Brexit divided them — tariffs are bringing them back together. Credit: Canva

Not long ago, the very idea of the EU and the UK teaming up on trade would have sounded like satire. Brexit split the UK and the EU economically and politically.  London determined to chart its course, now fast forward to 2025—— and the two are suddenly on the same page, speaking as one voice against a common threat. A new wave of global protectionism, led by the United States, is underway. A draft trade declaration was leaked ahead of a major summit. The UK and EU pledged to build a new strategic partnership grounded in economic cooperation, open markets, and mutual defense against rising tariffs.

It is not just symbolic but a direct challenge to the revived trade war tactics, which now include a 25% import duty on foreign vehicles. This is an alarming signal to British manufacturers and European exporters alike. This unexpected alliance is signaling something deeper: Brexit did not end the cooperation; it just redirected it. The coalition is coming to preserve global trade norms, showing that they have more in common than not. 

Most Read on Euro Weekly News

Tariffs Explained Simply 

Let us start with the basics. A Tariff is a tax placed on imported goods. When a product enters a country, customs charges an added fee that the importer often pays. This makes the item relatively more expensive in the destination market. 

So if Spain imports cars from the U.S. and imposes a 25% tariff on them, those cars will cost 25% more when they reach Spanish Shops.

The goal? To make local products look cheaper in comparison. Tariffs do not just hit exporters. They raise consumer prices, disrupt supply chains, trigger retaliatory tariffs, and create a trade war nobody wins. While a government can impose tariffs to protect local jobs and gain political leverage, the economic outlook starts to ripple outward. It hits everyone from factory workers to farmers to shoppers at the till.

Tariffs Meet Global Supply Chains

In the 21st century, few products are made in just one country. Cars, phones, clothes, and even medicine rely on globally sourced components. So, for example, if the U.S. adds a 25% duty on European cars, the entire European automotive ecosystem, from parts suppliers in Spain to factories in Germany, feels the impact.

Worse, if supply chain costs multiply, parts become more expensive, delivery times slow down, companies shift production, and ultimately, consumers pay more. It is already happening, Jaguar Land Rover has recently paused U.S shipments in order to assess the cost impact of Trump’s auto tariffs. Across Europe, businesses are preparing for higher costs and possible retaliatory measures. 

The Heart of The Debate

  • Protectionism: It champions tariffs & trade barriers. It appeals to a domestic industry and promises job security. Trump’s approach of targeting steel, cars, and Chinese technology fits this mould. 
  • Globalisation: By contrast, it sees the open market as a pathway to innovation, efficiency, and long-term growth. With this joint pledge, the EU and the UK defend that vision on trade deals over trade walls, shared standards over solo tariffs, and predictability over political posturing.

The key difference? Trump’s model is often predictable and unilateral. The EU-UK model is a multilateral, restrained, and lean towards existing institutions like the WTO.

Who’s Most at Risk in Europe? 

Consumers & Retail: Whether it’s a smartphone from China or shoes from the U.S., the tariffs trickle down, and Spain’s imported goods will see price hikes and tighten household budgets. 

Food & Agriculture: Spanish olives, French wines, and Italian cheese. All have been tariff targets in past disputes. When tariffs rise, the exports drop, and small farmers suffer.

Manufacturing: From industrial chemicals to tools, many EU exports rely heavily on global buyers. Tariffs on those components cause disruption, and finished goods hurt sales abroad. 

The Auto Industry: France, Germany, and the UK export thousands of cars to the U.S. every year. A 25% tariff on European cars can make them unaffordable, hurt sales, and risk thousands of jobs.

What the UK & EU Are Doing Differently

Instead of following the U.S. playbook, the U.K. and EU offer a future-facing measured approach: to build targeted tariffs, push WTO reform, strengthen bilateral trade deals, and promote digital and green trade standards. This is a roadmap for what began as a story of separation and has now morphed into an unexpected alliance. In the face of a rising global instability fuelled by tariffs, fractured supply chains, and standoffs on a large scale, Brexit was supposed to mark the end of the EU-UK economic agenda. 

It’s a reassurance of belief in rules-based trade and not a reactionary response, and in doing so, they are offering the world a reminder. Global cooperation does not need to end when treaties do, and when values align, partnerships can adapt. Europe’s deliberate move toward economic openness signals that diplomacy and not price hikes can win the day. 

What does this signal for the future? 

This Joint move is not about opposing tariffs but about shaping what trade would look like post-2025. In the era of supply chain fragility, economic nationalism, and political volatility, this cooperation is an alternative, a framework that rewards coordination and not confrontation. The Implications? 

  • Smaller economies: This shows that unilateral partnerships are still powerful and possible. Even after political ruptures, ensuring that coordination is a framework that works. 
  • For Businesses: This signals a future where trade standards can align, whether in climate-linked exports, digital services, or AI-regulated industries. 
  • For the U.S: This is a stark reminder that a tariff-first diplomacy does not go unchallenged. It will backfire as the global consensus leans elsewhere.

This alliance reframes Brexit as less about departure and more about redefinition. If the EU and the UK can recalibrate that quickly, it gives us a deeper question: Are we entering a new phase of globalisation, not driven by ideology but necessity?