HOUSTON — The Trump administration reached a nearly $1 billion agreement with French energy giant TotalEnergies on Monday to cancel its offshore wind leases off the coasts of New York and North Carolina. The announcement marks the latest blow by the Trump administration against the U.S. offshore wind industry, particularly in the Northeast, after it faced a series of recent legal losses. “The era of taxpayers subsidizing unreliable, unaffordable and unsecured energy is officially over,” Interior Secretary Doug Burgum told reporters at the CERAWeek by S&P Global conference in Houston. As part of the agreement, the Interior Department would terminate the leases for TotalEnergies’ Attentive Energy and Carolina Long Bay projects, worth $928 million, the department said. The lease sales occurred during the Biden administration. TotalEnergies committed to invest the value of those leases into oil and natural gas production in the United States, after which the United States will reimburse the company dollar-for-dollar for the amount they paid for the offshore wind leases, the department said. The company is poised to redirect the funds toward the Rio Grande LNG plant in Texas and the development of upstream conventional oil in the Gulf of Mexico and of shale gas production, according to the Interior Department. Burgum and TotalEnergies signed the agreements Monday from the conference. President Donald Trump has often attacked the U.S. offshore wind sector as unreliable and expensive. He’s repeatedly said he plans to have “no windmills built in the United States” under his tenure. Still, the settlement would suggest a new tack by the administration to target the sector. The Trump administration previously issued stop-work orders for offshore wind projects currently under construction on the East Coast, but judges lifted all five orders earlier this year. “Considering that the development of offshore wind projects is not in the country’s interest, we have decided to renounce offshore wind development in the United States, in exchange for the reimbursement of the lease fees,” TotalEnergies Chair and CEO Patrick Pouyanné said in a statement. Pouyanné previously said the company would halt development of the Attentive Energy project, off the New Jersey and New York coasts, following Trump’s return to the White House. Both the Attentive Energy and Carolina Long Bay projects were in the early stages of development. Pouyanné told reporters that the company continues to invest in solar, onshore wind and batteries. The deal is a major blow for New York’s offshore wind targets, although proposed projects in the lease area controlled by TotalEnergies and its partners never secured final contracts with the state. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) called the prospect of a deal “not helpful” last week. Attentive Energy dropped out of a bidding process for deals with New York in October 2024, even before Trump’s election. The state concluded that process last month with no awards amid the federal uncertainty and officials have struggled to determine next steps for the industry writ large. Hochul has pivoted to an “all of the above” energy strategy in the face of Trump’s opposition to offshore wind — including nuclear and fossil fuels. Further delays to the development of the technology off New York’s coast will likely further the state’s reliance on repowering fossil fuel plants to serve the New York City region. The deal also leaves New Jersey without any workable offshore wind projects at a time when Democratic Gov. Mikie Sherrill is already searching for more clean energy to combat a regional power crunch. The project was supposed to provide more than 1,300 megawatts of power. Sherrill’s predecessor, Phil Murphy, had lofty ambitions for the industry that were all for naught. His administration approved a series of offshore wind projects that all ran into financial or permitting challenges. The state approved Attentive Energy’s project in early 2024 as part of an attempted reset of the industry, which was already facing woe. The new affront could also prove problematic to permitting reform discussions on the Hill, as Democratic lawmakers have linked progress on those negotiations to whether or not the administration continues its attacks on renewable energy. ClearView Energy Partners said in a note last week the deal could also “re-raise concerns about the durability of federal approvals and therefore further erode, but not eliminate, the thin opportunity for bipartisan permitting reform on Capitol Hill.” So far, Senate Environment and Public Works ranking member Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) is staying the course on permitting talks, despite reports of the settlement agreement last week — a development he derided as “just more selling out the public for the fossil fuel industry.” His office did not immediately provide further comment Monday. Some Moderate New York Republicans last week also criticized the reported settlement. Marie French and Ry Rivard contributed to this report.

The 21st century is more likely to belong to Beijing than to Washington — at least that’s the view from four key U.S. allies. Swaths of the public in Canada, Germany, France and the U.K. have soured on the U.S., driven by President Donald Trump’s foreign policy decisions, according to recent results from The POLITICO Poll. Respondents in these countries increasingly see China as a more dependable partner than the U.S. and believe the Asian economic colossus is leading on advanced technologies, including artificial intelligence. Critically, Europeans surveyed see it as possible to reduce reliance on the U.S. but harder to reduce reliance on China — suggesting newfound entanglements that could drastically tip the balance of global power away from the West. Here are five key takeaways from the poll highlighting the pivot from the U.S. to China. The POLITICO Poll — in partnership with U.K. polling firm Public First — found that respondents in those four allied countries believe it is better to depend on China than the U.S. following Trump’s turbulent return to office. That appears to be driven by Trump’s disruption, not by a newfound stability in China: In a follow-up question, a majority of respondents in both Canada and Germany agreed that any attempts to get closer to China are because the U.S. has become harder to depend on — not because China itself has become a more reliable partner. Many respondents in France (38 percent) and the U.K. (42 percent) also shared that sentiment. Under Trump’s “America First” ethos, Washington has upended the “rules-based international order” of the past with sharp-elbowed policies that have isolated the U.S. on the global stage. This includes slow-walking aid to Ukraine, threatening NATO allies with economic punishment and withdrawing from major international institutions, including the World Health Organization and the United Nations Human Rights Council. His punitive liberation day tariffs, as well as threats to annex Greenland and make Canada “the 51st state,” have only further strained relationships with top allies. Beijing has seized the moment to cultivate better business ties with European countries looking for an alternative to high U.S. tariffs on their exports. Last October, Beijing hosted a forum aimed at shoring up mutual investments with Europe. More recently, senior Chinese officials described EU-China ties as a partnership rather than a rivalry. “The administration has assisted the Chinese narrative by acting like a bully,” Mark Lambert, former deputy assistant secretary of State for China and Taiwan in the Biden administration, told POLITICO. “Everyone still recognizes the challenges China poses — but now, Washington no longer works in partnership and is only focused on itself.” These sentiments are already being translated into action. Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney declared a “rupture” between Ottawa and Washington in January and backed that rhetoric by sealing a trade deal with Beijing that same month. The U.K. inked several high-value export deals with China not long after, while both French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz have returned from recent summits in Beijing with Chinese purchase orders for European products. Respondents across all four allied countries are broadly supportive of efforts to create some distance from the U.S. — and say they’re also more dependent on China. In Canada, 48 percent said it would be possible to reduce reliance on the U.S. and believe their government should do so. In the U.K., 42 percent said reducing reliance on the U.S. sounded good in theory, but were skeptical it could happen in practice. By contrast, fewer respondents across those countries believe it would actually be possible to reduce reliance on China — a testament to Beijing’s dominance of global supply chains. Young adults may be drawn to China as an alternative to U.S. cultural hegemony. Respondents between the ages of 18 and 24 were significantly more supportive than their older peers of building a closer relationship with China. A recent study commissioned by the Institute of European Studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences — a Beijing-based think tank — suggests most young Europeans get their information about China and Chinese life through social media. Nearly 70 percent of those aged 18 to 25 said they rely on social media and other short-form video platforms for information on China. And the media they consume is likely overwhelmingly supportive of China, as TikTok, one of the most popular social media platforms in the world, was built by Chinese company ByteDance and has previously been accused of suppressing content deemed negative toward China. According to Alicja Bachulska, a policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, younger generations believe the U.S. has led efforts to depict China as an authoritarian regime and a threat to democracy, while simultaneously degrading its own democratic values. The trend “pushes a narrative that ‘we’ve been lied to’ about what China is,” said Bachulska, as “social sentiment among the youth turns against the U.S.” “It’s an expression of dissatisfaction with the state of U.S. politics,” she added. There’s a clear consensus among those surveyed in Europe and Canada that China is winning the global tech race — a coveted title central to Chinese leader Xi Jinping’s grand policy vision. China is leading the U.S. and other Western nations in the development of electric batteries and robotics, while Chinese designs have also become the global standard in electric vehicles and solar panels. “There has been a real vibe shift in global perception of Chinese tech and innovation dominance,” said Sarah Beran, who served as deputy chief of mission in the U.S. embassy in Beijing during the Biden administration. This digital rat race is most apparent in the fast-paced development of artificial intelligence. China has poured billions of dollars into research initiatives, poaching top tech talent from U.S. universities and funding state-backed tech firms to advance its interests in AI. The investment appears to be paying off — a plurality of respondents from Canada, Germany, France and the U.K. believe that China is more likely to develop the first superintelligent AI. But these advancements have done little to change American minds. A majority of respondents in the U.S. still see American-made tech as superior to Chinese tech, even in the realm of AI. As Washington and its allies grow more estranged, the perception of the U.S. as the dominant world power is in retreat — though most Americans don’t see it that way. About half of all respondents in Canada, Germany, France and the U.K. believe that China is rapidly becoming a more consequential superpower. This is particularly true among those who say the U.S. is no longer a positive force for the world. By contrast, 63 percent of respondents in the U.S. believe their nation will maintain its dominance in 10 years — reflecting major disparities in beliefs about global power dynamics between the U.S. and its European allies. This view of China as the world’s power center may not have been entirely organic. The U.S. has accused Beijing of pouring billions of dollars into international information manipulation efforts, including state-backed media initiatives and the deployment of tools to stifle online criticism of China and its policies. Some fear that a misplaced belief among U.S. allies in the inevitability of China surpassing the U.S. as a global superpower could be helping accelerate Beijing’s rise. “Europe is capable of defending itself against threats from China and contesting China’s vision of a more Sinocentric, authoritarian-friendly world order,” said Henrietta Levin, former National Security Council director for China in the Biden administration. “But if Europe believes this is impossible and does not try to do so, the survey results may become a self-fulfilling prophecy.” METHOLODGY The POLITICO Poll was conducted from Feb. 6 to Feb. 9, surveying 10,289 adults online, with at least 2,000 respondents each from the U.S., Canada, U.K., France and Germany. Results for each country were weighted to be representative on dimensions including age, gender and geography, and have an overall margin of sampling error of ±2 percentage points for each country. Smaller subgroups have higher margins of error.

BRUSSELS — The European Commission will adopt the Industrial Accelerator Act (IAA) on Wednesday, finally backing the landmark measure that would define a European preference in green public procurement after several delays. Haggling over the planned regulation went right down to the wire, with a meeting of cabinet chiefs that began on Monday spilling into Tuesday, the day before Ursula von der Leyen’s College of Commissioners will now sign off on an agreed text. According to one Commission official, another 44 changes were made to the draft at the meeting that ran into overtime. Paula Pinho, the Commission’s chief spokesperson, confirmed at Tuesday’s regular midday briefing that “commissioners are expected to adopt a proposal for an Industrial Accelerator Act.” The landmark measure would define a “Made in EU” preference in green public procurement — while pushing back a decision for six months on whether friendly third countries can be included in its scope. This means that, even after Wednesday’s announcement, countries like the U.K. or Switzerland will still need to lobby to get inside the tent. The IAA would also set restrictions on inward investment for dominant players in strategic green industries. These would mainly have China in mind, and cover batteries and energy storage, electric vehicles and components, solar photovoltaic, and the extraction, processing and recycling of critical raw materials, according to a draft obtained by POLITICO last week. An earlier version of the proposal, which is being overseen by Industry Commissioner Stéphane Séjourné, was panned last month by as many as nine departments of the EU executive. By the end of last week that was down to three, including the Commission’s powerful trade department, according to one person familiar with the discussion. They were granted anonymity to discuss the closed-door talks. Germany also led a rearguard action by 10 EU countries — which styled themselves as the Friends of Industry — who support less industry regulation and more open trade, with Economy Minister Katherina Reiche saying it would create “a regulatory wasteland that nobody can understand anymore.” With so many changes being made at the last minute, including dropping entire industries like tech from the purview of the legislation, critics say the bill is nowhere near ready for prime time and is at risk of being heavily revised when it goes for review by the Council of the EU, which represents the bloc’s 27 member countries, and European lawmakers. Additional reporting by Gerardo Fortuna.

Pentagon officials and Hill lawmakers are increasingly warning that prolonged Iran strikes could stress U.S. military stockpiles to the brink and make the country more vulnerable. Gen. Dan Caine, the Joint Chiefs of Staff chair, has raised concerns about the military’s shortage of air defense interceptors since January, according to a person familiar with the conversations. But the fears have magnified in recent weeks as the Pentagon amassed the largest military buildup in the Middle East since the Iraq War. They follow a huge expansion of the nation’s military operations. U.S. President Donald Trump has often relied on the Pentagon to pursue his foreign policy goals — from capturing Venezuela’s leader to killing alleged drug traffickers, bombing Yemen’s Houthi group and striking Iran last year to decimate its nuclear program. Many of these operations burned through significant numbers of Standard Missile-3s, Terminal High Altitude Area Defense interceptors and Patriot missiles. The defense industry has struggled for years to produce critical air defense interceptors that protect against incoming missiles, partly because of the complexity and speed of production. Interviews with six current and former U.S. officials and members of Congress underscored widespread worries that sustained Iranian responses could deplete those waning U.S. air defenses and leave tens of thousands of American troops in the region unprotected against Tehran’s missile salvos. “Do we have enough interceptors to sustain a retaliation?” said the person familiar with the talks. “We don’t have a discretely focused objective. Is it regime change or is it [just] ballistic missiles?” American allies have already felt the shortage of U.S. air defense interceptors and batteries, including NATO nations trying to purchase more Patriot missile systems to send to Ukraine in its war against Russia. “That has been a central, continuous concern,” said a defense official, who like others interviewed, was granted anonymity to discuss sensitive issues. “It would also give fodder to those in the building that say we need to be more constrained with what we give Ukraine.” The Joint Staff did not respond to a request for comment. But the Pentagon dismissed concerns about weapons stockpiles. “The Department of War has everything it needs to execute any mission at the time and place of the President’s choosing and on any timeline,” said spokesperson Sean Parnell, using the administration’s preferred title for the Pentagon. Some lawmakers warn that a strike, especially one that spurs a prolonged conflict, could take away from other critical needs. “There have been urgent calls for reforms in procurement, but the net result is that we are seemingly unable to meet all of the needs for defense production — for Ukraine, for our partners in the Middle East,” said Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), who argued the defense industry is not producing Lockheed Martin-built Patriot interceptors or RTX’s Tomahawk long-range missiles quickly enough. Blumenthal and a group of other lawmakers, who have pressed to shift interceptor missiles from the Middle East to Ukraine to protect against Russian attacks, now see that as more difficult. “It may be problematic to think about moving Patriot missile interceptor systems from the Middle East because now we’re going to have to protect our embassies, not to mention our bases,” he said, adding that U.S. defense contractors already are telling European allies they don’t have the capacity to produce more weapons to aid Ukraine. The Defense Department doesn’t detail its weapons supplies for national security reasons, but analysts warn U.S. stockpiles already are dissipating. The Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank, estimated the U.S. fired up to 20 percent of the Standard Missile-3 interceptors it was expected to have on hand in 2025, and between 20 to 50 percent of Terminal High Altitude Area Defense missiles. Experts believe the state of Iran’s air and ballistic missile arsenal and any further American strikes could also factor into how much U.S. air defenses are stretched. “How much of a concern it is depends upon how degraded the Iranians are, or still are after the last go round, and how coordinated and capable we’re going to be in terms of getting things before they take off,” said Tom Karako, the director of the Missile Defense Project at the think tank. The U.S. military, beyond air defense munitions, also risks overusing Tomahawk land attack missiles and other precision strike weapons, Karako said, which are likely to figure into any future fight with Beijing. “It’s a tragedy to expend a Tomahawk when a gravity bomb will do,” he said, referring to an aircraft-dropped explosive. “It’s the strike munitions that we also need to steward and husband for deterring or prosecuting a war with China.” Not everyone involved in Washington’s drive to ramp up munitions production sees the situation as dire. Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Calif.), the House’s lead lawmaker for defense spending, downplayed the risk even while acknowledging munitions are scarce. Congress, Calvert said, recently authorized the Pentagon to enter multiyear contracts for munitions intended to boost production and bring down costs. Assembly lines for air defenses such as Patriot interceptors and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense systems “are set up, and they just have to maximize, with double or triple shifts,” he said. Calvert noted the scarcity was “not a secret,” but insisted the military had plenty of munitions in the short term. “I don’t want our adversaries to think for a second that we don’t have enough resources,” he said. “We do.”

EUROPE’S VANISHING CARS ARE JEOPARDIZING ITS RAW MATERIALS SECURITY Used cars are a treasure trove of metals essential in energy technology, but the EU is letting them vanish without a trace. By MARIANNE GROS in Brussels Illustration by Natália Delgado/ POLITICO EU decision-makers don’t have to look far to find cheap critical raw materials: Just 5 kilometers away from the EU quarter, car dealers up and down Heyvaert Street are scooping them up and shipping them to Africa. Dealerships in this industrial precinct in southwest Brussels send European used vehicles — many too polluting to be allowed on the continent’s roads — to African countries like Senegal, Sierra Leone and Nigeria, where the market for Europe’s unwanted automobiles is thriving. That one street intimately connects the capital of the EU — where some 10 million new cars hit the roads each year — to a global supply chain of used vehicles that sustains road transport in developing markets. One day these cars will end up in junkyards far away, and with them tons of valuable metals that the EU could recycle and reuse to run its economy. But Europe’s age-old habit of exporting unwanted goods is coming back to bite it as the bloc looks to recycle its way out of its reliance on raw materials imported from China.  The EU is scrambling to secure new sources of critical metals and minerals necessary for clean energy and military technology — a task of increasing urgency as geopolitical tensions disrupt traditional supply chains. For a small continent like Europe that is poor in natural resources but rich in consumer goods, old cars are a promising source of these materials. The vehicles are full of metals such as copper, platinum and steel that are essential in a long list of critical industries such as clean energy and military technology. And they’ll become even more valuable as early generations of electric vehicles — full of battery metals like lithium, cobalt and nickel — reach the end of their lifespans. But the EU isn’t close to taking advantage of this prospect. Along with those that are legally exported, between 3 million and 4 million end-of-life cars disappear without a trace from the EU each year. That’s a third of all cars that get deregistered. Some go missing because of a gap in the paper trail. Others get exported through obscure trade routes. Many are dismantled illegally, with the more valuable parts sold online or in non-compliant dealerships — while the rest are dumped, creating a pollution risk. “We see big and currently unused potential in recycling, reuse and also substitution” of critical raw materials, said Keit Pentus-Rosimannus, a member of the European Court of Auditors who last month co-authored a report on the EU’s difficulties in securing a supply of critical raw materials.  But that recycling and reuse can only happen if the waste products, e.g. cars, make it to recycling hubs in the first place.  The market for Europe’s unwanted automobiles is thriving in cities like Lagos in Nigeria. | Olympia De Maismont/AFP via Getty Images “The illegal dismantling and export of [end-of-life vehicles] is mainly motivated by profits from the sale of spare parts and metals,” the German Environment Agency wrote in a study on the topic back in 2020. Unauthorized dismantlers are “neglecting proper depollution, to avoid additional costs,” the study explained.  In a separate paper published in 2022, the agency estimated that 20 percent of all German vehicles that “go missing” — over 72,000 cars — are exported illegally.  According to Interpol data, nearly 3.6 million vehicles and vehicle parts from Europe — not just EU countries — were registered in the Stolen Motor Vehicles database as of Dec. 31, 2025. EUROPE’S MISSED OPPORTUNITY  The EU has made materials recycling a strategic pillar of its mission to reduce reliance on imports from China in an increasingly hostile geopolitical environment. Europe’s economy runs on importing critical raw materials, such as nickel, copper and lithium, as well as rare earths and so-called platinum group metals like palladium or platinum. It needs them to build car engines, weapons and products that contribute to the bloc’s green tech transition, including batteries, chips and solar panels.   While the metals are mined all over the world, China overwhelmingly dominates the processing and refining of these critical raw materials.  To address this, the European Commission says it wants to launch new mining projects, sign deals with other countries to diversify its supply, and promote recycling projects.  With the introduction of the Critical Raw Materials Act in 2024, EU governments are required to adopt national circularity measures to boost the recovery of critical raw materials and simplify permitting processes for recycling and recovery projects. The law says that 25 percent of the EU’s annual strategic raw material consumption should come from domestic recycling by 2030. Last December, the Commission announced additional measures as part of a new plan called RESourceEU.  But many argue that progress is too slow. “Most EU targets that are in place do not incentivize the recycling of specific individual materials. High processing costs, limited availability of materials, technical and regulatory issues also make the use of the recycling sector less competitive,” the Court of Auditors’ Pentus-Rosimannus said. Others say the EU is doing little to reduce consumption in the first place. Policymakers need to be “addressing [materials] consumption aspects to accelerate this process in addition to everything else that is being done on the recycling part” said the European Environment Agency’s head of the clean and circular economy group, Daniel Montalvo. EU policies should tackle “how we can change this upstream part of the material cycle so that we use products more intensively and for longer,” he added. RECYCLERS NEED HELP  End-of-life vehicles should all end up in one of Europe’s 13,000 authorized treatment facilities like the one in Menen, Belgium, which straddles the country’s border with France and is run by recycling company Galloo.   Running a recycling center is expensive and illegal dismantlers create unfair competition because they avoid regulatory and compliance costs. | Sebastian Kahnert/picture alliance via Getty Images “We can dismantle 17 cars at once here. Usually, we treat 10 to 15 thousand cars a year, but this year we’re around 3 or 4 thousand on this site,” said Emmanuel Katrakis, the company’s director of public and regulatory affairs. Galloo set up Valorauto, a joint venture with French-Italian automaker Stellantis, in 2023. Valorauto runs a vehicle take-back and recycling service through 300 authorized treatment facilities in Western Europe. The low turnover in Europe’s car fleet — a result of stagnating sales since the Covid pandemic due to Europe’s weaker economy — means fewer cars end up in recycling centers. Once the vehicles reach what can only be described as a cemetery for cars, the vehicles get scrubbed of polluting substances and taken apart. Most of the plastic, rubber, glass and iron can be recycled. Crucially, the more precious resources in their engines, catalytic converters and electrical systems can be collected. Two thirds of vehicles that reach end-of-life status end up in this system.  But running a recycling center is expensive. Illegal dismantlers create unfair competition because they avoid regulatory and compliance costs, which drives the price down, while also diverting some of the end-of-life-vehicle flow — and therefore revenue — away from authorized centers.  “We’re tired of having bad actors in our sectors who are willing to work with a completely illegal market,” Katrakis said.  Cars also get dropped off with missing parts.”We’re going to buy their car for €150, maybe €200, but they know they can sell their catalytic converter separately for €60. They do the math,” he added.  For Valorauto’s general manager, Thomas Delgado, online marketplaces should be held responsible for enabling the car dismantling grey market, saying they don’t monitor the sellers properly. “There are several marketplaces that should do their part to help [us] fight this system” he said, by preventing individual sellers from selling a car part unless they can prove they are registered as an authorized treatment facility.   Then there are Europe’s faulty registration systems. A lot of these cars go missing because they are sold second-hand in another country but are never deregistered in their country of origin. “Today we have national computer systems that are supposed to track things, but they’re totally overwhelmed,” Delgado said.  There are also gaps between the car registries and the database of insured vehicles. Responsibility for monitoring these systems is often shared by several national ministries.  National governments have tried to address the issue by creating incentives for car owners to drop their vehicles off at authorized centers. In Denmark, for example, owners can get a “scrapping premium” when their vehicle is dropped off at an approved dealer.  A new regulation on end-of-life vehicles aims to clarify when a car is legally considered waste.  | Nicolas Tucat/AFP via Getty Images At the EU level, a new regulation on end-of-life vehicles aims to address the issue with “clearer rules on the distinction between a used vehicle and an end-of-life vehicle” and “a strict framework for transfers of ownership,” but some of the technical aspects of the law are still being discussed. The law also aims to clarify when a car is legally considered waste.  The automotive sector is glad to see the EU will “implement an EU-wide registration/deregistration system and regulate the export of ELVs outside the EU, preventing valuable raw materials from leaving the European market,” according to ACEA, the sector’s main lobby.  GETTING A SECOND LIFE  Over 800,000 used vehicles are exported from the EU each year, mainly to African countries, according to EU data. The revised end-of-life vehicle regulation states that only roadworthy cars can be exported from the EU.   Just because a car isn’t allowed on the streets of a European city doesn’t mean it should be dismantled immediately, however.   “It’s important to make the distinction because they are not necessarily at the end of life everywhere,” said Pierre Hajjar, chief executive officer of Socar Shipping Agencies, a vehicle shipping company on Brussels’ Heyvaert St. Last December local police raided the street, seizing 45 vehicles and forcing several dealerships to close for not complying with national rules on cash payments or for not having the right environmental permits.   With the revised end-of-life-vehicle regulation, the EU wants to increase traceability so “only high-quality, technically fit European vehicles will be exported.” But for African markets, Hajjar says that’s already the case.  “For Africa, everything goes by boat, everything is extremely traceable,” he said, because port authorities and maritime shipping companies have high thresholds for the kind of vehicles that can be exported. “Whereas in Eastern countries it’s road transport … there isn’t really any traceability, they cross the borders quite easily,” he added.  

President Donald Trump’s historic tariffs, some of which the Supreme Court struck down Friday, remade trade in 2025 — and no country experienced as big a shift as China. Thanks in large part to U.S. tariffs that at one point reached triple digits, the Asian manufacturing powerhouse’s share of the overall U.S. import market fell to 9 percent in 2025, compared to 13.4 percent in 2024, according to the Commerce Department’s trade report for December released Thursday. That is China’s lowest market share since the early 2000s. Less than a decade ago, China accounted for one-fifth of annual U.S. imports. https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/Jeo2y/1/ U.S. imports from China fell to $308 billion in 2025, their lowest level since 2009 and a drop of more than 42 percent from the record high of $539 billion in 2018. https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/VYjTP/1/ Factoring all the tariffs Trump announced last year, as well as the rollbacks he granted, Chinese goods faced an “effective” U.S. tariff rate of 30.9 percent in November, according to Olu Sonola, head of U.S. economic research at Fitch Ratings in New York, and his colleague Sarah Repucci. This included, but was not limited to, Trump’s “reciprocal” tariffs that the Supreme Court struck down. Comparatively, the effective tariff rate was 19.7 percent for India, 12.7 percent for Vietnam, 8.1 percent for the European Union, 4.2 percent for Mexico, 3.7 percent for Canada and 3.5 percent for Taiwan, according to Fitch Ratings’ calculations. “Basically what’s happening is as China is falling across the board, many Asian countries are increasing their share of U.S. imports,” Sonola told POLITICO, adding that Vietnam, Taiwan, Mexico and India were among the biggest beneficiaries. Two categories of imports that include electric machinery, smartphones, computers and other related goods account for nearly half of U.S. imports from China. Below, we analyze the largest changes in those and several other categories of goods where imports from China fell as American companies shifted their supply chains last year. PHONES, GAMES, COMPUTERS AND MORE IMPORTS FROM CHINA FELL SHARPLY IN 2025 Phones: The United States has imported close to $950 billion worth of phones and related equipment from China over the past quarter-century, most of them smartphones in more recent years. Annual phone imports from China peaked in 2017 to a record $72 billion and have slid significantly since then, to $30 billion in 2025. That has coincided with a drop in China’s share of the U.S. import market for phones — which peaked at 65 percent in 2018 but slid to just 21 percent last year. Suppliers from other countries are filling the gap. The U.S. imported a record $142 billion worth of phones and equipment in 2025, with Vietnam grabbing about 22 percent of the market, India 17 percent and Thailand 13 percent. Phone imports from India were especially notable, since they nearly tripled to $25 billion from the previous year, with smartphones driving most of that surge. Smartphones from India captured 42 percent of the U.S. smartphone import market. Fortunately for New Delhi, Trump exempted smartphones from the additional 25 percent tariff that he temporarily imposed on India because of its purchases of Russian oil, as well as from the reciprocal tariffs he imposed on nearly every country in August. U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, in a Fox Business interview last week, praised India as a manufacturing substitute for China, at least temporarily, as the U.S. tries to increase its own output of key goods. “The American worker is first, but certainly to the extent we’re going to import from other countries, India can be a good source, as long as it’s balanced and it’s fair,” he said. Computers: Although Trump exempted computers, smartphones, semiconductors and certain other electronics from his “reciprocal” tariffs announced in early April, he did not exempt those goods from a separate 20 percent fentanyl-related tariff he imposed on China in early 2025, which the administration reduced to 10 percent in November. That duty was also struck down by the Supreme Court’s ruling on Friday. The higher rates, as well as companies’ longer-term efforts to diversify their operations away from China, resulted in a significant decline in U.S. imports of computers and accessories. The share of those imports coming from China dropped a staggering amount, from 26 percent in 2024 to just 4 percent in 2025. That represented a dollar value of around $11 billion in imports last year, less than a third of what the U.S. imported the year before. In 2021, the U.S. imported a record-high of $61 billion of the same Chinese-made computing equipment. Despite China’s decrease in computer exports to the U.S., the U.S. imported more computing equipment than ever: $251 billion in 2025, up from $140 billion the prior year. Imports from Taiwan went from $26 billion in 2024 to more than $85 billion last year. Mexico also saw its imports of this equipment nearly double to $90 billion, while imports from Vietnam and Thailand also surged. Those sharp increases have raised questions about whether the products are being locally produced or are actually manufactured in China and transhipped through the other countries — a practice the Trump administration is trying to crack down on. “That’s very much an unknown,” Sonola said. Toys, games and sports equipment: China historically dominated the U.S. market for imports of these items, cresting 80 percent a decade ago. The value of these imports fell sharply last year to less than $19 billion, compared to $30 billion in 2024. That dropped the share of U.S. imports from China to 53 percent in 2025. In particular, imports of video game consoles from China saw one of the largest market share drops since Trump’s tariffs took effect – from 86 percent of U.S. imports to about one-quarter last year. Clothing and footwear: Imports of clothing items, footwear and textiles dropped from almost $36 billion in 2024 to $24 billion in 2025, making up only about 20 percent of the U.S. import market for these products last year. A decade ago, these items made up 42 percent import share. Plastics: China’s share of the U.S. import market for plastics continued to slide in 2025, down about 5 percentage points to 21 percent last year. With almost $15 billion worth of imports, China remained the largest player in the U.S. market for plastic products, ahead of Canada, Mexico and Vietnam. Other electronic equipment: Among the consumer electronics and machinery that comprise a notable share of Chinese imports, some of the biggest drops came from video monitors and sound equipment, such as speakers and microphones. Combined, those categories saw a drop from $12 billion to $6 billion of U.S. imports. Other imports from China, like electric heaters and electric storage batteries, also saw reductions in their share of the U.S. market. Furniture and lights: U.S. imports of furniture, lights and bedding from China saw a sharper decline than in previous years, hitting $12.6 billion in 2025 compared to $18.5 billion the prior year. Vietnam has gained the most from China’s declining market share, followed by Mexico. Pharmaceuticals: The U.S. imported about $5.4 billion worth of pharmaceutical products from China in 2025, down from nearly $8 billion the year prior. China accounted for less than 3 percent of all U.S. pharmaceutical imports.

ALDEN BIESEN, Belgium — The European Union should open up more to its trade partners in public procurement and curb Chinese investment in sectors like green tech, according to a new draft of a landmark industry act obtained by POLITICO on Thursday. Free-trade partners like the United Kingdom and Japan will breathe a sigh of relief as the draft Industrial Accelerator Act (IAA) foresees a definition of “Made in EU” that includes “trusted partners.” Brussels wants to throw up a higher barrier to investment from China by imposing a cap on foreign direct investment by countries that dominate a given global industry. The leak of the bill came as EU leaders held a retreat at a Belgian castle to wargame ways to reverse the bloc’s industrial decline in the face of China’s export dominance and America’s tech supremacy. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is trying to find a balance between France’s protectionist instincts and calls for more openness led by Germany, Italy and the EU’s Nordic contingent. Leaders played down differences as they gathered at the Alden Biesen estate, with Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni saying her views on industrial strategy converged with those of German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, and brushing off suggestions the duo were trying to isolate French President Emmanuel Macron. “It is not something that we do against someone else, by excluding someone else,” she told reporters. Leaders reached a form of consensus on areas including the concept of a European preference, where there was openness to examining what it may mean and where it may be needed, according to a person briefed on the talks. The meeting kicked off an intense month of politicking on restoring EU competitiveness and its single market project, with the IAA due out on Feb. 25 and leaders to reconvene for a full-blown summit on March 19-20. The draft drew a swift and strong rebuke from Chinese business. “The latest version of the Industrial Accelerator Act is likely to undermine the investment confidence of leading Chinese companies,” the Chinese Chamber of Commerce to the EU said. “Beyond the political signaling, many of the proposed measures raise serious practical concerns, including the feasibility of mandatory local partnership requirements, which in many cases may simply not be commercially or technologically viable.” A big question mark over the industry push, which is being led by Industry Commissioner Stéphane Séjourné, is whether it can be sufficiently decisive to turn the economic tide. “Whatever new FDI rules will be enacted will be ineffective,” said Yanmei Xie, a senior associate fellow at the Mercator Institute for China Studies. Each EU member country has a different agenda and building a united front against Chinese dominance is a near impossibility. “Whoever is the lowest denominator becomes the de facto gatekeeper.” TRUSTED PARTNERS The latest draft of the IAA, which runs to 96 pages, broadens the definition of a European preference as it would apply to public procurement and other taxpayer-funded programs in energy-intensive industries, net-zero technologies and the automotive sector. In so doing it should allay fears among friendly trading nations of a “Fortress Europe” scenario.  The scope of Made in EU should include content originating from the EU and the European Economic Area, which spans Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein. The draft also leaves the door open to “trusted partners” whose manufacturing “should be deemed equivalent to Union origin content.” Earlier on Thursday, Séjourné dismissed the notion that the Made in EU push would exclude trade partners. His cabinet said there was broad support, both politically and in industry for the work of the Commission, although “opinions diverge on the conditions and modalities of its implementation.” A broader Made in EU concept will be welcome in the U.K. after the country’s finance minister, Rachel Reeves, said on Wednesday that Britain needed to be part of the Made in EU club. “I actually support the idea of some sort of ‘Made in Europe’ or ‘Made in countries that share each other’s values,’” she told an event. Japan, a major auto exporter, will also welcome the shift. The country “very much meets the definition of a Trusted Partner of the EU,” Patrick Keating, Honda Europe’s head of government affairs, told POLITICO.  GETTING TOUGHER The EU executive doubled down on its efforts to curb foreign direct investments from China in its latest draft.  Should the current form hold, the IAA would limit investments by companies based in countries that control more than 40 percent of global manufacturing capacity across four sectors: batteries, electric vehicles, solar technologies, and the processing and recycling of critical raw materials. “The sectors indicated — those in which Beijing is a leader — as well as the reference to the 40 percent manufacturing capacity, highlight how the increasingly clear target of these measures are Chinese foreign direct investments,”said Luca Picotti, a lawyer at Italy’s Osservatorio Golden Power. The Commission’s proposal, which effectively mirrors Beijing’s 1980s forced joint venture policy, remains in the new draft. Chinese automakers that could be forced to give up some of their technology to their European competitors are pushing back on that strategy. BYD CEO Stella Li has called the model “outdated.” “It’s not efficient: We take decisions in a second, a joint venture takes months. It’s a model of the past,” she told Italian daily Corriere della Sera at the Davos World Economic Forum last month. Governments would also be compelled under the IAA to buy more climate-friendly materials, though the scope of the requirement remains elusive in the latest draft of the upcoming industry booster. The act also proposes introducing voluntary green steel labels.  The scale of the Commission’s intervention remains unclear in the draft, which is missing a section devoted to specific materials as well as a set of annexes, though hints are sprinkled throughout the document. “Public procurement is a powerful lever,” von der Leyen told industry representatives at an event in Antwerp on Wednesday, noting it amounts to 15 percent of EU GDP. “This is massive financial firepower controlled by European governments. But too often, we see that our public buyers have to take the subsidized foreign products instead of the high-quality European alternatives. That is homegrown value that we are leaving on the table.”  Aude van den Hove reported from Alden Biesen, Francesca Micheletti, Jordyn Dahl and Sebastian Starcevic from Brussels, and Zia Weise from Antwerp.

LONDON — The U.K. and Poland have agreed to cooperate more closely to shoot down air and missile threats, as they seek to strengthen the protection of their skies. The two NATO allies will step up joint training of helicopter pilots and work together on new capabilities to counter attacks from the air. British and Polish military personnel will train together in virtual environments to improve air defense techniques, while eight Polish military helicopter pilots will undertake training in the U.K. under NATO’s military aviation program. Two Polish helicopter instructors will be permanently stationed at RAF Shawbury in the West Midlands for a full rotational tour. The announcement came during a visit by Polish President Karol Nawrocki to Downing Street on Tuesday. U.K. Defense Secretary, John Healey, hailed Poland as “a crucial ally for the U.K. in this era of rising threats” and said together they were “stepping up to defend Europe and face down the threat from (Vladimir) Putin.” British fighter jets conducted an air defense mission over Poland as part of an allied response to Russian drone incursions into Polish airspace, with pilots from the two countries flying together as part of NATO’s Eastern Sentry mission. Healey announced last year that British armed forces would get fresh powers to bring down suspicious drones over military sites as part of the Armed Forces Bill, amid a spate of aerial incursions across Europe. Ministers have committed to improving the U.K.’s aerial defenses, following concerns that it is increasingly vulnerable given the changing nature of threats from the air. The U.K. and Poland have cooperated extensively on air defense in the past, including a £1.9 billion export agreement announced in April 2023 to equip 22 Polish air defense batteries, and a separate deal worth over £4 billion to continue the next phase of Poland’s future air defense programme, Narew.