Martin Sandbu

The EU has validated Trump’s bullying trade agenda [FREE TO READ] The US president’s deals are not a win-win for the global economy

"Trump has ushered in an era in which panic rather than policy drives the global trade system. For those that ought to be able to push back, such as the EU, it has looked more like cowering to a bully." Strong FT editorial on Europe's submission to Trump. on.ft.com/3U52oag

Norge bør kjøpe Harvard Akademisk eksellense har aldri vært billigere.

An original solution... ("Norway should buy Harvard") www.dn.no/innlegg/harv...

A man ahead of his time...

Trade and wealth tax myth-busting Know your facts before conventional wisdom gets you

"If a wealth tax in the UK took in similar percentages [to those raised by the same in Norway and Switzerland], it could raise between £20bn and £45bn."

@martinsandbu.ft.com dispels some of the myths swirling around #WealthTaxes, in the @financialtimes.com.

www.ft.com/content/7ec2...

Good observation. Also "political agreement". Link to the whole thing?

Welcome to FT Edit! When the news is overwhelming, we bring you eight stories a day, chosen by editors, offering clarity, fresh perspectives, insight and inspiration — plus some extra treats! Explore more at www.ft.com/ftedit or, if you're reading on iOS, find us on the FT app: on.ft.com/44SHfGA

The EU’s budget is setting it up for geopolitical marginalisation [FREE TO READ] The good, the bad and the ugly of the bloc’s multiyear spending proposal

In the fiasco of the EU joining Trump in killing the rules-based trading order, don't forget the other (admittedly smaller) EU miss this month. The good, the bad and the ugly of the new budget proposals. on.ft.com/4f72wj0

Maybe the € is not falling because the agreed 15% tariffs will hurt European exports, but rather because the agreement makes it seem the EU is less likely to take the politico-fiscal steps that would follow from not having bargained about the tariffs.

The EU’s budget is setting it up for geopolitical marginalisation [FREE TO READ] The good, the bad and the ugly of the bloc’s multiyear spending proposal

In the fiasco of the EU joining Trump in killing the rules-based trading order, don't forget the other (admittedly smaller) EU miss this month. The good, the bad and the ugly of the new budget proposals. on.ft.com/4f72wj0

Very true

Another perfectly factually accurate headline readily available to media outlets framing this in terms of "who wins" & totally normalizing Trump's wildly illegal trade policies that violate both US law & our WTO treaty commitments.

Spending 5 per cent on defence doesn’t make Nato stronger [FREE TO READ] An arbitrary target won’t enhance members’ capabilities or co-ordination and encourages creative accounting

Some seriously smart observations from @alanderminna.bsky.social here. on.ft.com/44Snjng

bsky.app/profile/mart...

Donald Trump’s hard tariff deadline dissolves into whirl of endless confusion [FREE TO READ] EU and other trading partners are being bullied into opaque and unenforceable deals

Suitably hard-hitting from @alanbeattie.bsky.social today. on.ft.com/4fgjBYa

Correct headline today: EU endorses the drive-by killing of the postwar rules-based trading system and the most-favoured-nation principle.

If President Trump was serious, he would act now. Tougher sanctions and seize all frozen Russian sovereign assets now. No need to wait and show further weakness to respond. Make Putin pay for his war of aggression and terror in Ukraine. Now!

Nothing "realo" about trusting Trump's word.

Its legal power to do nothing was indisputable here (so in this sense like the ECB). Not "viable" just means the Commission would have had to take a lot of heat. Well, what do commissioners think politics is about? Member states getting very cross at you does not mean you don't have the power.

Also this. The EU's deep challenge is it's failure so far to align all its strategic interests in joined-up policy.

bsky.app/profile/laur...

Important climate perspective on the EU-US trade "deal" here.

Dammed waterfalls not so pretty either.

I wasn't predicting; we know what they ended up doing. I was saying what they should have done. Your original post suggests the Commission had little choice. I dispute that.

The EU doesn’t need a deal with Trump The bloc has the strength not to offer the US anything

1. Yesterday's deal between the US and the EU will not create stability. The conclusions of @martinsandbu.ft.com remain as valid as ever:
"What the EU does need to do is to stop dangling hopes to its own companies and citizens that some stability is achievable. There will be no new status quo.

That's precisely what the US has done because they didn't act in concert.

The commission could simply have done nothing. It wouldn't have needed anything from member states for that. Of course Trump would then have done whatever he wants to do, but the EU at least wouldn't have participated in killing MFN and the general Gatt/WTO approach to rules-based trade.

Establishing a reputation for being a pushover, unwilling to bear costs in order to promote one’s interests, is also a threat to our physical security in a dangerous world.

I suspect some citizens also intuitively understand this.

Shame they didn't listen. But since it's likely to unravel soon, they may get a second chance.

Good column by @martinsandbu.ft.com

This is what should have happened.

These two are some of the very rare good takes I've seen so far.