EC Briefing — Wednesday, 20 May 2026

Key Points

• EU remains concerned about US steel and aluminum tariffs impacting exports and administrative burdens.
• Agreement mandates Commission to negotiate reduced duties on steel and aluminum derivatives to a maximum of 15%.
• EU-Mexico trade deal signing emphasizes trade diversification and geopolitical strategy for greater independence.
• Upcoming agreement with Mexico aims to modernize trade relations and address global challenges beyond trade.
• EU's strict food safety rules on antimicrobials will impact imports from Brazil and Argentina under new legislation.
• Commission emphasizes ongoing engagement with Brazilian authorities to ensure compliance with food safety requirements.

Full Transcript

Transcribed automatically from EbS (Europe by Satellite) · English audio track · AI-generated · May contain errors · Verify before quoting

Opening Statement

of the steel and aluminium tariffs and we don't hide that this remains a concern for EU stakeholders because it increases costs and because it creates significant administrative burden for EU exporters. Now, the announced review in April also brought some improvements which we recognise, including the delisting of certain products. At the same time, we remain concerned about how the revised metal tariffs will impact EU exports and therefore, and you will have seen, this has also been covered in the agreement last night. We continue to be of the view that EU exports of derivatives should benefit from the 15% tariff ceiling, should not be subject to any further administrative requirements in line with the EU-US deal. In last night's agreement, the co-legislators have mandated the Commission to find a rapid solution with the US so as to bring down the duties on all steel and aluminium derivatives to the maximum of 15%, to the ceiling of 15% as it is foreseen in the joint statement. So, we are confident that the progress that was made last night will also help unlock these discussions and we will remain in touch with our US counterparts on this subject. A follow-up, Jorge?

EU-US trade relations

Q (Bloomberg): Yes, just a quick follow-up. When you said in relation to the first question that you are confident that this will bring into a new chapter, that means that the US counterparts yesterday, they didn't express a major objection to the result of the trialogue. And secondly, in response to the derivatives question, when you also said that you are confident that progress will help to unlock, that means that the US counterparts signal that they are ready to consider a new reform of the derivatives. Thank you.

Spokesperson: You know, we've been in constant contact with our US counterparts at all levels, including even President von der Leyen herself with President Trump only two weeks ago on this agreement, on the various stages, keeping our counterparts well informed. The moment of the agreement yesterday was something that was well expected by the US administration. So, I cannot see how this could be other than good news. We are delivering, we're going through our procedures, which are well foreseen in our treaties, in our legislation. This was a major step and we are delivering. It should be, without any doubt, good news for both sides. Other questions? So, you may have noticed that I'm wearing a trade hat today in the absence of our dear Olaf. Still on trade? Yes, please. Penny Duncan for DW.

EU-Mexico trade deal

Q (DW): Not on the EU-US deal, but on Friday, obviously, we'll see the signing of the EU-Mexico deal. I just wonder if you could underscore the importance of this deal to the Commission and perhaps the geopolitics behind signing it this week or weeks after the EU-US deal agreed. Thanks.

Spokesperson: Well, you have seen how actively we've been pursuing our trade diversification agenda, as part of the overall objective of ensuring greater independence of the EU in the various fronts. And trade is essential for that. We need to diversify. This has been demonstrated in several recent agreements on trade, be it with Mercosur, be it with India, and with others, and now also with Mexico. It's good to recall that Mexico was already 97, the partner with whom we have concluded a very ambitious agreement at the time, well beyond trade, also covering political cooperation and cooperation on development issues, on confirming our commitment to a number of values and the international law. And that was the basis for many years of our trade relations. Now, it's a good time to update that agreement, to modernize it, and that is precisely the sense of the foreseen agreement to take place at the end of this week with President von der Leyen, with President Sheinbaum in Mexico, is bringing this relationship again to a next level, modernize it, and going also beyond trade. It remains a relation which is also looking into how we can cooperate on global issues, on global challenges. But let me not anticipate too much and not prejudge too much. You will hear a lot from us, you will hear from the President herself, President von der Leyen, while in Mexico, and we will be offering also a technical briefing later in the week on this regard. Other trade-related questions? Let me see online. I have a few. Let's check if they are trade. Nikolaos Koumea. It's not trade. Can I ask it anyway? Let me see, Nikolaos, because I still have another question online. Let's see if it's trade. Yes, Paola, it's not trade. It's early this week. We didn't get the opportunity. As you know, last week, the Commission updated its list on countries on import of animal food products from countries which are using too much antibiotics to farm animals. I would like to ask how that will impact imports from Mexico countries, because both Brazil and Argentina are included in that list. We know that already, according to the Mexico agreements, safeguards and only a few percent of such products, beef and poultry, are supposed to be imported. But now, with this list, how does that affect even that small import of animal food products from those countries? Because the list will obviously enter into force in September. Thank you.

Spokesperson: Indeed. So you're referring to our enforcement of health and safety legislation. And Eva, you have more elements on this. Yes, maybe also for those who are not familiar with Moza's question. So this is related to a vote last week in our PAF committee, where basically member states, based on our proposal, have decided about antimicrobials, because as we always stress, food safety is a priority to us. So we have one of the strictest rules in the world for food safety. And so under these rules, the use of antimicrobials to promote growth or increase yield in livestock is not allowed. And we apply the same measures, obviously, to the countries that want to export to the European Union. Based on this decision from last week, Brazil must now ensure that there is a compliance with these requirements and that the use of antimicrobials for the entire lifetime of the animals is prevented. So I have to also add that we have closely engaged with the Brazilian authorities. We will continue to engage with the Brazilian authorities. But for the moment, we don't have guarantees from the Brazilian side that these measures are applied. If you speak about Mercosur, Moza, this is not connected to Mercosur. These rules do not affect the trade deals, so the other Mercosur countries are not affected by this. Thank you, Eva. Since we have Eva with us on the podium, any other questions to Eva on the various

Ebola outbreak preparedness

Q: not clear to me whether it was, let's see, it's not, whether it's forever. Yes, it's forever. It is? Okay, go ahead. It's just a question of Ebola because there's an outbreak going on in the Republic of the Congo and also in Uganda, if I'm not mistaken. There are some cases. I mean, it's likely, given the extension of the virus, that some important cases might come up in Europe. I wonder if you are preparing for this and if you are monitoring the situation as usual. Many thanks.

Spokesperson: Thank you, Tommaso. Obviously, we are prepared and we have several tools in place. We have our channels, we have tools, we have our partners, and we act very quickly because, as I always say here, safeguarding of the public health is our priority. And this is a prerogative that basically guides us through any such case of any outbreak of a disease. We saw it with Hantavirus, now we see it with Ebola. So, we are following the situation very, very closely, the situation in Africa. At this stage, there is no indication that people here in Europe would need to take some specific measures beyond the normal public health advice. Nevertheless, we coordinate and cooperate with our partners. Actually, today, there is a health security committee discussing the issue, and also ECDC has called the EU Health Task Force to discuss the same things. So, we have these channels that are activated. We know that diseases do not stop at the borders, and this is also the case of Ebola, because it's not only in DRC, there are some cases in Uganda and South Sudan. So, this is why we think that the coordination and cooperation with WHO, with the CDC in Africa, and with other partners is absolutely essential, and we do everything what we can to support the region. So, at the moment, just for the European citizens, I have to say that, according to ECDC, the risk of infection here in the European Union is very low. Even for the people who travel to the region, it's assessed as low, but we do plenty of things to support DRC. For example, there is an air humanitarian air bridge on its way, so we will soon deliver essential material to DRC, medicines, protective material, infection control material, some tents, simply everything that is necessary in the front line, everything that needs the medical workers, but also the patients there. ECDC has already sent experts to the ground, so they are already in DRC. We are also supporting African CDC with detection kits, and let me also say that our partners, which is mainly Red Cross, but partners that we support financially, are monitoring border crossings. They already trace the contacts, and they operate in the high-risk areas. What we do regarding health, because this is maybe in your question, whether we are prepared. I said that we coordinate with member states, we coordinate with experts, we coordinate with our partners. We always believe in science regarding the medical emergencies, so today is meeting the health security committee that is also discussing whether any measures in Europe are necessary, so we can keep you updated later on. And it's necessary also to say that this is not a trigger for us. We've been working on this filoviruses family as a health threat already in the past. We've been contributing to the sequencing of Ebola, to the sequencing of the virus. We've been financing laboratory testing and the research around this, so this is something that we have already detected in the past, and we continue our work via several channels. And just last week, as you will recall, we have put forward a communication on tackling global health challenges precisely, so that also brings together what our tools and what we've been doing and what we continue to plan to do.

Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Q: Other questions to Eva? I see online Serife, not sure if it's for Eva, let's see. Serife, are you there? Yeah, hi. It's not for Eva, I have a foreign affairs question. Okay, let's move to foreign affairs then, go ahead. Well, as you may have already seen, Israel's finance minister, Smotrych, has ordered the eviction of a Palestinian village in the occupied West Bank. And he openly says that the measure is a retaliation to reports that the International Criminal Court is mulling an arrest warrant for him. He also said that the attempts to arrest him marked a declaration of war. Do you have a comment regarding this? Thank you. Let's bring Anwar to the podium for this question. Anwar, go ahead.

Spokesperson: Good afternoon. Thank you, Serife, for the question. Different angles from your question that needs to be unpacked, starting with the one on the ICC, because I understand these are based only on reports that are not confirmed. So you will allow me not to comment on that front, not being the spokesperson of the ICC. But as part of my functions, we have and we will continue to reiterate our strong commitment to the International Criminal Court. Why? Because we are strongly committed to international criminal justice and the fight against impunity. That's one. Then, in terms of the matter of the at hand that you have raised, let me reiterate it very clearly from here. Settlements, settlements, constructions, settler violence, demolitions, forced transfers, evictions of Palestinians must stop. We have already been quite vocal on the issue of the settlements in the West Bank. And we have been strongly condemning Israel's unilateral actions, aiming to expand its presence in the West Bank, and this including in East Jerusalem. The International Court of Justice advisory opinion of July 2024 declared this to be unlawful. And we urge the government of Israel to reverse these decisions, to abide by its obligations under international law, and to protect the Palestinian population of the occupied territories. And I believe that this answers the different angles of your question. Other foreign affair questions to Anwar? David?

Sanctions on occupied territories

Q (Radio Radical): Yes, thank you, David Carretta, Radio Radical. It's a follow-up on this issue, if I may. You have been quite vocal, but in terms of actions or sanctions, I would say, because be vocal in diplomacy is action too. But in terms of sanction or concrete action, could you confirm that a debate took place inside the college on Wednesday last week on the proposal by two member states to increase tariff for product from occupied territories? And the results of this debate has been that no proposal will come from the Commission. Thank you.

Spokesperson: Thank you, David. As you know, we do not elaborate on the discussions which take place within the college, other than what we share with you at the readout. Other questions on foreign affairs? Yes?

Baltic security concerns

Q: but I'll give it a crack anyway. Okay. So obviously Lithuania's capital was shut down today over the report of a drone incursion. That obviously has been lifted, but the Polish Prime Minister has stated that these incursions are a coordinated provocation and we can't pretend that nothing is happening. A collection of Baltic MEPs are also demanding a response from the European Commission President stating that this is a provocation and that the European Commission needs to respond to this. So one, what is her response? And number two, how is the European Commission coordinating with these Baltic countries regarding these incidents which have only seemed to increase since May? Thank you.

Spokesperson: Yes, this would be for Anita. Now, we have noted what happened and of course, we stand with the Baltic states, with Finland. You could still expect further reaction from our side, but Anita, do you want to join us already? And we do a tandem here with Anwar on any possible further questions on foreign affairs. Thank you very much, Angela. So first of all, I'm starting with the political message that obviously Europe and the EU is united with Estonia, with Latvia and Lithuania, as well as with Finland, and Russian threats are simply unacceptable. On our side, Europe is taking also concrete steps to address the growing drone threat, and this is why the member states have established a capability coalition focused specifically on drones, and we also have the Eastern Flag watch flagship in which counter-drone capabilities are a key component. Then obviously, we have also SAFE and also the work that is done there to support all our member states at the wide scale and EU-wide on our Europe defence industry. Then when it comes to the issue of the Russian threats as such, as these threats are simply unacceptable, and when we look at what happened just now with the incursion of drones in Lithuania, first and foremost, without Russia's war of aggression, there will be no drones crashing into the EU airspace, so the responsibility for everything that's happening right there, it is with Russia. Now from our side, we commend also the quick NATO's reaction in putting down the drone. We have also seen the reactions from Ukraine and Estonia, and this shows once more that Russia's war of aggression has far-fetching implications, so this is why we are continuously working on further supporting Ukraine and putting the pressure right where it belongs, and that's on Russia. Thank you. I need to add the questions to Anita. Jorge.

Sanctions on Russia

Q: Hello. Maybe it's more for you, Paula. It's about sanctions. On Monday, the United States issued its third sanctions waiver for Russian oil. On Tuesday, the United Kingdom issued its own sanctions waiver on Russian oil. Meanwhile, you, the European Commission, continue to insist that economic pressure on Russia must increase as soon as possible. So do you consider that the US and the UK are actively undermining your strategy? And how can EU sanctions be effective when two of your closest allies are providing sanctions relief to Russia? Thank you.

Spokesperson: We will not comment on what other countries are doing on sanctions regarding Russia. Now, we remain committed to our sanctions on imports of Russian oil and gas, and we need to reiterate the call for Russians not to be benefiting from the ongoing conflict in the Middle East. It's too ironic. Other questions on foreign affairs to Anita or Anwar? Not in the room. I see Nikolaos online.

Energy crisis and sanctions

Q: Thank you so much. I have a follow-up on the sanctions. How bad would the energy crisis have to be for the Commission to sort of propose an easing of sanctions? And secondly, the Commission has yet to propose a Russian oil ban, which it committed to do in the spring of 2025. Are you shelving this ban given the energy crisis and sort of like biding your time? Or would you propose it sort of in the near future? Thank you.

Spokesperson: So we're going into the subject of sanctions, which usually is Siobhan, and she's sitting patiently while I already give you some hints on future sanctions or future actions. We'll see what the future brings. We have not hesitated in standing by a number of sanctions against the US as recently as two weeks ago we had the agreement on the 20th package of sanctions. What will come next remains to be seen. I go back to foreign affairs, and I see again Tomaso online.

Ukraine war envoy speculation

Q: Sorry for the double presence. It's just about the Financial Times wrote today that the EU is considering a Mario Draghi as possible special envoy for the Ukraine war. The truth is, of course, many thanks. Anita.

Spokesperson: What we think about the idea of Mr Draghi becoming an envoy?

Spokesperson: Well, we have covered that question just the other day. We will not go into names and speculations. The High Representative has had also the point made during the last FAC. Now with the incoming informal giving, she also announced that there will be discussions on precisely what we will need to ask from Russia. We need unity in terms of this point. So this is where we are. And more important than the who is the what, and what is it that we want to ask from Russia? Now, still on foreign affairs, I see one question left. Mose again.

Sanctions against Israel

Q: Yes, thank you very much, Paula. I have a follow-up question to David's question before about possible sanctions against Israel. We talked about the EU's vocal diplomacy, and which signals it could or should send to Israel. And as we know, at the last latest Foreign Affairs Council meeting, new sanctions were imposed on extremist settlers or settler organizations in the West Bank. Obviously, Hungary, I mean, lifted this veto. But what happened with the other proposed sanctions against extremist ministers? Is that still on the table? And as you know, has Hungary changed its opinion about that? And another question related to this, as we know, probably the Israeli parliament will be dissolved this week. And there will be early elections, maybe already in September, before and not in October. And there are many concerns about the integrity of those elections. I would like to ask if the Commission or EU is considering sending election observers to observe the elections, the coming elections in Israel. Thank you. Thank you.

Spokesperson: Thank you, Mose. I'll start from the last part of your question. No speculation whatsoever in terms of elections. We are not commenting on this from here at the moment. Allow me to start by actually also following up on David's question, following our strong condemnation in terms of the settlement policy from Israel, also urging the government to reverse that. This is a statement that we have been having, but that has translated into concrete actions, and this into different trains of sanctions against extremist settlers. The last one, having been the one that we had, and that the High Representative has announced, at the outcome of the last Foreign Affairs Council, which shows what? That we are delivering and turning our positions into actions with unanimity from the 27 member states. Because when we have unanimity on sanctions, then we can obviously sanction. And the opposite is also true. When there is no unanimity, then we cannot sanction. And this also is an answer to of the state of play which the High Rep has already formalized and formulated yesterday in the European Parliament. We have put measures on the table from the Commission side for the Council to decide. Some require the qualified majority and we don't have that qualified majority. Some require unanimity and we don't have that unanimity. So in the meanwhile what do we do? We focus on what we can do to bring about a change, a positive, constructive, concrete and tangible change to the situation on the ground of the Palestinians, not only in Gaza but also in the West Bank in light of the situation that we have described in terms of settler violence in the West Bank. Happy to go again at length in terms of all the tools that we have mobilized from our toolbox to bring about that positive change which will show what? That you will not find any other supporter of the Palestinian people in the world, be it institutionally, politically, financially, concretely and in terms of humanitarian support than the EU because we are the biggest supporter of the Palestinian people, the largest donor to the Palestinian Authority which is extremely necessary in the horizon of the two-state solution and we are also working on the reforms track. So we could go on and on to show the added value that we are striving for to bring about a positive change in the situation on the ground and this regardless of what you might see as being a situation where we do not necessarily have a unanimity from 27 member states which is also normal when we work in an open society amongst open democracies and with 27 voices around the same table. Good and I think this concludes the Foreign Affairs set of questions. We can then change subject. Go ahead. Okay, Chris Parasecki of Independent. I have a question. I think it's for Balazs. It's on the memorandum of understanding on the 90 billion loan. So it was agreed, signed from the EU side this morning. I'm wondering if we can get some details on the conditions that are attached to it and a specific request. Is there anything in there on the Ukrainian energy industry and its ability or not to access this money? Thank you. Indeed. Thank you. Today is an important day in terms of operationalizing the 90 billion euro assistance package for Ukraine and that is because we have indeed finished the negotiations on the memorandum of understanding which underpins the macrofinancial assistance program. Not only did we finish the negotiations but we on the Commission side also adopted the document and signed it as well. So it's going to be now for Ukraine to do the same thing, sign it and adopt it. Now when it comes to the MOU there are two important things. It sets out the conditions that Ukraine will have to meet before receiving the respective disbursements and also the MOU provides an indicative timeline for the upcoming installment. Regarding the conditions, so as usual in such a document Ukraine will have to let's say meet political and economic conditions and on the political side Ukraine will have to continue to respect an effective democratic mechanism in the country, the rule of law, but also continue to fight against corruption and ensure respect for human rights. Now on the economic front there is a strong focus on fiscal reforms and these reforms that we are requesting are structured around three main pillars. You have revenue mobilization, you have public spending efficiency and public financial management system related reforms. So the whole point here is really to increase the capacity of the Ukrainian state when it comes to revenue mobilization and according to our estimate if these reforms are effectively implemented they could generate annually around 6 billion additional euro for the state budget and the effect should be felt gradually from the end of 2026 onwards. Thank you. Vitaly. Thank you Vitaly Sezov, Freedom. Just to follow up, which amount of money could expect to get Ukraine and when according to these particular documents, not other but this memorandum? In terms of the MFA, so for 2026 we've foreseen 8.35 billion euro for Ukraine, so 8.35 under microfinancial assistance for Ukraine and the first disbursement will constitute 3.2 billion euro under the microfinancial assistance program. Now important to say is that we can only make the first disbursement once Ukraine has proven that it has fulfilled the respective conditions and importantly also we have to have the loan agreement in place. So if you like that is the last missing piece here and that's what we are focusing on. On that front as well good progress has been made and we'll continue to work hard and we will work towards the first disbursement still in the second quarter, so in June. Thank you. Yes, Vitaly, a follow-up? And to clarify, to avoid speculation, this is money for macrofinancial, it's not included this 6 billion for drones and military? That's right, so we are using three different channels to let's say operationalize the 90 billion assistance package. One channel is the macrofinancial assistance program and that is budget support indeed. So for defence expenditure we have a different window, that's the defence window and that's the one that we are going to be using for providing defence related expenditure. Thank you. Other questions to Luk Palasz? Now let me just say because the question came a few minutes ago regarding drones reaching the Baltic states and President von der Leyen just posted a minute ago on this precise subject so you also have her own personal statement with regard to that very unfortunate event of this morning. Other questions, go ahead.

Energy efficiency directive

Q (Independent): Hi, my question is actually on the environment, it's related to the energy efficiency directive so perhaps not for Palasz.

Spokesperson: Thank you Palasz and we bring in Anna Kaisa on energy efficiency, a topic that we should discuss much more than we do in this press room. Go ahead, yes.

Environmental transparency issues

Q (Investigate Europe): Hi, it's not on energy efficiency per se, hi, hello. My name is Ella Joyner, I work for Investigate Europe, we are a team of investigative journalists and last month we led an investigation exposing how a secrecy clause embedded into a delegated act tied to the energy efficiency directive means that essentially all of the information that large data centre operators transmit to the European Commission on their environmental footprint is kept secret at an individual level and we also, together with our many media partners, we exposed how that clause directly mirrored language that came from lobby proposals from big tech companies. Yesterday we were aware that a group of 35 MEPs sent a letter to Commissioner Roswell demanding that clause to be scrapped, describing it as unlawful, so my question to you today is will the Commission now consider revising this secrecy clause attached to the EED relating to data centres? Thank you.

Spokesperson: More broadly, as you will probably be aware, given that you have carried out a very extensive investigation on this topic and continue to follow it very closely, we have a package coming up on data centres particularly and that will include the energy efficiency aspect of that as well and it is currently foreseen on 10th of June. On the letter I will need to check whether we have officially received it before I can give any comment on that, if you allow I will check if that was the question. I think that you first gave a state of play of your investigation, but on the letter I will have to check whether we have officially received it and on the plans regarding the energy performance and energy efficiency of data centres, we are currently preparing this package, this aspect will be included. I do not at this stage have any comment to make on the record on these plans. The planned adoption is on the 10th of June and we can get back to this then, but on the letter I am happy to check and get back to you. Thank you Ana Casa, but let us recall, I think it's useful recalling independently of your question, but the broader context and indeed the Commission put forward legislation, first time legislation.

Spokesperson: asking data centres to disclose data in relation to the energy efficiency of their operations. So let's really bear that in mind. It's major because data centres are contributing massively to the energy consumption. So the very simple fact that the EU, and I don't know of many other similar types of legislation across the world, the fact that the EU is putting forward legislation which asks data centre operators to disclose the energy efficiency of their operations is in itself a very important aspect to bear in mind in terms of transparency and in terms of really enabling data centres to be more energy efficient. Other questions to Ana Casa? No? Other questions to us today? No further questions? Then thank you very much and wish you a good afternoon. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

🔔 Starter subscribers: Manage your topic preferences to receive a personalised alert when your topics are mentioned.