ADVERTISEMENTWhen the US slapped a 25% tariff on EU aluminium and steel in mid-March it fired the opening salvo in a trade tussle between the long-time allies which subsequently saw 25% tariffs slapped on imports of EU cars into the US and a blanket 10% tariff on other imports. EU officials, caught between diplomatic outrage and the economic realities of safeguarding EU industries, announced a series of counter-measures, which were suspendedafter US President Donald Trump proclaimed a 90-day pause on a round of so-called reciprocal tariffs, which would lift the 10% blanket levy to 20%.
But this is far from the first time the EU and US have locked horns over trade.
From chicken to aircraft manufacturing, a series of economic skirmishes have punctuated the history of the transatlantic alliance.
This bout shows signs of possible escalation well beyond previous trade scraps, however, with services, and particularly tech entering the battleground, as a result of the trade surplus in services enjoyed by the US over the EU.
The chicken war – US 1 / EU 1
In 1962, confronted with a flood of inexpensive American chicken imports, the European Economic Community (EEC) — then comprising France, West Germany, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg — took decisive action by imposing tariffs on US poultry.
The move had an immediate impact: American chicken exports to Europe, particularly to West Germany — a key target market — plummeted.
The US estimated its losses at $46 million annually, while the EEC argued the figure was closer to $19 million. The GATT — the forerunner to the WTO— eventually settled on a compromise figure: $26 million in damages.
With negotiations deadlocked, Washington opted for retaliation. It imposed tariffs worth roughly $26 million on a range of European goods, including trucks, brandy and dextrine.
In the end, neither side emerged as a clear victor. Europe paid a lower price than initially expected, while the US secured leverage through its targeted tariffs.
The banana war – US 1 / EU 0
The so-called “Banana Wars” marked one of the longest-running trade disputes between Brussels and Washington, lasting more than 15 years.
In 1993, the EU adopted a preferential trade regime favouring banana exports from ACP countries — a group made up of former European colonies in Africa, the Caribbean, and the Pacific – as part of a strategy aimed at supporting fragile economies.
However, the US took issue with the decision, arguing that it unfairly disadvantaged some of its multinationals which were major players in the global banana trade.
The case was taken by the US to the WTO which in 1997 condemned the EU. In 1998, the EU modified its import system, but the US felt that this was not enough. It retaliated with tariffs on EU exports such as French handbags and Italian Pecorino cheese, levying up to $191 million.
It was not until 2009 that the EU agreed to lower its customs duties on bananas from €176 to €114 per tonne.
The beef hormone war – US 0 / EU 1
What began in 1989 as a public health measure quickly escalated into another major transatlantic trade dispute. That year, the EEC imposed a ban on the import of beef treated with artificial growth hormones, citing consumer safety concerns. The decision effectively shut out beef exports from Australia, Canada, and the United States.
ADVERTISEMENTWashington and Ottawa challenged the measure at the WTO. A decade later, in 1999, the WTO sided with the complainants, granting the US the right to impose retaliatory tariffs on goods from the EEC – which by then had transmuted into the European Union (EU) – worth $116.8 million annually.
The sanctions hit some totemic European exports including French Roquefort, Italian and Spanish hams, and Belgian chocolates.
After more than two decades of wrangling, the dispute was finally resolved in 2011: The EU agreed to gradually expand its quotas for high-quality, non-hormone-treated beef from the US; in return, Washington lifted its punitive tariffs.
The never-ending story: Boeing/Airbus – US 0 / EU 0
For 17 years, the EU and the US were locked in a bitter battle over state subsidies to their respective aerospace giants — Airbus and Boeing.
ADVERTISEMENTThe saga began with a 1992 agreement designed to regulate government support for the two aircraft giants. But by 2004, Washington had grown dissatisfied, accusing the EU of unfairly subsidising Airbus. The US withdrew from the deal and launched a formal complaint at the WTO.
What followed was a drawn-out legal and diplomatic confrontation, which reached its peak during the first Trump administration. In 2019, the WTO authorised the US to impose tariffs on nearly $7.5 billion worth of EU goods and services annually.
A year later, in 2020, the pendulum swung in the EU’s favour. The WTO granted Brussels the right to impose tariffs on US imports in response to subsidies received by Boeing.
In 2021, a breakthrough was announced: both sides agreed to suspend the tariffs, marking a temporary truce. However, the détente is only set to last until 2026.
ADVERTISEMENTThe first aluminium and steel war – US 0 / EU 0
The dispute began in 2018, when the Trump administration imposed sweeping tariffs on steel and aluminium imports, citing national security concerns like it does today. The EU responded swiftly, filing a complaint with the WTO and imposing countermeasures on €2.8 billion worth of US goods, including iconic products like bourbon, motorcycles and orange juice.
The standoff endured until 2021, when both sides — under the Biden administration — agreed to suspend the tariffs in a move hailed as a step towards restoring transatlantic trust.
However, that fragile peace has now unravelled. With 25% US tariffs back in force as of March 2025.
Game, set and match?
What sets the current trade stand-off apart – aside from the intensity of the dispute – is the apparent departure from the scene of the World Trade Organization (WTO) as an arbiter.
ADVERTISEMENTTraditionally, as the above examples show, disputes would be channelled through the WTO, the multilateral institution designed to manage and mediate global trade tensions.
But the US is stymying appointments to the panel which determines WTO disputes, and has declared ‘reciprocal’ tariffs against more than half of the body’s members.
A glance at the Homeric trade wars between the EU and the US will remind us that the multilateral organisation or its predecessor the GATT have been at the forefront of resolving disputes in the past.
The past examples also show that, even where there might be a winner on paper, no-one emerges as a true winner from a trade war.
ADVERTISEMENT
