Fact Check: EU steel and aluminum exports face crippling 50% tariffs from the U.S.

Fact Check: EU steel and aluminum exports face crippling 50% tariffs from the U.S.

Published June 20, 2025
±
VERDICT
Partially True

# Fact Check: "EU steel and aluminum exports face crippling 50% tariffs from the U.S." ## What We Know The claim that EU steel and aluminum exports w...

Fact Check: "EU steel and aluminum exports face crippling 50% tariffs from the U.S."

What We Know

The claim that EU steel and aluminum exports will face a 50% tariff from the U.S. is based on recent announcements regarding tariff increases. On June 4, 2025, President Donald J. Trump signed a proclamation to raise tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from 25% to 50% as a measure to protect U.S. industries, citing national security concerns (source-1). This tariff increase is scheduled to take effect on June 4, 2025. However, it is important to note that tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from the United Kingdom will remain at 25%, with possible changes or quotas depending on ongoing negotiations (source-1).

The European Union has indicated that it may respond to the U.S. tariffs with its own retaliatory measures, potentially imposing a 50% tariff on American whiskey if an agreement is not reached by the end of March 2025 (source-2). This context suggests that while the U.S. tariffs are set to increase, the EU's response is contingent upon negotiations.

Analysis

The assertion that EU steel and aluminum exports will face a 50% tariff is partially true. The U.S. has indeed announced an increase in tariffs to 50%, but this will apply to all steel and aluminum imports, not exclusively to those from the EU. The current tariffs on EU steel and aluminum imports are set at 25% and will remain at that level unless further negotiations alter this status (source-1).

The potential for a 50% tariff on EU exports is more of a future possibility rather than an immediate reality. The EU has expressed concerns about the impact of U.S. tariffs on its own industries, particularly in sectors like whiskey, which could face retaliatory tariffs if no agreement is reached (source-2).

The sources used are credible, with the first being an official proclamation from the White House and the second being a news report discussing the implications of the tariffs. However, the potential for retaliatory tariffs is still speculative and dependent on future negotiations.

Conclusion

The claim that EU steel and aluminum exports face a crippling 50% tariff from the U.S. is partially true. While the U.S. has announced an increase in tariffs to 50%, this will not apply to EU exports immediately, as current tariffs remain at 25%. The situation is fluid, with potential retaliatory measures from the EU depending on the outcome of ongoing discussions. Therefore, while the claim has a basis in fact, it does not fully represent the current state of affairs.

Sources

  1. Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Increases Section 232 Tariffs on Steel and Aluminum
  2. How EU's retaliatory tariff impacted American whiskey exports in Trump's first term
  3. Biden extends EU steel, aluminum tariff exemption for 2 years
  4. Trump's 50% Tariffs on Steel and Aluminum Imports
  5. Trump: US to double steel import tariffs to 50%

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
100% Free
No Registration
Instant Results

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

Fact Check: Magnets stick to stainless steel
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Magnets stick to stainless steel

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Magnets stick to stainless steel

Jul 8, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Trump controls a 'golden share' in U.S. Steel's national security deal.
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Trump controls a 'golden share' in U.S. Steel's national security deal.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Trump controls a 'golden share' in U.S. Steel's national security deal.

Jun 29, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Trump's 'golden share' gives him veto power over critical U.S. Steel decisions.
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Trump's 'golden share' gives him veto power over critical U.S. Steel decisions.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Trump's 'golden share' gives him veto power over critical U.S. Steel decisions.

Jun 28, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Transcript
00:00
911 was a false flag. For the
first 10 years, I did not think
anything other than the
official narrative then after
being shown a video, a close up
video of building number seven
coming down and that got me
going because it's obvious to
me that building seven was was
a controlled demolition because
the building collapses from the
bottom down. The trade centers
were unique in that they were
designed to withstand the
00:33
impact of a a a jet. From what
I understand the the outer
skeleton of the building. The
outer columns was like a a fish
net and you had these inner
core columns which was
substantial thick steel beams
to withstand four or five times
what the loads were. Got it.
The engineers always over
design a building. No steel
frame building has ever
collapsed before or since 9/
eleven. So that should say
something right there. And it
said that building seven it was
01:05
aggressive collapse that it was
caused by fire but progressive
collapse unlike the twin
towers, the twin towers
collapse from the top down.
That's a progressive collapse.
Sure. Floor by floor by floor.
But if you look at the videos
of building seven collapsing,
it collapses uniformly, it's
collapsing from the bottom, the
building stays intact all the
way to the bottom of the ground
and you could see the sides
caving in on it. For a building
to collapse uniformly which the
video show all the load bearing
it would have to have failed
01:36
simultaneously. Now, fire
doesn't act like that. I came
across an analogy of the twin
towers and if you could
visualize cast iron stoves
stacked. One on top of each
other. The stoves up at the
top. Yes, there's fire and
they've been damaged but the
stoves on the bottom, they
haven't been damaged. Okay. So,
the structure underneath all of
that is intact. So, it's
impossible for a building to
collapse near free fall speed
and increase. Without a
02:07
controlled demolition. You're
running into the path of most
resistance. I something else is
going on. I don't believe that
it was just the planes or the
fires I think that and they
examine the dust and they found
what they call thermitic
material which is like a
explosive incendiary which was
in the dust samples and that's
documented. There were reports
of the buildings were
undergoing a extensive elevator
renovation in the two or three
years prior to all kinds of
02:40
workers they had access to the
the core the cores of the
building and on the day of the
attack the the elevator company
would not assist in the
operations of the elevators and
the elevator company was the
elevator company it
subsequently went out of
business and a couple of years
after that
False

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Jul 28, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Canada is the largest foreign supplier of steel to the United States.
Unverified

Fact Check: Canada is the largest foreign supplier of steel to the United States.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Canada is the largest foreign supplier of steel to the United States.

Jul 1, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Metallurgical coal is used in the production of steel.
Unverified

Fact Check: Metallurgical coal is used in the production of steel.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Metallurgical coal is used in the production of steel.

Jul 1, 2025
Read more →