There is no such thing as “reasonable protectionism” unless you are dealing with dumping. Harley could hardly be accused of dumping. So why a 6% tariff in the first place? EU clothing tariffs already average 12% in many other categories it ranges from 4-36%.
So is the EU protecting nearly every industry? Isn’t that the point of this “trade war” — the EU has been applying tariffs to almost everything for a long time. Doesn’t the US have a right to retaliate?
French milk is already better than most American milk, yet France puts a 36% tax on dairy imports in addition to heavily subsidizing dairy. So the effective tariff is much higher. And European consumers end up losing because they have to spend more of their money on dairy — all to protect a fairly small industry when measured as a percentage of GDP. Yet every time reforms are attempted, farmers literally riot.
Why should a country accept their goods being taxed without being able to respond in kind?
This is tit-for-tat to be sure, but the tit didn’t start with the Trump tariffs.
Huh? It's disingenuous to look at only one one side of the equation. The US imposes its own share of tariffs and non-tariff trade barriers. Some of which (mainly for certain agricultural products) are high enough to all but eliminate imports of them altogether. Peanuts, raw tobacco, and sugar are examples of American industries that have benefited from aggressive protectionist policies for decades.
Existing trade agreements have recognized this; it's not something that the EU has unilaterally imposed in recent years. The average EU tariff on American goods is under 3 percent.[0] More importantly, the average tariff--for both the EU and the rest of the world--have been steadily declining.[1] That was the trend. The administration's recent trade policy upends that trend for no real purpose.
If the goal is to see tariffs lowered and barriers removed--one that I heartily support--you don't undertake a policy that will spur the opposite. You sit down at the negotiating table like adults and hammer out a trade deal. Which is a lot harder than it sounds, because every tariff of your own that you can use as leverage in the deal has its own domestic supporters. Many of whom are politically well-connected. It's not surprising then, that the administration chose to pursue a simpler (albeit inherently flawed) approach.
The tit didn't start with the Trump tariffs, but Trump also effectively stopped TTIP negotiations, and TTIP would lower trade barriers between US and the EU. This was a prelude to the current trade war with the EU. Which is very unhelpful, he should just concentrate on China.
