Skip to main content

Trump’s Tariff Threats: A 50% Levy on the EU and 25% on iPhones Shakes Global Markets



On May 23, 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump reignited global trade tensions with a pair of bold tariff threats that sent shockwaves through financial markets. In back-to-back posts on Truth Social, Trump announced a recommended 50% tariff on all European Union goods starting June 1, 2025, and a 25% tariff on iPhones not manufactured in the U.S., targeting tech giant Apple. These moves, coming just weeks after a period of relative calm in trade relations, have sparked fears of a renewed trade war, with potential ripple effects on consumers, businesses, and international relations. Here’s what these threats mean and why they’re causing such a stir.


A Sudden Escalation in Trade Policy

Trump’s latest tariff threats mark a sharp departure from recent de-escalation efforts. Earlier this year, in April, Trump imposed steep tariffs on various countries, including a 20% “reciprocal” rate on EU goods and over 100% on Chinese imports. However, after market turmoil and pushback from businesses, the White House granted exemptions, particularly for electronics like smartphones imported from China—a lifeline for companies like Apple. These exemptions, along with a temporary reduction in tariffs on Chinese goods, had brought some stability to global markets. That stability evaporated on Friday morning when Trump announced his new recommendations.

In his post about the EU, Trump accused the 27-nation bloc of being “very difficult to deal with,” claiming it was “formed for the primary purpose of taking advantage of the United States on TRADE.” He cited a U.S. trade deficit with the EU, which he claimed exceeds $250 billion annually—a figure disputed by the Office of the United States Trade Representative, which reported a $235.6 billion goods trade deficit in 2024. “Our discussions with them are going nowhere!” Trump wrote, recommending a “straight 50% tariff” on all EU imports starting June 1, 2025, unless the goods are manufactured in the U.S.

Minutes earlier, Trump targeted Apple, writing, “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else.” He threatened a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the U.S. but not made domestically, a move that could upend Apple’s global supply chain. Currently, the U.S. has no smartphone manufacturing, with Apple assembling most iPhones in China and increasingly in India, where an estimated 25% of production will occur by the end of 2025.


Market Reactions and Economic Concerns

The announcement triggered immediate market reactions. U.S. stock futures plummeted, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average dropping nearly 600 points (1.4%), the S&P 500 falling 1.6%, and the Nasdaq 100 sinking 1.9%. Apple shares slid 3.8% in morning trading, reflecting investor concerns about the company’s reliance on overseas manufacturing. European markets also took a hit, with Germany’s DAX and France’s CAC 40 plunging around 3% at their lowest points, and the UK’s FTSE 100 dipping into the red after early gains. The euro pared gains sharply against the dollar, and Treasury yields sank as investors sought safer assets.

The proposed 50% tariff on EU goods would affect a wide range of products, from German cars to Italian olive oil, French pharmaceuticals, and Belgian electric vehicles like Volvo’s EX30. Volvo Cars CEO Hakan Samuelsson told Reuters that such a tariff could make it “impossible” to import smaller cars into the U.S., with customers bearing the brunt of cost increases. Lindsay James, an investment strategist at Quilter, noted that the EU now faces a higher tariff rate than China—an “almost unthinkable scenario” just weeks ago—suggesting the policy is more punitive than economically grounded.

For Apple, the 25% tariff on iPhones poses a significant challenge. The company has been diversifying its supply chain away from China, with India becoming a key manufacturing hub. However, building iPhones in the U.S. is a nonstarter for industry experts due to the lack of domestic infrastructure and higher labor costs. If implemented, the tariff could raise iPhone prices significantly—some estimates suggest a $3,500 price tag for a high-end model—or force Apple to absorb the costs, squeezing its profit margins. Trump’s pressure on Apple echoes his broader strategy of pushing companies to “eat” tariff costs, as seen in his recent comments to Walmart, though this approach risks layoffs and economic strain.


Geopolitical and Domestic Implications

The timing of Trump’s threats raises questions about his motives. The EU, America’s second-largest trading partner after China, exported $350 billion in goods to the U.S. in recent years while importing $550 billion. The proposed 50% tariff—far higher than the 39% rate Trump floated in April—comes as the EU is conducting a public review of counter-tariffs on $100 billion of U.S. products. Maros Šefčovič, the EU’s trade chief, was scheduled to speak with U.S. counterpart Jamieson Greer on May 23, but the EU Commission declined to comment immediately on Trump’s threat. Some analysts, like Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, suggest the tariff recommendation may be a negotiating tactic to pressure the EU into concessions, such as lowering its value-added tax or reducing non-tariff barriers.

Domestically, Trump’s tariff push aligns with his “America First” agenda but risks alienating key stakeholders. The One Big, Beautiful Bill Act, which passed the House by a single vote on May 22, already includes $25 billion for the Golden Dome missile defense system—a project tied to national security concerns that could be undermined by trade wars with allies like the EU and Canada. Moreover, U.S. businesses, from automakers to retailers, have warned of supply chain disruptions and higher consumer prices. The heads of General Motors, Ford, and Stellantis recently met with Trump to highlight how tariffs on steel and aluminum—already at 25%—disrupt manufacturing, even with some exemptions.

Posts on X reflect a mix of skepticism and alarm. Some users called the tariffs a return to “classic short-sighted nationalism,” predicting higher prices and trade wars, while others speculated Trump might back off after initial threats, as he did with China earlier this year. One user quipped, “Does he realize not everything can be produced in the U.S.?” highlighting the practical challenges of Trump’s demands.


A High-Stakes Gamble

Trump’s tariff threats are a high-stakes gamble with far-reaching consequences. For the EU, a 50% tariff could strain diplomatic ties and provoke retaliatory measures, potentially escalating into a full-blown trade war. For Apple, the 25% tariff on iPhones could disrupt its global operations and raise costs for American consumers. And for the global economy, already rattled by months of tariff uncertainty, this latest escalation threatens to undo recent progress toward stability.

As June 1 approaches, the world watches to see if Trump will follow through or if this is another negotiating ploy. For now, his threats have injected fresh uncertainty into an already volatile landscape, leaving businesses, consumers, and allies bracing for what comes next.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

U.S. Strikes on Iranian Nuclear Sites: Unraveling the Impact of Operation Midnight Hammer

  On June 22, 2025, the United States launched a stunning military assault, code-named Operation Midnight Hammer, against Iran's nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. It was a biting switch in the Israel-Iran war, pushing the U.S. into direct confrontation after weeks of growing tensions. President Donald Trump confidently declared the attacks a total success, asserting that they "obliterated" Iran's nuclear program and dealt a devastating blow to Tehran's plans. But as satellite imagery and early intelligence reports arrive, the more sobering picture reveals widespread but reversible damage, possibly delaying Iran's program by several months at most, not destroying it entirely. With Iran deeming "badly damaged" targets and hinting at preemptive evacuations, and global leaders cautioning against danger of escalation, the real impact of this operation remains a subject of close scrutiny and debate.  The Operation: A Military Success with ...

Severe Damage but Not Irreversible’: Decoding Satellite Images of U.S. Strikes on Iranian Nuclear Sites

  With the dust having yet to settle on the U.S. bombing campaign that hit Iran's nuclear facilities on June 22, 2025, satellite imagery has proven to be the indispensable tool for unraveling the truth behind the devastation. The mission, dubbed Operation Midnight Hammer, was a mass deployment of B-2 stealth bombers and Tomahawk cruise missiles on the Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan sites—important pillars of Iran's uranium enrichment program. President Donald Trump called the raids a complete success, claiming they "obliterated" Iran's nuclear program. However, a closer inspection of satellite imagery, combined with expert opinion and alternative reports, undermines the validity of the damage reportedly done, whether it can be fixed, and the official pronouncements. The Strike Targets: A Strategic Overview The American attacks hit three extremely well-protected nuclear sites, each of which was designed to withstand significant attacks. Fordow, hidden in a mountain, i...

Trump’s Military Parade and the “No Kings” Protests: A Nation Divided on Display

  Washington, D.C. will host a grand military parade on June 14, 2025, to commemorate the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army's founding, which also happens to be President Donald Trump's 79th birthday. The procession, featuring over 6,600 soldiers, 150 vehicles, 50 aircraft, and even a horse, a mule, and a dog, will be the biggest military celebration in the capital city since the 1991 Gulf War victory parade. But this demonstration of American military power is tainted by deepening national polarizations with thousands of demonstrators marching in nearly 2,000 towns and cities across the United States under the banner of the "No Kings" movement. These protests, fueled by opposition to Trump's policies—particularly his aggressive immigration enforcement and politically charged use of National Guard and U.S. Marines to Los Angeles—mark a contentious and polarized moment in American history. This article explores the context, controversies, and significance of this ...