Commission insists “a deal is a deal” while a key MEP urges the Parliament to pause its vote
Brussels, 22 February 2026 — The European Commission is pressing Washington for “full clarity” on its next trade steps after renewed turbulence in US tariff policy, warning that the EU will not accept any increase beyond what was negotiated in last year’s transatlantic understanding. At the same time, a senior European Parliament lawmaker has called for delaying the planned parliamentary vote on the deal, arguing that the legal and political ground has shifted so dramatically that lawmakers should not rubber-stamp an agreement amid “tariff chaos.”
The Commission’s message was blunt: the EU considers the existing terms binding and expects the United States to respect the agreed limits on tariffs. In comments reported by Reuters, the executive said it would accept no increase in US tariffs beyond the level set in the deal, stressing the need for predictability for companies and markets on both sides of the Atlantic.
The dispute is rooted in a sudden reversal in US tariff policy following a Supreme Court ruling striking down several of President Donald Trump’s global tariffs. The decision triggered fresh uncertainty when the White House moved to impose new across-the-board tariffs, first at 10% and then quickly raised to 15%, according to Reuters and AP. For Brussels, the key issue is whether those moves remain compatible with the EU–US understanding reached in 2025.
Under that 2025 deal, the United States was expected to cap tariffs on most EU goods at 15%, with specified exceptions for certain sectors, and the EU in turn committed to concessions including removing some duties and suspending retaliatory measures, as outlined by Reuters. The Commission has portrayed the framework as a stabiliser designed to avert a new transatlantic trade war — and it has argued that further hikes would breach the spirit and the letter of what was agreed.
EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič discussed the issue with US officials over the weekend, according to Reuters, as Brussels tries to determine whether the latest US measures are temporary improvisation or the start of a broader shift in policy. For European exporters — from automotive suppliers to pharmaceuticals and aircraft components — even short bursts of tariff uncertainty can disrupt contracts, pricing, and investment decisions.
Parliamentary ratification comes under pressure
That uncertainty is now spilling into the EU’s own ratification process. Bernd Lange, a senior lawmaker who chairs the European Parliament’s trade committee, urged postponing the Parliament’s scheduled vote, warning that the upheaval in US tariff policy had altered the “terms” and “legal basis” of the deal, Reuters reported. The Greens have also called for a delay, according to the same report, signalling that opposition is widening beyond the usual critics of trade compromises.
The timing matters. The European Parliament had planned to vote by the end of February, after earlier pausing its work on the agreement amid broader concerns about US pressure on European allies, as reported by Reuters. Now, lawmakers face a choice: proceed quickly to lock in what remains of the deal, or delay to demand written assurances and legal clarity from Washington.
Supporters of moving ahead argue that the EU’s leverage is strongest when it acts decisively, and that anchoring the agreement could protect businesses from a sliding scale of tariffs driven by US domestic politics. Critics counter that ratification without clarity could leave the EU exposed, normalising unpredictability and weakening the Parliament’s ability to scrutinise the deal’s enforceability — a sensitive point for an institution that has become increasingly assertive on trade oversight.
What’s at stake for Brussels — and for transatlantic credibility
Beyond the immediate tariff rates, the dispute touches a deeper issue: whether the EU and the US can still provide a stable, rules-based anchor for global trade when domestic legal and political shocks ripple across borders. The Commission’s insistence that “a deal is a deal” is as much about credibility as it is about percentages — a warning that negotiated outcomes cannot be rewritten overnight without consequences.
In Brussels, the next steps are likely to focus on written clarification from the US administration, potential interpretative safeguards, and reassessing the timing of the Parliament’s vote. The debate also revives an older EU question: how to balance the economic value of transatlantic trade with the political need to ensure partners respect predictable legal commitments.
For background on how the EU framed the 2025 understanding and its intended stabilising effect, see The European Times’ earlier coverage of the Commission’s implementation plans: EU moves to cut tariffs and implement US trade deal.
