Brussels Warns Trump About Tariffs and the Lobster Trap
from RealEcon and Greenberg Center for Geoeconomic Studies
from RealEcon and Greenberg Center for Geoeconomic Studies

Brussels Warns Trump About Tariffs and the Lobster Trap

Matt Weber, lobsterman on Monhegan Island, pulls and sets traps ten miles off the coast of Maine, U.S., May 20, 2023
Matt Weber, lobsterman on Monhegan Island, pulls and sets traps ten miles off the coast of Maine, U.S., May 20, 2023 REUTERS/Lauren Owens Lambert

A trade war with the European Union could negatively impact many U.S. industries. The lobster trade provides a specific case study of how one significant industry could be severely harmed. 

June 10, 2025 11:20 am (EST)

Matt Weber, lobsterman on Monhegan Island, pulls and sets traps ten miles off the coast of Maine, U.S., May 20, 2023
Matt Weber, lobsterman on Monhegan Island, pulls and sets traps ten miles off the coast of Maine, U.S., May 20, 2023 REUTERS/Lauren Owens Lambert
Article
Current political and economic issues succinctly explained.

Marc L. Busch is Karl F. Landegger Professor of International Business Diplomacy at Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service.

More From Our Experts

The European Union (EU) wants a better trade deal than the one President Donald Trump signed with the United Kingdom, and Brussels is threatening to impose retaliatory tariffs on a wide variety of U.S. exports if it does not get its way.

More on:

RealEcon

Trade War

Trade

On May 8, the EU unveiled a list of U.S. goods that could be targeted. The list is 218 pages long. It includes many of the go-to items Brussels has hit before, such as bourbon and motorcycles.

Lobsters are on the list, too. A lot of lobster products, at that: no fewer than fifteen different tariff lines. That is nearly a fourfold increase over what Brussels targeted when the World Trade Organization (WTO) green-lighted the EU to retaliate for illegal Boeing subsidies.

The EU is a prized market for American lobsters, and the industry has the backing of a small but vocal group of members in Congress. In his first term, Trump was very responsive to the plight of lobstermen; Brussels is betting he will help them again.

More From Our Experts

There is good reason to expect Trump will. The lobster industry directly or indirectly employs hundreds of thousands of Americans from Maine to North Carolina. It exported over a half billion dollars in 2020, with frozen products nearly double that figure.

The recent growth in sales is mainly attributable to China and other Asian markets, which turned away from this luxury seafood in the wake of the president’s first-term tariffs, but returned in recent years. Back in 2020, Trump offered $50 million to compensate the industry for those tariffs, but American lobstermen have found it difficult to claw back lost market share, and fear that more tariffs will do irreparable harm.

More on:

RealEcon

Trade War

Trade

American lobstermen also depend on positive trade relations with Canada, where most of their processing takes place. Add to this that many of the skills and investments made by lobstermen are industry-specific, and it is easy to appreciate why these are motivated voters.

The bigger lesson Brussels wants Trump to recall about lobsters is that trade wars are not waged in a vacuum: it is hard to establish escalation dominance when third countries—in this case, Canada—are also competing.

In 2017, the EU and Canada signed a trade agreement, called the Comprehensive and Economic Trade Agreement, that zeroed out lobster tariffs. This gave Canadian exporters an 8 percent cost advantage over their U.S. competitors. Trump asked Brussels for an agreement to offset this, but the EU declined, citing that it would violate WTO law.

Instead, a “mini deal” was struck, whereby Brussels eliminated its lobster tariffs on a most-favored-nation (MFN) basis, in return for a 50 percent reduction of some U.S. tariffs.

That lobster deal was a big win. U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer and EU Trade Commissioner Phil Hogan insisted that “[w]e intend for this package of tariff reductions to mark just the beginning of a process that will lead to additional agreements that create more free, fair, and reciprocal trans-Atlantic Trade.”

But it was even bigger than that. The tit-for-tat tariffs over Boeing and Airbus took place against the backdrop of Trump’s trade war with China. Beijing slapped a 25 percent tariff on U.S. lobsters because of Washington’s Section 301 duties. It then lowered its MFN rate to 7 percent, which put U.S. lobsters at a serious cost disadvantage. Things were even worse in comparison to Australia, which has tariff-free access to China.

Trump responded with an executive order instructing the U.S. trade representative to monitor Chinese imports of lobsters. Phase 1 purchase commitments, in the U.S.-China trade deal, were to be tracked and “appropriate action” taken if China fell short.

But the purchase commitments were frustrated by global competition. U.S. lobster exports to China fell by nearly two-thirds and would have fallen by even more, were it not for China’s rising trade tensions with Australia.

In 2025, it is beginning to look like déjà vu all over again.

In March, Beijing put a 25 percent tariff on Canadian lobsters in retaliation for Ottawa’s duties on Chinese electric vehicles (EVs). If Trump deescalated his trade war with China, this would give American lobsters a cost advantage over their Canadian brethren.

If not, EU retaliation will hurt even more, not least because one of the fifteen tariff lines that Brussels is considering would foreclose processing as a workaround for China’s hit on live U.S. lobsters.

These tensions are coming to a head. The EU now says it could retaliate sooner than planned due to Trump doubling his steel and aluminum tariffs. And China alleges that the United States is not living up to the ceasefire negotiated back in May, raising the odds that it, too, will hit back on lobsters.

Moreover, both the EU and China are hinting they will strike back with more than tariffs. Both have suggested using regulatory measures, including health and safety standards, which could result in an outright ban of American lobsters, not just a tax.

The irony is that the country best poised to benefit from the U.S.-EU-China lobster war is Australia. Let that sink in. Australia does not claim to have any leverage and does not even see itself as being involved in this fight. But its lobstermen could steal market share, and guard it jealously.

Canada could also come out ahead. Ottawa enjoys preferential market access to the EU, and if it can lower the heat on its EV dispute with Beijing, its lobster exports could flourish. Corporate inversions from the United States would likely follow.

The other twist in this story is that the Boeing-Airbus ceasefire expires next summer, meaning all those tariffs, including the ones that started the lobster wars under Trump’s first term, could soon be back. This would be tremendously costly, not just because of the tit-for-tat tariffs themselves, but the cost advantages they afford third countries.

That is the lesson of this story. A trade war is like a lobster trap: it is easy to get in, but hard to get out. Brussels is trying to warn Trump not to go back in.

 

Creative Commons
Creative Commons: Some rights reserved.
Close
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) License.
View License Detail
Close

Top Stories on CFR

Immigration and Migration

The White House’s latest travel ban imposes restrictions on citizens from nineteen countries. Many of those affected are contending with crises at home.

United States

America’s oldest military service turns 250 on Saturday. If you see an active duty, former, or retired member of the Army, wish their service a happy birthday.

Economics

There is too much talk about the dollar’s role as a reserve currency and too little talk about expectations of exceptional returns. Reserve accumulation hasn’t driven the financing of the U.S. current account deficit in recent years.