In high diplomacy, quiet agreements are more important than loud statements

According to Reuters, the European Commission issued an official statement demanding full clarity on the United States' next steps following the February 20 Supreme Court decision that found most of the Trump administration's tariffs unlawful. This clarity is needed so as not to undermine the predictability of transatlantic trade.

Brussels' official position

The EC stressed that the current uncertainty does not contribute to the "fair, balanced and mutually beneficial" trade the parties agreed on in a joint statement in August 2025. Brussels expects the US to fulfil the commitments it previously undertook, which the EU itself is also observing.

"A deal is a deal. As the United States' largest trading partner, the EU expects the US to honour the commitments set out in the Joint Statement, just as the EU is honouring its commitments."

— European Commission (official statement)

The Commission also emphasized that European goods should enjoy the most‑favoured treatment without tariffs being raised above the agreed cap.

Brief: timeline of recent steps

• 20 February — The US Supreme Court found most of the Trump administration's tariffs unlawful (source: Reuters).
• At the same time, the US Trade Representative said that tariffs against China and certain sectoral duties remain in force.
• The administration announced new global tariffs, with some rates raised from 10% to 15% from 24 February for 150 days; further restrictions are also being announced.
• Last year's agreement provided for a 15% rate for most goods from the EU and zero tariffs on certain categories (for example, aircraft and spare parts), and the EU withdrew the threat of reciprocal tariffs.

Why this matters for Ukraine

Uncertainty in the trade rules between the US and the EU complicates competition in third markets, where Ukrainian exporters compete alongside European suppliers. Fluctuating tariffs and unpredictable restrictions increase logistics costs, complicate financial planning and deter investment — effects that are especially pronounced during the war.

Moreover, stability in transatlantic rules is important for Ukraine's integration into European supply chains: clear agreements reduce risks for partners and increase the attractiveness of investment in our manufacturing capacities.

What's next — a brief analysis

Experts agree that what matters now is not only announcing positions but detailing: timelines, scopes of application and dispute‑settlement mechanisms. Without this, there is a risk of escalation of trade disputes that hit supply chains and weaken the region's economic resilience.

For Ukraine, it is important to monitor the development of negotiations between Brussels and Washington — and to seek opportunities to consolidate its role in chains where predictable trade rules work in favour of our exporters. The ball is now in the partners' court: will they turn declarations into concrete mechanisms that protect market stability?