The EU still has no trade agreement with the US just days before the end of the truce.

During the commissioners' visit to the Danish city of Arhus to launch Denmark's six-month rotating presidency of the EU Council, there was one notable absence: Trade Commissioner Maros Sefcovic. His absence was well justified: he was in Washington to meet with US authorities and try to return with a basis for a trade agreement just days before July 9, the deadline to avoid the US-threatened tariff hike.

So far, Sefcovic's meetings with US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent; Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick; and Trade Representative Jamieson Greer have not led to any white smoke. Official information, according to Commission Trade spokesman Olof Gill, is that this latest trip saw "progress toward an agreement in principle" for Wednesday—which would be detailed later—and about which the Commission briefed the ambassadors of the Twenty-Seven for about an hour on Friday afternoon. After the necessary consultations, "the Commission will now reengage with the United States on the substance over the weekend." "At the same time, we are preparing for the possibility that a satisfactory agreement may not be reached," Gill noted. The ambassadors could meet again on Monday if there is progress over the weekend.

Anti-dumping measures China raises tariffs on European brandy to 35%

China's Ministry of Commerce announced yesterday the imposition of anti-dumping tariffs of between 27.7% and 34.9% on brandy imports from the European Union starting July 5, 2025, although it also indicated that the new tariffs will not apply to companies that have reached "price undertakings." According to Beijing, these tariffs on brandy imports from the EU will range between 27.7% and 34.9%, including 32.2% for Bodegas Osborne, Bodegas Fundador, and Miguel Torres. China maintains that European brandy has been imported at an artificially low price and that this represents a case of unfair competition. This protectionist measure follows the European bloc's decision to impose tariffs of up to 45% on electric vehicles manufactured in China. European companies, to avoid the tariff surcharge, have already submitted price undertaking requests to the investigating authority. Thus, they will not be subject to antidumping duties if they export distillates to China at a price no lower than the promised price. Beijing warns that tariffs will be levied if they fail to comply.

Other diplomatic sources point out that the situation is complicated, although there is a willingness on both sides to continue, because the US is still trying to impose substantial tariffs on a significant number of industries, such as the European automotive industry—Trump is obsessed with German cars—while showing openness to removing them from others.

Europe assumes that it will have to accept 10% "reciprocal" tariffs like the United Kingdom.

All this, while Europe should always accept a minimum of 10% "reciprocal" tariffs, as the United Kingdom did. The Financial Times also noted that the US is threatening 17% tariffs on agricultural products.

At the same time, across the Atlantic, US President Donald Trump warned that his administration would begin sending letters to countries with which it has not reached a trade agreement to notify them of the tariffs it intends to impose. He indicated that there would be about a dozen letters per day, and the value of the new tariffs "will vary from, perhaps, tariffs of 60 or 70% to tariffs of 10 to 20%," and in some cases will be higher than those announced on the so-called "liberation day" last April.

Brussels is aware that any trade pact with the United States will result in a worse situation for Europe than it was before Trump returned to the White House, and this is something that is already being absorbed. First of all, the United States is collecting more and more from the tariffs that remain in place during this truce—10% "reciprocal" for the EU, 50% for steel and aluminum, and 25% for cars—and the Trump administration does not want to give up this revenue.

The Financial Times reports that Trump is threatening 17% tariffs on agricultural products.

The question, however, is how much worse it will get. Several countries prefer a tariff war to a bad deal in which the EU loses too much. Others, especially Germany, are pushing for a quick agreement, even if it's bad, because their industries are being severely affected by the current tariffs. In any case, everyone here is aware that in Washington, nothing is final until Trump signs it, and not even then. Furthermore, the president's unpredictability is one of the factors that leads some countries to believe that signing anything is no guarantee of peace.

If all goes well, there's already talk of a lightning trip by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen to stage the potential agreement with Trump at some point. There are no preparations yet, and the president's schedule is tight, but it's natural to think the tariff agreement would take priority.