The gradual recovery in demand, which has been noticeable for almost six months, seems to be continuing in the Eurozone. It remains to be confirmed given the uncertainties surrounding US trade policy. Nevertheless, the trend towards improvement has not been called into question by the decisions taken so far. In the medium term, the implementation of the European rearmament plan and the German investment plans should strengthen this dynamic.
The EU-UK summit on 19 May marks a new phase in economic rapprochement, more than five years after the Brexit, which has undeniably weakened the UK economy. The structural challenges facing the UK – high inflation, sluggish business investment, low productivity – partly result from this event.
In this new Podcast, we take a look at the short- to medium-term economic outlook for the major advanced economies, analysing the impact of trade tensions, the room for manoeuvre available and the expected economic dynamics.
Main trade protection measures put in place since Donald Trump took office in the United States on January 20, 2025
Central European economies have defied pessimist predictions in recent years on their ability to cope with shocks. The region posted a less pronounced GDP contraction in 2020 compared to advanced EU countries. In 2022, at the onset of the Russia-Ukraine war, the region was viewed as the most exposed within Europe due its high energy dependence on Russia. However, the widely expected recession did not occur as these economies implemented generous fiscal stimulus. Central European countries are now facing the tariff shock imposed by the US administration. Will this time be different?
Since January 2025, the United States has announced major reversals in its foreign and trade policies. For developing countries that depend on international aid, the suspension of USAID and the increase in tariffs on US imports create a double shock that will durably weaken their economic prospects.
The vast majority of Latin American countries have been subject to 10% tariffs, the minimum rate, since April 2, imposed by the Trump administration. This leniency is due to the composition of their exports (raw materials and energy, whereas the Trump administration's “reciprocal” tariffs mainly targeted exporters of manufactured goods) and the fact that most of them have a trade deficit with the US.
The tariff offensive led by Donald Trump since his return to the White House has quickly shifted into a face-off with China. Following a cycle of announcements and retaliation, the extra-tariffs applied by the United States to China amount to 145%, compared to 125% in the opposite direction. The shock is of unprecedented magnitude, and the two superpowers are engaged in a negative-sum game.
By accelerating the fall in oil prices, the timing between OPEC+'s decision to accelerate quota easing, and the Trump administration’s announcement of the start of a tariff war could limit inflationary pressures for US consumers and put pressure on the cartel's undisciplined members. However, the convergence of interests between the heavyweights of the oil market is likely to be short-lived. This policy is likely to make the economic equation increasingly difficult for US producers. At the same time, by putting pressure on public finances, it poses a risk to the cohesion of the cartel.
Last week, the Trump administration announced tariffs against the entire world which, added to those of previous weeks, will raise the average external tariff of the United States to 22%, compared with 2.5% at the end of 2024. Financial markets have reacted extremely badly, and suggest even more serious fears for US growth than for global growth. Many unknowns remain, but this scenario is the most plausible. For the United States' trading partners, it would be better to resist the temptation to escalate and instead to double down on strengthening the engines of domestic growth. Europe is particularly well placed to do this.
The vulnerability of ASEAN countries to US trade protectionism has increased significantly since 2017. The US has become a key destination for these countries, which export low-intensity tech products (such as textiles and footwear) as well as medium-intensity tech products (mobile phones) and high-intensity tech products (integrated circuits and semiconductors). Vietnam, Thailand and, to a lesser extent, Malaysia have the largest trade surpluses with the US and are therefore the most exposed to a change in US tariff policy.On 2 April, the US government announced an increase in tariffs on ASEAN countries that goes well beyond simple reciprocity
As a result of the post-Covid debts surge and rising interest rates, the financial burden on governments is increasing. In the OECD, it has reached 3.3% of GDP, its highest level since 2010. For the European Union, the end of the period of cheap money coincides with a substantial increase in its borrowing requirements, partly linked to the need of rearmament. Public finances, already confronted with climate change and ageing populations, are under pressure and will not be able to meet all the challenges alone.
The tug of war between the United States and the European Union has begun. On March 12, the US administration raised tariffs on imports of aluminum and steel by 25%. In response, the EU has announced that it will reinstate, in mid-April, tariffs introduced during Donald Trump's first term, suspended since 2020
The message delivered by Beijing at the annual meeting of the National People's Congress at the beginning of March was clear: whatever the difficulties linked to trade and technological rivalries with the United States, the Chinese economy must achieve growth of close to 5% in 2025. The target has remained unchanged since 2023. It seems particularly ambitious this year, given that external demand, the driving force behind Chinese growth in 2024, is set to weaken significantly due to the rise in protectionist measures against China. The authorities are counting on domestic demand to pick up the slack, but this is still coming up against powerful obstacles
In a 1933 article on national self-sufficiency, British economist John Maynard Keynes advised “those who seek to disembarrass a country from its entanglements” to be “very slow and wary” and illustrated his point with the following image: “It should not be a matter of tearing up roots but of slowly training a plant to grow in a different direction”. Nearly a century later, what are the precepts of the author of the General Theory worth?
Manufacturing PMIs rebounded in February, returning to their average level of Q4 2024 (50.2 for the NBS index and 50.8 for the Caixin index). In services, the PMIs remain below their Q4 level but are above the expansion threshold (50 for the NBS index and 51.4 for the Caixin index). The latest activity data confirm this reassuring but rather lacklustre performance: growth in industrial production slowed in January-February after accelerating in December, but held steady at almost 6% y/y. The slowdown in growth in production in services was more marked (+5.6% y/y in January-February, vs. +6.3% in Q4).
To reduce the United States' bilateral trade deficits, a subject already raised in a previous Chart of the week, the Trump administration has broadened its angle of attack, by attacking the differences in customs duties between the country and its trading partners. The introduction of reciprocal tariffs, still under study, would be specified at the beginning of April.
Who's next? As soon as he became the 47th President of the United States, Donald J. Trump drew the weapon of tariffs, “the most beautiful word in the dictionary”, as he put it. Mexico, Canada and China were the first to be hit, while the European Union (EU) was explicitly targeted.
Chinese economic growth accelerated in Q4 2024 (+1.6% q/q and +5.4% y/y), driven by strong export performance and a recovery in private consumption. These supporting factors should persist in early 2025, but economic growth will then resume its downward trend. Domestic demand is likely to remain fragile and the rise in US tariffs will be a significant negative shock to exports.
The consensus view currently holds that the great divergence between the US and EU economies observed since the pandemic is bound to continue. As a snapshot of current conditions, it is certainly true that the US economy has a strong growth momentum and bullish animal spirits, while Europe has neither. But extrapolating from a snapshot, as instinct tempts us to do, is often wrong. In fact, there are solid reasons to expect the gap between US and Europe growth to shrink in 2025—as envisioned in BNPP’s central scenario, with the US economy slowing down and the Eurozone’s accelerating (albeit modestly so). Beyond the year-ahead outlook, there are at least 5 reasons to challenge the view that Donald Trump’s economic policies will make Europe even weaker. Let’s consider them in turn.
The deficit on the trade in goods published by the French Customs authorities on 7 February is likely to have been EUR83 billion for 2024, from EUR100 billion in 2023 (but EUR58 billion in 2019). The improvement in the nominal deficit hides the fall in goods exports. However, the improvement in the balance in volume terms and the strength of services exports are positive factors.
Energy policy was at the top of the agenda during the election campaign and in the first few weeks of the Trump presidency. Its objectives are to reaffirm America's domination of the global hydrocarbon market (the United States has been the world's leading oil producer since 2019) and to ensure low prices for US consumers. In practice, this is manifesting in a desire to increase US oil and gas production by three million barrels of oil equivalent per day, for an average crude oil production of over 13 million b/d in 2024. But is this goal realistic?
Central European countries are relatively well-positioned in industrial sectors with high technological content. However, there are differences, with regards to the respective percentages of tech products in value added and in manufacturing sector exports. The share of the high-tech sector, consisting of only three segments in the sector approach (pharmaceuticals, IT/electronics/optical and air/spacecraft), is relatively modest, but the percentage of “medium-high-technology” sector (chemicals, weapons, electrical equipment, machinery, motor vehicles, other vehicles, medical devices) is high. However, these two sectors are also very technology-intensive
Will 2025 fulfil all the good wishes being exchanged across the globe as these lines are being written? Probably not, sadly. But narrowing it down to the field of global economics, I see five critical questions that will determine how good 2025 will turn out.
On 20 January, Donald J. Trump will be sworn in as President of the United States for the second time.With him, there will be no "soft trade" or multilateralism, but a logic of nations governed by power relations.Faced with this new order, in which historic partners become rivals and alliances are now only circumstantial, what will Europe do?Between its desire to assert its power and its concern to protect its interests,Which card will China play? Will the "multi-aligned" countries such as India be able to maintain their position?Finally, as the United States prepares to withdraw from the Paris agreements once again, will the climate be the big loser?Find out more with this replay of the latest conference of the Economic Research department of BNP Paribas, held on 10 December.
