development in the direction of a comprehensive trade agreement, the exception under GATT Article XXIV will no longer be viable.

Safeguard – The Regulation grants the United States broad and exceptional tariff preferences that may lead to an increase in imports of covered goods, with possible adverse effects on Union industry. In the absence of an accompanying impact assessment, the economic implications of these preferences are difficult to evaluate. A safeguard mechanism is therefore necessary to protect Union industry in cases where the tariff preferences result in a surge of imports causing, or threatening to cause, serious injury. An increase in import volumes exceeding 10 % for a given product should be considered evidence of such injury or threat.

Strengthened Suspension – The Commission’s proposal allows for implementing acts suspending the application of Articles 1 or 2 of the Regulation. The Rapporteur considers that the power to suspend tariff preferences or tariff rate quotas, and to amend the Annexes accordingly, should instead be exercised through delegated acts. This would enable the Commission to make more tailored adjustments to the Annexes while retaining the capacity to suspend preferences entirely if necessary. The Rapporteur also strengthens and broadens the suspension Article by empowering the Commission to suspend Article 1 or 2 of the Regulation in the event that the US applies or threatens to apply a coercive measure.

Standstill – The Joint Statement establishes a new framework for EU–US trade relations. The proposed Regulation should therefore include a mechanism enabling the Union to respond to new US tariffs that deviate from the letter or the spirit of the Joint Statement.

The Rapporteur also introduces changes throughout the draft regulation to strengthen the role of the European Parliament by introducing clear reporting requirements for the Commission on the application of the regulation, by allowing the Parliament to submit substantiated information that may lead to the suspension of the Regulation and by introducing delegated acts, instead of implementing acts, with regard to the suspension, the safeguard and the steel provisions.

ANNEX: DECLARATIONS OF INPUT

DECLARATION OF INPUT FROM BERND LANGE

Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur declares that he included in his report input on matters pertaining to the subject of the file that he received, in the preparation of the draft report, from the following interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register, or from the following representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies:

1. Interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register

Airbus

VDMA

IHK Hannover

AmCham

ETUC

Deutsches Aktieninstitut

ZVEI

2. Representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies

US Embassy

The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur.

Where natural persons are identified in the list by their name, by their function or by both, the rapporteur declares that he has submitted to the natural persons concerned the European Parliament's Data Protection Notice No 484 (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/data-protect/index.do), which sets out the conditions applicable to the processing of their personal data and the rights linked to that processing.

11.12.2025

BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT OF THE COMMITTEE ON BUDGETS

for the Committee on International Trade

on the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the adjustment of customs duties on the import of certain goods originating in the United States of America and opening of tariff quotas for imports of certain goods originating in the United States of America

(COM(2025)0471 – C100193/2025 – 2025/0261(COD))

Rapporteur for budgetary assessment: Danuše Nerudová

The Committee on Budgets has carried out a budgetary assessment of the proposal under Rule 58 of the Rules of Procedure and has reached the following conclusions:

The Committee on Budgets,

A. whereas the proposal aims to apply a 0 % customs duty rate on certain goods originating in the United States and open autonomous tariff quotas for certain goods originating in the United States, in line with the commitments set out in the Joint Statement on a United States–European Union framework on an agreement on reciprocal, fair, and balanced trade (the Joint Statement);

B. whereas Article 3 of the proposal provides for the possibility to suspend the tariff concessions granted under this Regulation, in whole or in part, in the event that the United States does not comply with its commitments under the Joint Statement;

C. whereas customs duties represent a well-established source of revenue deriving from the EU’s trade policy and constitute the largest component of the EU budget’s traditional own resources; whereas traditional own resources account for around 10-15 % of total own resources revenue, corresponding to EUR 22.2 billion in 2025;

D. whereas the forecast method for customs duties is approved each year by the Advisory Committee on Own Resources and takes into account trade patterns and volumes and general economic trends;

E. whereas in 2025, three amending budgets have already revised customs revenue; whereas exact estimates of traditional own resources cannot be fully assessed ex ante;

F. whereas a lower tariff of customs duties can increase trade volumes and thus yield similar amounts of revenue;

G. whereas the own resources system is designed to absorb fluctuations of income through the adjustment of the call rate of gross national income-based contributions – operating as the balancing item – offsetting any reduction in the share of revenue, in line with Article 2(1)(d) of Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2020/2053 of 14 December 2020 on the system of own resources of the European Union and repealing Decision 2014/335/EU, Euratom;

H. whereas the EU and the United States have the largest and deepest bilateral trade and investment relationship in the world; whereas the proposal is designed to foster stable transatlantic trade relations; whereas any trade facilitation measure towards a third country should always contribute to strengthening the EU’s position in that country’s market, rather than result in one-sided concessions;

I. whereas the political agreement to stabilise trade relations has been achieved against the potential backdrop of significant macroeconomic risk, with economic analysis pointing to possible contraction of the EU’s GDP in the short run, a shock that should be mitigated by reinforcing European resilience and market safeguards;

1. Notes that the estimated annual budgetary impact of the forgone customs duty revenues amounts to approximately EUR 1.2 billion in 2025 and EUR 3.9 billion annually until 2030, calculated by multiplying current imports from the United States subject to tariffs by a trade-weighted average duty rate; notes that the proposal does not have any impact on expenditure but a non-negligible impact on revenue;

2. Emphasises, in this regard, that the EU budget is already under significant strain, exacerbated by the payment of debt and associated interest stemming from NextGenerationEU funds, and therefore emphasises the need to conduct a careful assessment of the budget to bolster efficiency and simplification, as well as to reduce duplication, administrative barriers and unnecessary spending, and to comply with the 2020 Interinstitutional Agreement (IIA) on own resources;

3. Urges the Commission, therefore, to maximise the pressure on the Member States to find a swift agreement on the new own resources package and calls on the Council to adopt this proposal as a matter of urgency without further delay; calls on the Commission to continue exploring additional own resources and new revenue sources for the EU budget beyond the IIA, such as the revenue potential of an EU-wide digital services levy, should other proposed own resources not gain support among Member States;

4. Supports the Commission’s latest proposal for a reform of the EU Customs Union; stresses the importance of a swift agreement on the legislative proposals of the new EU Customs Reform package, in particular both the abolition of the de minimis exemption from customs duties and the establishment of the e-commerce fee for small shipments; encourages the Commission to explore further means in customs policy with the aim of strengthening the revenue side and supporting the EU’s political objectives;

5. Recalls the distinction between the total duties foregone and the effective loss of revenue to the EU budget, given that Member States retain 25 % of the duties collected as collection costs; recalls in this context the recent Commission proposal to lower the share of collection costs to 10 % and Parliament’s long-standing call for an increase in the share of traditional, genuine own resources, particularly customs duties;

6. Acknowledges that the volume of customs duties due under the regulation may vary depending on a variety of parameters and future economic trends; stresses that the resulting impact on EU budget revenues remains uncertain;

7. Calls on the Commission to ensure full transparency in the estimation and monitoring of forgone customs revenues, and to keep the budgetary authority regularly informed of any deviations from the initial forecast, so as to preserve the predictability and stability of the EU’s finances;

8. Recalls also that aggressive trade policies by the United States against other countries, notably China, could negatively affect certain EU sectors and regions exposed to increased import and price competition, which could in turn have implications for the EU budget, including through increased reliance on the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund; notes that, according to Eurostat, the imports of Chinese machinery and vehicles increased by 16.4 % in June 2025;

9. Notes that a potential expansion of bilateral trade may have second-round effects on other own resources bases, such as VAT and gross national income;

10. Determines that the proposal is compatible with the current multiannual financial framework, the system of own resources and the corresponding IIA; determines its overall compatibility with the budgetary principles established in the Financial Regulation;

11. Expects the Commission to take the proposal into account in the upcoming annual budgetary procedures and in their post-2028 own resources’ projections.

As part of its budgetary assessment, the Committee on Budgets also submits the following amendments to the draft proposal:

Amendment 1

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 10 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10a) The implications of this Regulation for the Union budget have been assessed+ pursuant to Article 310(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. Sufficient financial and human resources should be provided for its implementation, while considering the impact of the financing on other Union programmes or policies and ensuring its compatibility with the multiannual financial framework, the system of own resources and the corresponding interinstitutional agreement, as well as with the budgetary principles laid down in Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council[1].

____________________

ANNEX: DECLARATION OF INPUT

The rapporteur for budgetary assessment declares under her exclusive responsibility that she did not include in her budgetary assessment input from interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register, or from representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies, to be listed in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT

Title

Adjustment of customs duties on the import of certain goods originating in the United States of America and opening of tariff quotas for imports of certain goods originating in the United States of America

References

COM(2025)0471 – C10-0193/2025 – 2025/0261(COD)

Committee(s) responsible

Date announced in plenary

INTA

20.10.2025

Budgetary assessment by

Date announced in plenary

BUDG

20.10.2025

Rapporteur for budgetary assessment

Date appointed

Danuše Nerudová

20.11.2024

Discussed in committee

20.11.2025

Date adopted

11.12.2025

Result of final vote

–:

Members present for the final vote

Tomasz Buczek, Olivier Chastel, Angéline Furet, Thomas Geisel, Jean-Marc Germain, Monika Hohlmeier, Alexander Jungbluth, Fabienne Keller, Giuseppe Lupo, Siegfried Mureşan, Victor Negrescu, Danuše Nerudová, João Oliveira, Karlo Ressler, Hélder Sousa Silva, Nicolae Ștefănuță, Joachim Streit, Carla Tavares, Nils Ušakovs, Lucia Yar, Auke Zijlstra

Substitutes present for the final vote

Roman Haider, Céline Imart, Rasmus Nordqvist, Kai Tegethoff, Annamária Vicsek

Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote

Maravillas Abadía Jover, Thomas Bajada, Matthias Ecke, Esther Herranz García, Rosa Serrano Sierra

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT

Key to symbols:

15.1.2026

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT

for the Committee on International Trade

(COM(2025)0471 – C100193/2025 – 2025/0261(COD))

Rapporteur for opinion: Veronika Vrecionová

AMENDMENT

The Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development submits the following to the Committee on International Trade, as the committee responsible:

Amendment 1

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(2a) Several product categories, in particular fresh navel oranges, fresh clementines including Monreal, dairy products, cheeses and nuts, constitute highly sensitive sectors for Union producers, given their structural importance, exposure to international competition and vulnerability to market disruption. While this Regulation reflects the current state of commitments, the Union considers it essential that these product-specific arrangements do not set a precedent and remain subject to systematic review and further negotiations in future bilateral exchanges. Such discussions should explicitly allow for the revision, tightening or recalibration of the relevant tariff-rate quotas, volumes and accompanying safeguards, where necessary, in order to ensure the effective protection of Union producers and the overall balance of the agreement.

Amendment 2

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(3a) In this context, the Union reaffirms its readiness to pursue dialogue with the United States with a view to reaching a zero-for-zero tariff understanding in sectors of significant weight for the Union economy, notably in the agri-food sector. It is also important to provide for the possibility of additions to the list of exceptions to the 15 % baseline tariff, particularly with regard to the Union goods such as wine, olive oil, dairy products, beef, honey and spirits.

Amendment 3

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 3 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(3b) The Joint Statement commits both parties to work together to address non-tariff barriers, including streamlining requirements for sanitary certificates, but does not and should not engage the Union to lower its standards nor change the method of their setting, maintaining both parties' regulatory freedom.

Amendment 4

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(4) The Union has committed to eliminate tariffs on all United States industrial goods and to provide preferential market access for a wide range of United States 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. The Union and the United States have committed to negotiate rules of origin that would apply to these trade benefits. However, that opening of the Union market to the United States agricultural goods, without reciprocal measures and with unequal production conditions, raises significant concerns among the farmers in the Union. It is therefore essential to ensure thorough and continuous monitoring of import flows from the United States in order to assess their effects on the Union internal market and, if necessary, to activate safeguard, review and expiry mechanisms. It is also essential that any future adjustments of tariffs with the United States be fully transparent, based on ex-ante and ex-post impact assessments, include consultation with the affected sectors and broader engagement of relevant actors, to support a balanced and mutually beneficial partnership.

Amendment 5

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(4a) Having regard to the potential impact on sensitive market segments for agricultural goods in particular, the elaboration of the tariff quotas should take account of strict terms for their management.

Amendment 6

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 4 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(4b) To ensure adequate and transparent management of the tariff quotas for agricultural goods in particular, having regard to the sensitivity of that sector, quota management should be implemented under the following conditions: (a) the annual quota should be divided into subperiods of monthly, bi-monthly or quarterly periods to prevent premature depletion; (b) the duration of import licences should always be limited to the subperiod of quota management per good, which is particularly relevant for sensitive agricultural goods; (c) volume limits per operator should be applied to prevent market concentration and ensure fair access; (d) in order to promote market stability and to prevent speculation, it should not be possible to transfer unused volumes between subperiods; and (e) import licences should be issued under the condition of pro rata allocation in case of oversubscription, with a ban on transferability, so that only genuinely interested parties will register and with a view to preventing fraud and speculation.

Amendment 7

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(5) Accordingly, the Union should adjust the customs duties on imports of certain goods and open tariff quotas for imports of certain goods originating in the United States, adopting preferential tariff measures as referred to in Article 56 of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council2. It is necessary for preferential tariff measures to be applied in a transparent manner, and for control mechanisms to be strengthened in order to prevent abuses or mislabelling.

_________________

2 Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 October 2013 laying down the Union Customs Code (OJ L 269, 10.10.2013, p. 1).

Amendment 8

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 7 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(7a) The Union and the United States are members of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and have repeatedly reaffirmed their commitment to a rules-based multilateral trading system. The conclusion of this bilateral framework takes place outside the multilateral disciplines of the WTO and therefore raises concerns regarding its compatibility with the principles and obligations set out in the WTO agreements. The WTO’s dispute settlement and negotiating functions have, in recent years, been severely undermined, thus preventing it from fully performing its role as a fair and effective arbiter of global trade relations.

Amendment 9

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 8 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8a) All products covered by this Regulation are subject to the official controls and other official activities provided by Regulation (EU) 2017/625 of the European Parliament and of the Council. They remain fully subject to Union legislation on food safety, public health, including animal welfare and animal and plant health, the environment and the protection of intellectual property, including geographical indications. Preferential tariff treatment should apply only where the United States maintains effective protection of Union geographical indications on its market, including safeguards against misuse or imitation.

Amendment 10

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 8 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8b) It is important for clauses guaranteeing the origin, traceability and monitoring of goods imported from the United States to be complied with, failing which this agreement should be suspended immediately.

Amendment 11

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 8 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8c) In order to safeguard the stability of Union and local agricultural markets, any tariff adjustment or quota expansion under this Regulation should avoid market disruptions, import surges, and unfair competition, particularly in sensitive sectors such as dairy, protected geographical indication products and animal feed. Continuous monitoring through Union market observatories, regular reporting, and structured consultations with affected stakeholders, including small and medium-sized enterprises and primary producers, are essential to ensure transparency and timely corrective action where necessary.

Amendment 12

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 8 d (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8d) When considering the reinstatement of tariff preferences under this Regulation, the Commission should take into account the principle of effective reciprocity and the need to ensure a level playing field between the Union and United States producers.

Amendment 13

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 8 e (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8e) Given that the Union has goods with protected designations of origin and geographical indications, including many high-quality goods with international recognition, it is essential that imports from the United States do not confuse consumers or undermine the value of the protected designations. The Commission should adopt all appropriate measures to protect Union goods with protected designations of origin and geographical indications.

Amendment 14

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 9 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(9a) The United States administration has invoked the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA, 50 U.S.C. §§ 1701 et seq.) to declare a national emergency and impose sweeping tariffs on imports, including those from the Union, representing an unprecedented expansion of executive authority in trade policy. Such use of IEEPA is currently under review by the Supreme Court of the United States, with lower courts having ruled that such tariffs exceed the statutory limits of IEEPA, raising significant questions as to their validity and duration.

Amendment 15

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3a. For the tariff quotas for agricultural goods as set out in Annex III, the import quotas shall be managed by the Commission and the Member States as follows:

(a) the annual quota shall be divided into subperiods of monthly, bi-monthly or quarterly periods;

(b) the duration of import licences shall be limited to the subperiod of quota management per good;

(d) the transfer of unused volumes between subperiods or operators shall not be permitted;

(e) import licences shall be subject to pro rata allocation in case of oversubscription.

Where necessary, the Commission shall be granted the powers to manage quotas under the terms set out in this paragraph.

Amendment 16

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The Commission may adopt an implementing act suspending in whole or in part the application of Article 1 or Article 2 in the following circumstances:

The Commission shall, without undue delay, adopt an implementing act suspending in whole or in part the application of Article 1 or Article 2, and shall immediately inform the European Parliament and the Council thereof, in the following circumstances:

Amendment 17

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) where the United States fails to implement the Joint Statement or otherwise undermines the objectives pursued by the Joint Statement, or undermines access of Union economic operators to the United States market, or takes any measure that results in increased tariffs on goods originating from the Union, imposes additional tariffs or measures having equivalent effect, or otherwise disrupts the trade and investment relationship between the Union and the United States;

Amendment 18

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c) where the adjustment of the customs duties referred to in Article 1, or the opening of tariff quotas referred to in Article 2, results, or is likely to result, in the importation of a good originating in the United States in such increased quantities, in absolute terms or relative to domestic production, and under such conditions as to cause or threaten to cause serious market disturbance or downward pressure on producer prices, or serious injury to the domestic industry or the primary producers of the Union, including critical production sectors of the Member States such as the citrus fruit, table grape, dairy and fishery sectors and the Union goods with protected geographical indications;

Amendment 19

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ca) where monitoring of imports of agri-food goods indicates unfair competition or where market distortions are found to exist;

Amendment 20

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The implementing act referred to in paragraph 1 shall apply for as long as the circumstances referred to in paragraph 1 persist.

2. The implementing act referred to in paragraph 1 shall apply for as long as the circumstances referred to in paragraph 1 persist. If such circumstances cease to exist, the Commission may adopt a delegated act to reinstate the total or partial application of the suspended elements of this Regulation.

Amendment 21

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 3a

Monitoring and corrective actions

1. The Commission shall ensure that any tariff adjustment or quota expansion under this Regulation does not undermine the stability of Union or local agricultural markets, or distort competition, or lead to import surges of sensitive agri-food goods, and shall give particular consideration to those already under pressure from existing United States tariffs such as dairy products and animal feed raw materials. It shall, through the Union market observatories, continuously monitor import volumes, price trends, evolutions in production costs for Union producers, impacts on supply chain sustainability and fair competition in the internal market, as well as compliance with origin and traceability requirements for agricultural goods covered by this Regulation. The Member States shall provide the Commission with the information relevant for establishing disruption in local markets for the relevant agricultural sectors.

2. The Commission shall publish a detailed, public breakdown of agricultural import data by product category, country of origin, tariff treatment, and tariff quota utilisation by ... [three months from the date of entry into force of this Regulation], and shall update this information on a quarterly basis thereafter. Every 6 months, the Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council on the progress of imports and exports, any market disturbances and the necessary preventive or corrective measures taken. The reports shall be based on available and up-to-date information, including structured consultation with the sectors most affected, in particular primary producers and small and medium-sized enterprises. By 31 December 2028, the Commission shall present to the European Parliament and the Council an implementation report assessing in particular the effects of tariff liberalisation on the functioning of the relevant markets, including effects on producer prices, rural employment, and the agri-food processing sector accompanied, where appropriate, by a legislative proposal to amend, suspend or repeal the period of application of this Regulation.

3. Where any evidence of adverse impact on the Union agricultural market or market disturbance or risk thereof is identified, the Commission shall immediately inform the European Parliament and the Council and shall take immediate corrective action. This may include activation of safeguard, review or expiry mechanisms, or compensation measures available under the Common Agricultural Policy crisis reserve, or partial or full suspension of Articles 1 and 2. If appropriate, the Commission may propose to revise or adjust the measures provided for in this Regulation.

Amendment 22

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 b – title and paragraph 1 (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 3b

Verification of origin

1. The Commission shall ensure that goods imported under this Regulation have been substantially produced in the United States and are not transhipped or lightly processed products from third countries. For this purpose, additional documentation checks shall be established.

Amendment 23

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 b – paragraph 2 (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. By 1 January 2028, the Commission shall establish an electronic system for enhanced verification of origin to prevent redirection of goods from third countries through the United States.

Amendment 24

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Entry into force

Entry into force and application

Amendment 25

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

This Regulation shall apply until ... [36 months from the date of entry into force of this Regulation], unless the European Parliament and the Council decide to extend it on the basis of a proposal referred to in Article 3a(2).

ANNEX: DECLARATION OF INPUT

The Chair in her capacity as rapporteur for opinion declares under her exclusive responsibility that she did not include in her opinion input from interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register, or from representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies, to be listed in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title

References

COM(2025)0471 – C10-0193/2025 – 2025/0261(COD)

Committee(s) responsible

Date announced in plenary

INTA

20.10.2025

Opinion by

Date announced in plenary

AGRI

20.10.2025

Rapporteur for the opinion

Date appointed

Veronika Vrecionová

5.11.2025

Date adopted

12.1.2026

Result of final vote

–:

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Key to symbols:

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

Title

References

COM(2025)0471 – C10-0193/2025 – 2025/0261(COD)

Date submitted to Parliament

28.8.2025

Committee(s) responsible

Date announced in plenary

INTA

20.10.2025

Committees asked for opinions

Date announced in plenary

BUDG

20.10.2025

AGRI

20.10.2025

Rapporteurs

Date appointed

Bernd Lange

24.9.2025

Budgetary assessment

Date of budgetary assessment

BUDG

11.12.2025

Discussed in committee

24.9.2025

4.11.2025

2.12.2025

Date adopted

19.3.2026

Result of final vote

–:

Date tabled

19.3.2026

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL BY THE COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

Key to symbols: