Gli Stati Uniti chiedono all’UE di smantellare le norme verdi mettendo a rischio l’accordo commerciale

# US demands EU dismantle green regulations in threat to trade deal

The US is demanding the EU water down parts of its green legislation just months after agreeing a tariff pact to avoid an all-out transatlantic trade war.

According to a US government position paper seen by the Financial Times, Washington has asked Brussels to scrap requirements for non-EU companies to provide “climate transition plans”.

It has also demanded that the bloc change environmental legislation on supply chains to exclude US companies and others from “countries with high-quality corporate due diligence”.

Washington’s demands come as US President Donald Trump has also pressured Brussels over its laws restricting big technology groups, sparking nervousness within the EU that the trade deal agreed in July will not hold.

The EU’s corporate due diligence rules, which came into force last year, require companies operating in the bloc to identify any environmental and social harms in their supply chains, in a bid to crack down on forced labour and pollution.

But in its paper, the Trump administration described the legislation as a “serious and unwarranted regulatory over-reach” that “imposes significant economic and regulatory burdens on US companies”.

The legislation’s “extraterritorial reach, onerous supply chain due diligence obligations, climate transition plan requirements, and civil-liability provisions will adversely impact the ability of US businesses to compete in the EU market”, the document adds.

Washington has communicated its demands to the European Commission in recent days, according to two EU officials familiar with the matter.

Unlike traditional trade negotiations, the US is not offering concessions in return. “It’s a one-way street,” said one EU official.

US companies fear the due diligence rules will expose them to increased risk of legal actions in an already litigious market, because they allow activist groups to take legal action over child labour and environmental damage in their supply chains.

According to US officials, several American companies have said that they will need to halt operations in the EU as a result of the due diligence and sustainability reporting rules, which demand that companies report on hundreds of data points related to their environmental footprint.

Violations of the due diligence rules could result in fines of up to 5 per cent of global turnover.

The legislation has come under attack from US oil and gas companies, with ExxonMobil’s chief executive Darren Woods describing the rules as threatening US companies with “bone-crunching” penalties on a results call in August.

The demands expand on Trump administration concerns contained in July’s trade pact, reached at Turnberry in Scotland, which said “undue restrictions” should not be imposed on transatlantic trade, and specified that the EU should make changes to cut red tape.

The “Turnberry” deal set tariffs on most EU products at 15 per cent, but left open scope for further concessions by Brussels. European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen has said EU regulations were a “red line”, but is herself weakening them after complaints from European businesses and governments.

A panoply of laws forcing companies to fight deforestation, labour abuses and reduce their impact on the environment are being weakened or delayed, and the US is pushing Brussels to go further.

The interim “framework agreement” reached at Turnberry marks the beginning of a wider process to remove unfair trade barriers in the EU, according to two US officials.

The US has also raised concerns about the EU’s carbon border tax, which would apply as of next year to polluting industries outside the bloc, such as steel and aluminium manufacturers.

Washington also objects to an upcoming EU anti-deforestation law, which would ban the import of goods such as timber and cocoa if producers fail to prove that no forests were felled in their production.

Brussels last month said it would delay the deforestation rules for a second time by another year, blaming an IT system issue.

The EU is already making efforts to streamline the rules as part of a broader agenda to cut red tape within the bloc and as European companies are also balking at the rules.

But the simplification drive has hit a roadblock in the European parliament, with leftwing politicians accusing the conservatives of deregulation and siding with the far right to gut the legislation.

If a company is found exploiting child labor, it should be outright banned from EU!

Making deals with the current US administration is pointless, as they’ll just move the goalposts again and again. Also, if you are worried about being sued for using child labor in your supply chain, maybe don’t use child labor in your supply chain? Seems like a non-controversial stance to take…

Interesting.

In response, may I suggest that each and every member of the American administration suck shit.

I mean, what was the EU expecting, for the Trump admin to honor their word? That’s their fault for not closing ranks with Canada and other countries affected by this beligerence and building a more US-resilient economy. Lions led by donkeys.

First, they want to get rich by selling their oil and gas products to Europe.

Second, they are demanding it because oil and gas help maintain the dominance of the USD in global trade, as these commodities are typically traded in dollars. They are losing their global influence, especially if one of the biggest markets – Europe – continues transitioning to renewable energy.

How about no.

If the US wishes to tack on additional requirements following the agreement of a deal, then they reveal themselves to be unreliable business partners who’s deals aren’t worth the paper it’s signed on.

There’s nothing stopping the US if they decide they want to ask for more demands even if the EU agrees to every thing that they want here.

Trade and co-operation should be built on mutual benefit, with the idea that failing to engage co-operatively will have consequences that will make the unco-operative party suffer.

The EU capitulating to any demand post deal allows the US to skirt the consequences of its own actions, and only rewards/motivates them for their continued agression to their allies.

It protects the EU long term to take a stand and absorb the costs of disharmony with the US.

Then just drop the trade deal and call it a day. The whole world has to stop giving head to every USA whim, just because they have money.

That trade deal with the US is looking great 🫠

Reminds me Darth Vader: “I’m altering the deal, pray I don’t alter any further”

“U.S. demands,” sounds a lot like Russia.

At some point they will request we send our military to “police” and arrest the undesirable citizens in our own countries.

How about we say no now and govern ourselves?

*now Im even gonna regulate even harder*

Why the f would the EU move away from the future and back to american stone-age? there are like 20 years of fossil fuels left at best