Commissioner we start the questions here in the room, Jorge Thank

you very much, here, Commissioner Jorge Valeiro with Bloomberg. Two questions. the first one, are

you rock solid convinced that President Trump would maintain its commitment

of 15% tariff for pharma and chips after the investigations are

conclude, after, I mean, knowing how President Trump behaves and what you saw during the

negotiations, and secondly. Given that the energy purchases are are

totally in the hands of companies, do you fear that the US

might retaliate if you don't achieve this €250 billion

of purchases per year? Thank you. Please go ahead, Commissioner. Thank you. Thank you very

much. So on your, on your first question, I mean this was the

issue which was discussed already for quite some time and

for us it was very clear that 15% is acceptable in

the case that 15% is seen as inclusive, so no

stacking and would also cover the ongoing 232

investigation and I think that it's very clear in summing up of the negotiation

yesterday that this point was made very clearly by the President von der Leyen

and I believe that with our American counterparts

we are opening a new chapter. We spend a lot of time together. we

know each other much better than before. We understand each other's sensitivities, each

other's perspectives, and, we also, will

be informing each other much more frequently. about

all the, important, decisions taken. So I believe that this commitment, will

be honoured, will be, respected, in this case

as well. If it comes to energy. purchases

I think we discussed, in the, in the past, how we've been

working together from the perspective of common purchase platform. Of course, we will

discuss of the, this approach, my colleague, Danny Jørgensen

who is responsible for the energy sector right now. But if you look at the

the current, purchases and if you look at the perspective that, we

will be phasing out the Russian energy supply by

2027. So it's very clear that Europe will need, the

solid, consolidated and reliant supply of energy. We are not talking

only about LNG. We are talking about oil, and I would say what is also

a new element, this is the nuclear fuel, as I'm sure you know, Europe

is going through the nuclear energy renaissance and therefore

new technology, nuclear fuel will be very much needed for the current

but also future nuclear power plants in Europe. And I would add that significant addition

To the strategic purchase list is something what we very much need in the

European Union, and these are high quality AI chips. I think you

know our policies quite well, and you know how much emphasis we put on

developing AI centres, AI gigafactories in Europe

and therefore for me, this is one of the very important strategic achievements. that we

have now the clarity that the top quality chips would be available

for us Europeans that we will collaborate in this field very, very closely with our

American partners because this is clearly opening a new chapter of strategic cooperation in such

a future oriented sector like AI. Many

thanks to Commissioner Tom Muller Nielsen. Hello, thank you very much, Thomas

Mel, EUractive. I have two questions, Commissioner. So the first is on this joint

action on steel, aluminium, and copper derivatives to combat overcapacities. I mean, are you suggesting

that the EU and the US will jointly impose tariffs on Chinese metals? And if

not, what exactly is it that's that's been agreed? And second of all, I'd just

like to ask a couple of months ago you gave an interview with the Financial

Times we said the EU is prepared to make a €50 billion trade offer. Obviously

the final deal was significantly larger, €250 billion just for energy purchases alone

So could you just explain how this went from €50 billion to €250 billion

energy plus the 600 billion investment, plus military purchases

as well? Could you explain how that transformation happened? Thanks very much. Thank you very

much, Thomas, starting with the first question. If it

comes to this metals union, I think I mean in this many

hours of discussions, we had with our US counterpart, I think it

became very, very clear that if it comes to, to steel and metals, we are

not, each other's problem. We are not destroying US steel sectors

and they are not destroying our steel sector. On top of it, we are very

complimentary, and I know that the United States are very much in need of our

high specialty steel. So what we concluded after this

little negotiations was very clear that what would

benefit both of us as much as possible is if, if we would have a

kind of metals union between us, meaning that we would we would set

the, the tariff rate quota based on let's say historic flows between EU and the

US and Trade let's say at MFN level as we've been trading until now

so it means that the complementarity of our metal sectors would continue, will be further

developed and that we will take jointly on what is the global problem for the

steel sectors and this is global overcapacity. So of course. US preferred

tariffs. We've been working with the, with the quotas

with the TRQs until now. You're familiar that just a few weeks, a

few weeks ago, we adopted the steel action plan, which was very much expected by

our steel industry. We are actively preparing the additional measures for post 2026

safeguard situation. So it's a pressing issue. It's a pressing issue. I'm talking to

the fellow alloy companies. I'm talking to aluminium companies. It's pressing, pressing issues. So it's

very clear that what we need to do is to address the overcapacity because this

is really killing our industry. And if we can do it together with our US

partners. So, we definitely would go in that direction and of course, details how

this would work, the mechanics of it clearly would need to be discussed, but we

want to be complementary, to help each other here to make sure that

the, the steel and metal industries in both EU and US would strive and what

will not be threatened by, by overcapacities built over the last

decades. Many thanks Kim Hi

Kim McCray from the Wall Street Journal. thanks for doing this, commissioner. I, I wondered

this builds a little bit on the last question about the metals Alliance you, you

mentioned, but between the metals Alliance, and what

was said so far and what we understood from the briefing about semiconductor purchases and

the decision to preference the US for semiconductor purchases over China, for

example, taking those together, what do you see What

do you think the outcome of this deal means for the EU's relationship with China

Are you working with the US right now to box China out of the, of

the trade that you're doing between perhaps the US and the EU and perhaps other

major trading partners? and just a quick question about the EU's WTO

obligations. The way I understood from the technical briefing, this

to, to work in terms of the EU's decision to lower some tariffs is that

some tariffs will be lowered unilaterally and only for the US, is

that in line with the EU's obligations under the WTO to do it that way

as opposed to most favoured nation. Thanks. Thank you, thank you very much, Kim. So

the, so the first question on, on China, as you know, just last week we

had the EU China summit and President von der Leyen and

President Costa visited their counterparts in Beijing. Of course

at the beginning of the, of the year, we hoped for

better results which will be delivered by the summit, but I have to say

that despite the strenuous efforts of my colleagues and myself and several

long meetings with my Chinese counterparts, unfortunately, the list of

accumulated issues on the table will not get shorter but just grew longer and

and clearly the, the issue is overcapacity, the issue is linked

with what we perceive as, illegal subsidies

the, question mark over how our companies, are treated in

in China, if they, if they get the fair access to public procurement and other

issues and, and, quite a few absolutely unwarranted, trade

defence measures taken about the products coming, coming, coming from, from Europe

And I think that all this was very clearly. Remunerated, and

highlighted, in a preparatory long VTC I

had with my counterpart Minister Wang Wentao just a few days before, before, I

think it was actually the day before, before summit and then, by both presidents, von

der Leyen and, and Costa in, in Beijing. So I think it's, it's, it's quite

clear that there is a lot of, a lot of issues, we have to deal

with, China because we just want to have fair trade

relationship with them. I would unders underline fair, fair treatment of our companies

And also clear commitment if it comes, to

to subsidies of the, of the, of the products exported to the, to the EU

because we cannot afford to have another, development

like we had with photovoltaic panels, a couple of, couple of

years ago. So, I mean, of course, the, the US in many aspects are in

similar situation. We are dealing with the critical raw materials issues. We are, we are

we are dealing with The, the, with the, the, the permits

and export permissions for rare earth, permanent magnets

and, and I would say this strategic elements which are needed for our

industry, so it's only natural for the close allies like we are with the US

to to compare the notes and to cooperate in all these

aspects. As you know, we also work very, very closely with the US if

it comes to the dual use technologies. you know how complementary

we are if it comes to the semiconductors, because, if the US have the

best chip designers, we have the best machine on this planet to print this chips

So clearly we are complementary here and we want, we want to consolidate

this further by building very solid and strong AI capacities in In

Europe. If it comes to the WTO, you know that the European

Union is and will remain the strongest champion and supporter of

WTO and rules-based trade, and nothing

changes about it. At the same time, I am in a frequent contacts with Doctor

Ngozi, director general of the WTO, and I think we both

recognise the fact which became so clear. After the

ministerial meeting in, in Paris a couple of months ago that WTO needs

deep reform, and I appreciate the efforts of, of Doctor Ngozi, which are very

much supported by us to deliver on, on, on these reforms, and I

think we have a precious opportunity. To progress

between now and the spring ministerial council in, in Cameroon

to achieve that, otherwise, it will be extremely difficult

for the, for the WTO to play the same role as they're playing now or

as they play next year, but we from the EU side will have them at

every step on the way to achieve that goal because they're absolutely convinced we need

the rules. We need a well functioning WTO and, and we need to really clarity

for the, for the, for the global, for the, for the global trade. And of

course, the last part of your question was that we look at The

agreement which was agreed upon yesterday

as the opening of the process. We want to end up with the trade agreement

with the US and the trade agreement which would be fully compatible with

the WTO rules. Many thanks, Commissioner ; Bray. Thank

you, Commissioner. I have a political question. Some Member states

say they are disappointed with this agreement because it's not

balanced enough. How do you plan to convince them? Thank you. Thank

you, thank you very much. I think first and foremost, we did our, our

utmost to keep our member states

involved and informed at every step of the way, and

we had I would say almost permanent contacts with them

including the, the corre meetings before and after every

engagement on my level, every engagement on the

level of our technical teams, and of course before and after the meeting of

President von der Leyen with with President Trump. And we've been of course explaining

to them the complexity of the situation and if Some still believe

that we can return to the pre-April 2nd situation. I think also with

the agreements which are struck between the United States and

its trading partners over the last couple of weeks, or I'm sure the number of

letters just setting the new tariff lines between now and the 1st August

it's quite obvious that the world which was there before the 2nd of April is

gone. And we simply need to adjust. We need

to address the challenges which are coming from this, from this new approach

and I believe that the strategic cooperation with our with our strategic

partner is a better outcome that all out trade war. In my

introductory remarks, I was just describing what would it mean. Tariffs more

than 30%. Then a huge political tension. Lots

of SMEs under dramatic pressure and

loss of potentially of hundreds of thousands if not millions of jobs. And what

would happen after that? The situation will become so unbearable that we have to get

to the negotiated solution, after that

We will have to sit and negotiate a new deal, but in much, much worse

conditions. So therefore, I believe that the, the, the tasks we

set for ourselves when I for the first time met my counterpart, Secretary of Commerce

Howard Lutnick. The next day after this confirmation when I said, Howard, let's work together

to avoid this mutual pain, because as the two allies, we should be able to

find the deal, to understand each other. You want to reindustrialize, we want to reindustrialize

You want to have high value chips. We want to have chips. We

want to have energy security. You want to have energy security. So I think that

that I think what is important at this stage, even though I know that For

some that potential kind of other outcome might seem

very appealing now, but they didn't go through all the numbers, through all the consequences

through all the impact it would have at every sector, and we did that. And

we did that and therefore, with full consciousness, I'm 100% sure that this deal is

better than the trade war with the United States. Many thanks

Commissioner. We don't have too much time left with the commissioner. He's under pressure, so

we'll take a few questions in the room and then we'll wrap up Jorge. Hello

Commissioner Jorge Liboreiro with Euronews. Just following up on my colleague what he said. I

mean, it's objective that this deal is quite unbalanced because you have 15%

on one side and almost 0% or virtually 0 on the other side. So do

you consider this a good deal or just a case of damage control

And second, do you have any regrets about not using retaliation at any

stage of the process in a bid to secure more concessions? Thank you. Thank

you, thank you very much, Jorge. At first, I would say that this

is clearly the, the best deal we could get under very difficult

circumstances, and I have to say, that you be not in the room, but if

you have been in the room yesterday, you would see that we really started with

30%. That was absolutely real perspective that as of 1st of August, we will have

30% tariff, On on our exports, which would, as

I already mentioned, practically halt, stop all the trade, and I have to say that

President von der Leyen did terrific negotiations yesterday. She was absolutely great

in managing these negotiations which to the

conclusion of the deal, which I'm absolutely convinced. Saves the trade, save the trade

flows, save the jobs in, in, in Europe and

opens new chapter in EU US relations, how to adjust our mutual trading patterns

in this new age of geoeconomics and geopolitics, and that's, that's for me, it's very

important political answer because it's not only about the trade. It's

about security. It's about Ukraine. it's about current geopolitical

volatility. I cannot go into the all details what everything was discussed yesterday, but I

can assure you it was not only about the trade. So therefore, I mean to

have a possibility that the two biggest economies and two closest allies can openly discuss

all sensitive issues and as I can judge from the discussion yesterday that they

are very much aligned on the geopolitical issues of today, I think. Has

additional price. It has additional worth

in having this deal done because I believe that from now

we can go only for the better. We can go for the improvement, closer cooperation

fair trade agreement, and, and simply work on all these issues we've been kind of

accumulating on the table for, for quite some time. Many thanks, Commissioner

Commissioner, we have 100 of our hardworking journalists tuned in online, so we should give

one of them the floor, and on top of my list is Rebecca Gwalandi from

Carbon Pulse. Rebecca, the floor is yours, go ahead. Rebecca

can you knock on your mic? Can we see you, please? Sorry

sorry. Can you hear me now? You see you and hear you. Please go ahead

OK, thank you. So in in 2024, the US, the EU

imported €76.9 billion of

energy from the US, so. If we want to get to the target, then

that means roughly tripling our purchases of US energy, taking into account exchange

rates. So how, how do we do that? Do we put a target? Is

it feasible? I've heard from energy experts that it's actually not feasible. The

target is not actually possible because the US doesn't even produce that much LNG

or energy products, so yeah, I'm just wondering how you're

going to monitor this, these purchases, if there's going to be a platform

how you're going to convince EU member states and companies, and also this

target actually seems very in opposition to the climate targets and to the objective of

reducing energy prices in the EU. So it seems a bit contradictory

to many of the things that the EU has said. Thank you. Thank you very

much, Rebecca for your questions. I think that

look, when we, when we approach the assessment of

Of, this, this goal. So we look at gas, we looked at

oil, we look at nuclear fuel, which is, which is, which is new, and

we also look at AIs. So these are the four basic categories, and

we look at what can be achieved in the term of President

Trump, but what can go also beyond the term of President

Trump and and as you know, I, I was responsible

for Managing the joint purchase of gas platform

in the, in the, in the last commission, and I know what

the LNG exporters need to give you a good price. They need predictability

They need long-term contracts so they can invest in development of further infrastructure

and once the further infrastructure is built, then of course you have more competition in

the market and, and you have a, you have a good price. So if you

look at what are the, what are the amounts of energy

we would need, especially if you are proceeding through phasing

out of Russian energy supplies, in the, in the next years

if you are looking at the nuclear renaissance in Europe, if you're looking at the

booming industry of AI where we would need 40 billion of the chips, we believe

that these numbers are achievable. And of course we will work with our companies

with the member states, with my colleagues in the commission, how to set up that

mechanism, and of course this would be one of the issues which we would be

regularly discussing with our US counterparts because of course, from our perspective

that's, that's the offer. We are, we are ready to to go for that for

that purchase, and I know that on their side, they're also working very hard to

be, to be able to produce that volumes, that, that quantity

of of energy and therefore I would say it would be, it would be joint

joint effort, but to have Solid supplies for your close allies and to

to have it at the, at a good price and good quality is something what

in these volatile volatile times where, as you know from the past, we

have seen how energy supplies could be weaponized. I think it's also very important

for overall competitiveness of the European economy. Many thanks, Commissioner, and

with this we draw our press point to a close. Huge thanks to the Commissioner

for making himself available. Thank you to our wonderful interpreters, and thank you to our

technical experts for keeping the show on the road. Get in touch with us at

the SPP if you have any follow up questions, and we look forward to talking

to you again soon.