The EU-US Forum has been consistent on this. In July we wrote that Europe’s free ride on pharmaceutical innovation had to end. In September we explained why the Section 301 investigation into Germany’s drug pricing deserves to be taken seriously. Since then, the hearing has come and gone. Berlin’s position has not moved.

The numbers have not moved either. The United States spends almost four times as much on innovative medicines as Germany does. Germany spends less than half what the U.S. spends on new drugs as a share of GDP. Germany is the largest economy in Europe and home to some of the world’s most sophisticated pharmaceutical companies. It can afford to pay. It chooses not to.

In July, Berlin passed a health insurance overhaul that deepened mandatory discounts on branded medicines. The steepest cuts land on drugs with annual sales above €100 million, which in practice means the most successful innovative therapies. The law was written to close a projected €18 billion hole in the statutory health system. In effect, Germany filled its budget gap by charging less for the products of American research.

The industry’s reaction was predictable. Eli Lilly and Boehringer Ingelheim announced investment cuts or withdrawals. Other companies warned they may stop launching new drugs in Germany at all.

This is where the Trump administration’s work to rebalance prescription drug costs has an effect. Under current posture, drugmakers commit to aligning American prices for new medicines with what other wealthy nations pay. Germany is one of the high-income countries those prices are measured against. When Berlin forces prices down at home, it is no longer just making a domestic budget decision. It is trying to export its price controls into the American market through the benchmark.

That puts Germany at the center of the debate on prescription drug prices. Its policies are a big part of why the gap between American and European prices exists. Washington has two options for closing that gap: American prices come down or German prices come up. The administration has been clear about which one it expects. Its demands for Berlin are specific. Raise the share of GDP spent on innovative medicines. Roll back July’s deeper discounts. Accept a compliance mechanism so commitments are kept.

Germany’s counteroffer has been underwhelming. Officials are developing a so-called “Germany bonus,” which would ease discounts only for companies that follow German collective bargaining agreements and carry out research, development and production in Germany. That is not a fix for underpayment. It is a local-content requirement wearing a health policy label, and it rewards companies for moving investment out of the United States.

Critics at the hearing argued that R&D costs and drug prices are not linked. If that were true, Lilly and Boehringer would not be pulling investment over German pricing. Capital follows returns. When a wealthy market refuses to pay for innovation, less innovation gets funded. The burden of paying for what does get funded shifts to American patients.

There is a model on the table. The United Kingdom agreed to double its spending on new medicines over the next decade and raise its price thresholds for innovative treatments. In exchange it secured three years of duty-free pharmaceutical trade. USTR Jamieson Greer called it “a ground-breaking arrangement.” Germany could have the same deal tomorrow.

Chancellor Merz called drug pricing “a purely domestic matter” when the investigation was launched. It stopped being domestic when Germany’s prices started setting the terms for American patients. The longer Berlin waits, the fewer options it has left.

The post Germany Is Underpaying for the Future. America Needs An Ally Willing to Play Its Part. appeared first on THE EU-US FORUM.

Last month, about 175,000 German auto workers walked off the line for coordinated protests at roughly 280 sites across the country. The union behind it, IG Metall, brought out workers from Volkswagen, Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Audi, Porsche and Bosch. Its slogan was “A Future Instead of Cuts.”

Nobody disputes that the German auto industry is in trouble. Volkswagen cut its 2026 profit margin outlook to 1% at most, down from as much as 5.5%. Its restructuring could push total job losses to 100,000. According to the VDA, Germany’s auto industry has shed roughly 100,000 jobs since 2019. Suppliers have cut close to a quarter of their workforce over the same period.

The diagnosis is fair. The prescription is the problem.

IG Metall’s demands are telling. The union is defending the 35-hour workweek. It wants to keep retirement after 45 years of contributions. It is calling for “effective trade protection” and “clear local-content requirements” to shield German factories from competition. It wants the EU to broaden its tariffs on Chinese vehicles. Germany’s Vice Chancellor, Lars Klingbeil, has backed tariffs on imported plug-in hybrids.

Compare that with Berlin’s message to Washington. When the United States uses tariffs and local investment requirements to rebuild its own manufacturing base, German officials call it a threat to the transatlantic relationship. When German unions ask for those same tools, it gets called industrial policy.

American auto workers have already been through what Germany is facing now. The 2008 collapse forced painful restructuring across Detroit, and the industry rebuilt around competitiveness. Some of the best evidence for this sits in the American South, at German-owned plants in South Carolina, Alabama and Tennessee. BMW’s plant in Spartanburg is the company’s largest production site anywhere in the world. American workers in those plants build German cars competitively, at scale, for export markets around the globe. That is the standard an ally should be measuring itself against.

The issue is bigger than labor relations. Germany is America’s most important trading partner in Europe. Motor vehicles were its top export to the United States in 2025, at roughly €28.5 billion. An ally that depends that heavily on access to American consumers should not answer its own competitiveness crisis by shortening the workweek and closing its markets.

The timing makes it worse. As the EU-US Forum noted last month, the Section 301 investigation into Germany’s drug pricing puts autos directly in the line of fire. A Section 301 finding does not have to stay within one sector. If Berlin will not pay its fair share for American pharmaceutical innovation, German cars are the obvious place for Washington to apply leverage. A protectionist turn in German auto policy only makes that case stronger.

IG Metall says workers should not “pay for a crisis that isn’t their fault.” On that point it has an argument. Years of poor management decisions, high energy costs and a misjudged bet on the Chinese market put the industry where it is. But walling off the German market while expecting the American market to stay wide open is not a recovery plan. It is a request for someone else to cover the bill.

Germany has asked for a lot from this alliance. It is time for Berlin to show it can compete on the same terms it expects everyone else to accept.

The post Germany’s Auto Workers Are Asking for the Wrong Thing appeared first on THE EU-US FORUM.

When the EU-US Forum wrote in July that Europe’s free ride on pharmaceutical innovation had to end, Germany’s response was to double down. The Bundestag passed new legislation slashing drug prices further, and Berlin has spent the months since insisting, publicly, that there is nothing to discuss. But that posture collides with reality.

Recently, U.S. trade officials convened a public hearing into whether Germany’s system for setting prices on new medicines constitutes an unfair trade practice under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. It is the next formal step in an investigation the Trump administration launched in June, and it carries consequences that reach well beyond the pharmaceutical sector.

The case against Germany is straightforward. Americans account for nearly 80% of the innovative revenue for drugs launched between 2020 and 2025, according to research by the Office of Health Policy. That disparity is not a coincidence. It is the product of deliberate foreign government policy.

Germany’s pricing system strips billions of dollars annually from American pharmaceutical companies by refusing to pay market rates for the medicines those companies discovered, developed, and brought to patients. The German government calls this system “established and balanced.” Washington disagrees. To them, it’s freeloading.

Germany isn’t the only case of freeloading. Switzerland has also chosen to move forward with a restrictive drug pricing and coverage regime. This plan would further penalize U.S. innovation.

Republican Congressman Vern Buchanan, vice chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, put it plainly: “For too long, European countries have been freeloading off American innovation while our own patients and companies foot the bill.”

Here is what makes the recent hearing significant: the leverage Washington holds is not limited to pharmaceuticals. Former Assistant USTR Dan Mullaney, now at the Atlantic Council, has noted that a Section 301 finding does not restrict retaliatory tariffs to the sector under investigation. Germany’s top export to the United States in 2025 was motor vehicles, totaling roughly 28.5 billion euros. Pharmaceuticals came in at 28 billion euros. Both are squarely within reach. The threat does not require any creative legal interpretation. It is built into the statute.

Washington has been explicit about what it wants. The demands include increasing Germany’s GDP share of spending on innovative medicines, rolling back recent legislation that deepened price discounts on new drugs, and establishing a compliance mechanism to ensure any commitments are honored. Germany currently spends less than half what the United States spends on new medicines as a share of GDP. The new health reform law Berlin passed in July, designed to close an 18 billion euro deficit in the statutory health insurance system, made that gap wider, not smaller. Companies including Eli Lilly and Boehringer Ingelheim responded by announcing investment cuts or market withdrawals.

The administration’s position is consistent with the broader accountability framework it has applied across the transatlantic relationship. As we noted in July, NATO allies ultimately committed to spending 5% of GDP on defense by 2035 after years of American pressure produced a landmark summit outcome. The mechanism that worked in Brussels can work in Berlin. The question is whether Germany’s government is willing to act before the finding forces its hand.

German politicians have argued that the problem is not German prices but American ones. Matthias Mieves of the governing German Social Democrats said that “the reality is that drug prices in the United States are far too high.” That framing misunderstands the economics of the issue entirely. The United States bears the cost of pharmaceutical R&D because other governments refuse to contribute their share. If every country invested in pharmaceutical R&D the way Germany does, the pipeline of new medicines that European patients rely on would not exist. Innovation does not happen in a vacuum.

What happens after this recent hearing is not predetermined. The USTR is still building its record. But anyone watching this process should understand that the administration launched this investigation with the intent to use it. The hearing is not a pressure release valve. It is a step in a process with a destination.

Europe has watched this dynamic play out on defense, on trade deficits, and now on pharmaceuticals. The pattern is consistent. The administration identifies a structural imbalance, applies formal and informal pressure, and holds firm until the other side moves. Berlin would be wise to treat this week’s hearing not as a procedural formality but as the signal it is.

The post Innovation Does Not Happen in a Vacuum appeared first on THE EU-US FORUM.

The message is clear: the era of one-sided arrangements is over. Now, that same accountability must extend to pharmaceutical innovation.

For too long, European governments have imposed aggressive price controls on American-developed medicines while their citizens benefited from every breakthrough those medicines represent. New research by the Office of Health Policy shows Americans account for nearly 80% of the innovative revenue for drugs launched between 2020 and 2025. No other country comes close. That gap is the direct result of foreign government policy that shifts the burden of R&D costs onto American patients, who effectively subsidize the healthcare systems of wealthy nations that simply opt out of paying full price.

When wealthy allies refuse to pay fair prices for prescription drugs, they don’t just harm American companies. They threaten the innovation pipeline that patients around the world depend on.

The Trump administration took critical action in June by launching a Section 301 investigation into Germany’s underpayment for innovative pharmaceuticals. The investigation will assess whether Germany’s pricing policies unfairly burden U.S. commerce and warrant a stronger response.

Germany answered by doubling down. Last week, the German Bundestag passed a sweeping overhaul of the country’s statutory health insurance system in its final session before the summer recess. The legislation forces additional drug-price reductions on pharmaceutical companies as part of a broader push to cut billions of euros in health system costs. The Bundesrat cleared the bill the same day, putting the law on track to take effect January 1. Germany already imposes strict price controls that strip billions of dollars annually from innovation. This new law makes a bad situation significantly worse.

Germany is not the only concern. Switzerland is advancing new pricing restrictions that expand administrative price controls and impose mandatory volume-based clawbacks of up to 40% on innovative medicines. The implications extend far beyond Switzerland’s borders. Not only will these measures reduce the recognized value of life-saving medications and dilute future innovation, they contribute to a global pricing spiral that has direct implications for the availability of innovative medicines worldwide.

These are state-induced price control mechanisms that create real trade-policy exposure and warrant Section 301 scrutiny.

The Administration has laid the groundwork and is right to continue pressing high-income trading partners to contribute more to financing pharmaceutical innovation. A trade agreement framework that includes meaningful commitments on innovative medicine spending is not just a health policy goal. It is a national security and economic competitiveness imperative.

NATO allies finally heard the message on defense spending. It is time for Europe and Switzerland to hear it on life-saving medications.

The post The Free Ride Must End: It’s Time for Europe to Pay Its Fair Share on Pharmaceutical Innovation appeared first on THE EU-US FORUM.

The DMA was sold to the world as a tool to rein in dominant platforms where real monopoly power exists, think dominant search engines, app stores, and social networks that billions of people have no practical alternative to. Cloud computing is none of those things. The EU knows it. That’s why no American cloud service provider meets the DMA’s own quantitative thresholds for gatekeeper designation. The Commission is moving forward anyway.

That’s not enforcement. That’s improvisation in service of an agenda.

The EU’s “tech sovereignty” project has been transparent in its goals for years: tilt the regulatory playing field against American technology companies and toward European alternatives. The DMA cloud investigation is the latest chapter. AWS has committed tens of billions of euros to data centers across France, Germany, Spain, and beyond. Microsoft Azure has made similarly massive European investments. These companies are not extracting value from Europe, they are building it. Gatekeeper designation is the reward they get for it.

The legal rationale here is thin to the point of embarrassment. Cloud services don’t intermediate between businesses and consumers the way the DMA envisions. There’s no platform dynamic. There’s no gateway. Applying a framework designed for two-sided platforms to enterprise cloud infrastructure is a category error, and European regulators are sophisticated enough to know that.

What makes this even harder to justify: Europe already regulates cloud. The EU Data Act regulates interoperability, portability, and customer switching mechanisms, exactly the issues the Commission claims to be investigating. The cloud sector is already highly competitive, with more than 70 percent of European customers using multiple providers and prices continuing to fall.

The costs here are real. Layering duplicative DMA obligations on top of the Data Act framework creates compliance burdens that hit American companies hardest. That’s not incidental, it’s the point. Regulatory unpredictability chills investment. Infrastructure dollars that would have flowed to European data centers will go elsewhere, and the jobs, skills, and capacity go with them. European businesses relying on cutting-edge cloud and AI capabilities will be the collateral damage.

US leaders need to keep fighting back against these draconian actions by the EU. This is not a routine regulatory disagreement. It is a pattern of discriminatory action against American companies that are playing by the rules, investing in Europe, and serving European customers well. If Brussels faces no consequences for stretching its own law to punish American success, it will keep doing it.

The post The EU’s Cloud Power Grab Is a Trade War in Regulatory Clothing appeared first on THE EU-US FORUM.

The EU bureaucracy is declaring war on American business
Matt Mowers
Washington Examiner

President Donald Trump is ushering in a new era of American prosperity by dismantling the regulatory state. As in his first term, where I was proud to serve, his administration is slashing red tape, unleashing U.S. energy, and turning the United States into the undisputed engine of global growth. Meanwhile, in the European Union, a left-wing cabal of bureaucrats is constructing a brick wall of regulations and compliance costs that punishes American businesses and threatens Trump’s golden age.

The EU has entered a phase of hostility toward American success. Brussels has long been the global hub for central planning, seeking to overregulate instead of innovate. If we fail to confront this regulatory imperialism now, the consequences will fall on workers worldwide whose livelihoods depend on American innovation.

The most egregious example of this overreach is the EU’s transparently political vendetta against Elon Musk and his social media platform X. Under the banner of the Digital Services Act, European commissars are attempting to act as the world’s censors. They have levied astronomical “user protection” fines against X because Musk dared to restore the principle of open debate to the digital town square.

Brussels is not coming for the company; they are coming for the man.

The personal threats and vengeful rhetoric directed at Musk by EU officials are a warning to every American entrepreneur: If you do not bow to the radical sensitivities of the European elite, they will use their regulatory machinery to bankrupt you. It is a protectionist shakedown masquerading as public safety, and it is an attack on our American value of free speech.

The Digital Markets Act and Digital Services Act are another tool of the EU deep state designed with one goal in mind: to kneecap American “gatekeepers” while providing a free ride to European laggards. Under the DMA and DSA, the EU has hit American companies such as Apple and Meta with fines of 700 million euros combined.

These fines from the EU on American companies have sparked outrage across the U.S., with many pointing to the fact that the EU made more money from fining U.S. companies than it made in tax revenue from its own tech companies in 2024.

Recent surveys also show that the vast majority of Europeans find their online experience has actually worsened under the DMA. Instead of the seamless, high-speed services they were used to, users are now met with endless consent pop-ups, broken integrations, and degraded search results.

So, Brussels has achieved the impossible: It has made the internet harder to use while stifling the very competition it claimed to promote.

And perhaps the most dangerous of the EU’s regulation obsession is found with the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive. These backdoor maneuvers aim to impose a sweeping, unpopular environmental, social, and governance agenda on major corporations worldwide, and they’re being quietly rubber-stamped by EU bureaucrats just before Christmas, banking on the assumption that Americans won’t be paying attention.

Through these directives, the EU is attempting to extend its jurisdiction into every American boardroom. They are demanding that American companies comply with disastrously complex reporting requirements and face legal liability for the actions of every small supplier in their global chain. This is a deliberate attempt to drive up the cost of business for American energy and manufacturing firms, forcing them to abandon the reliable, affordable power that fuels our economy. It is an attack on American energy independence and a gift to our adversaries who do not play by these suicidal rules.

Thankfully, we have a president who is refusing to submit to the new world order Brussels is trying to dictate. The message from the Trump administration in recent weeks has been clear: The days of American subservience to the whims of Brussels are over. Nothing better encapsulated this strength than Trump’s recent interview with Politico when he took the EU to task. The president and his team have not and will not sit idly by while a group of failed social engineers in a foreign capital attempts to regulate our best companies into oblivion. It’s important that they keep up the pressure and not let up in these final days of the year, when Brussels attempts to do its worst on CSRD and CSDDD.

Americans believe in the power of the individual, the sanctity of the free market, and the sovereignty of our own people. If Europe chooses to regulate itself into a museum of the 20th century, that is its right. But it should not be allowed to drag the American economy down with it.

The post ICYMI: Matt Mowers: The EU bureaucracy is declaring war on American business appeared first on THE EU-US FORUM.

The EU-US Forum, a nonprofit organization that shines a light on the harmful policies coming out of the EU in order to stop them from spreading to the US, today released a new six-figure ad encouraging President Trump to continue pushing back against the European Union’s extraterritorial ESG mandates. Brussels’ agenda includes the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CS3D), which have provisions that force American companies on American soil to comply with Brussels’ climate rules.

The 30-second spot, “America Calls The Shots,” is backed by a six-figure buy and will begin running today on TV and digital platforms in Washington, D.C.

The ad warns that EU compliance regimes would raise costs for American families, slow domestic energy development, and eliminate jobs; all by imposing Brussels’ far-left climate rules beyond Europe’s borders. The message is clear: extraterritorial regulation from the EU undermines U.S. law, our growth, and self-government.

Matt Mowers, EU-US Forum Senior Advisor and former Senior White House Advisor at the U.S. Department of State, made the following statement:

“Europe should never get to call the shots in America, but that’s what Brussels is trying to do with the CSRD and CS3D. These extraterritorial rules reach deep into U.S. supply chains, saddle American companies with costly foreign reporting schemes, and shift costs onto American workers and families. President Trump is right to defend U.S. sovereignty and competitiveness, and we’re urging him to keep fighting back.”

This new ad from the EU-US Forum is part of a broader major advertising campaign by the group to influence the debate surrounding the changes the EU is considering to CSRD and CS3D as part of its trilogue negotiations.

Watch the ad here.

TRANSCRIPT:
       Europe shouldn’t get to call the shots in America.
       But with the EU’s compliance regulations CSRD and CS3D, that’s exactly what’s happening.
       These ESG regulations force American companies to comply with Europe’s far-left climate rules even while
       operating in the U.S.
       That means higher costs for families, slower energy development, and fewer jobs.
       But President Trump knows that in America, we call the shots.
       He’s standing up to protect our hard-earned freedom from Europe’s red tape agenda.
       Tell him to keep fighting back.

BACKGROUND:

• EU-US Forum released the six-figure ad “Dictate” in November, urging President Trump to keep standing up to the EU’s CSRD and CS3D rules threatening America’s economic golden age.
• The EU-US Forum released polling that found U.S. voters reject the EU’s CSRD/CS3D and want the Trump Administration to use trade leverage to protect American Businesses from these far-left ESG regulations.
• The EU-US Forum is led by multiple former Trump administration officials. Matt Mowers, former Senior White House Advisor at the U.S. Department of State, and Joseph Grogan, former Director of the White House Domestic Policy Council, both serve as Senior Advisors.

The post EU-US Forum Releases New Six-Figure Ad Highlighting Dangers of Extraterritorial EU Regulations for American Companies appeared first on THE EU-US FORUM.

EU‑US Forum Senior Advisor Matt Mowers joined The Dana Show and The Guy Benson Show yesterday to break down the group’s new polling on how Brussels’ ESG agenda is strongly opposed by the American people. The polling found that U.S. voters overwhelmingly reject the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CS3D) and the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and want the Trump administration to use trade leverage to protect our businesses here at home from these far-left ESG regulations.

In case you missed it…

Watch Matt Mowers on The Dana Show here.

“Essentially, what they do is they work hand in hand to hamstring businesses both in the European Union, but also any business, doesn’t matter where they’re headquartered, doesn’t matter where they’re based, that wants to do business in the European Union, which is essentially any US company that does anything in the EU. And what it would do is subject American companies to the same exact onerous regulations that have stifled their own economy in Europe, here in the US. That means additional legal support services needed to comply with all these laws. That means complying with these radical environmental policies, which actually don’t really save the environment, but just actually hamstring innovation. It means complying with a bunch of bureaucrats in Brussels that we didn’t vote for.”

Listen to Matt Mowers on The Guy Benson Show here.

“It’s not surprising that Americans want to push back on this. I mean, we actually, at the EU-US Forum, did a poll. We just released it last week. 70% of Americans worry that foreign rules on US firms set a dangerous precedentand that we shouldn’t be governed by Brussels. 71% say that EU-driven compliance would actually raise costs on American families, including grocery, gas, and housing bills. Overwhelmingly, a majority say they’d support President Trump and Congress making this part of the trade negotiation.”

BACKGROUND:

• In November, the EU-US Forum launched the six-figure ad “Dictate” urging President Trump to keep standing up to EU rules threatening America’s economic golden age.
• The EU-US Forum released new polling this week that found U.S. voters reject the EU’s CSRD/CS3D and want then Trump Administration to use trade leverage to protect American Businesses from these far-left ESG regulations.
• In May 2025, the EU-US Forum hosted a panel discussion in Budapest, Hungary, featuring former Senior Advisor to President Donald Trump Jason Miller and EU-US Forum Board Members Joe Grogan and Matt Mowers.
• Earlier this year, the EU-US Forum released polling that found Europeans think the EU is moving in the wrong direction, granting von der Leyen, Macron, and Scholz dismal approval ratings.
• The group released shocking polling in May 2024 that revealed discoveries that predicted the rightward shift in Europe that played out in its 2024 parliamentary elections.
• Throughout spring 2024, the EU-US Forum ran a six-figure paid media effort taking aim at the far-left policy agenda of the EU. This included campaigns in:
  • Rome, Italy with ads that said “EU Policies Are Putting Western Civilization at Risk.”
  • Budapest, Hungary during CPAC with ads that read “Demand Change in the European Union.
  • Maastricht, Netherlands during the Maastricht Debate with the message: “Demand Borders. Demand Free Speech. Demand Change at the EU.”
• The EU-US Forum is led by multiple former Trump administration officials. Matt Mowers, former Senior White House Advisor at the U.S. Department of State, and Joseph Grogan, former Director of the White House Domestic Policy Council, both serve as senior advisors.

The post ICYMI: Senior Advisor Matt Mowers Joins Dana Loesch and Guy Benson to Discuss New EU-US Forum Polling Revealing Strong Opposition to EU’s ESG Rules appeared first on THE EU-US FORUM.

WASHINGTON — The EU-US Forum, a nonprofit organization that shines a light on the harmful policies coming out of the EU in order to stop them from spreading to the US, today announced a new ad campaign taking aim at the European Union’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CS3D) and the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and the threat these rules pose to America’s Golden Age.

The ad urges President Trump to keep standing up to the EU by drawing a firm line against the CSRD and CS3D, which would undermine U.S. growth, increase costs for American companies, and slow the manufacturing boom that the Trump Administration has brought back to the United States.

“Brussels’ elites don’t get to dictate how American companies operate. President Trump has already delivered multiple historic trade deals and he can score another major win by standing strong against the European Union’s CS3D and CSRD power grab. In doing so, he would continue fighting for U.S. workers, to lower costs, and to serve our manufacturing comeback. We support President Trump as he keeps protecting America’s Golden Age from the EU’s overreach.”

The 30-second spot, “Dictate,” follows new polling from EU-US Forum released earlier this week that finds U.S. voters reject the EU’s CSRD/CS3D and want the Trump Administration to use trade leverage to protect American businesses from these far-left ESG regulations. The ad is backed by a six-figure buy and will begin running today on TV and digital platforms in Washington, D.C.

Watch the ad here.

TRANSCRIPT:

President Trump’s trade deals are leading America into a new Golden Age.
More American manufacturing, more jobs, and more opportunity.
But Europe’s far-left regulators threaten our Golden Age.
The EU’s CSDDD and CSRD rules would dictate how American companies do business and cost our companies billions, grinding Trump’s progress to a halt.
We won independence from Europe once; we’re not letting Brussels take control today.
President Trump, keep standing up to the EU’s rules and protecting our Golden Age.

BACKGROUND:

• The EU-US Forum released new polling this week that found U.S. voters reject the EU’s CSRD/CS3D and want the Trump Administration to use trade leverage to protect American businesses from these far-left ESG regulations.
• In May 2025, the EU-US Forum hosted a panel discussion in Budapest, Hungary, featuring former Senior Advisor to President Donald Trump Jason Miller and EU-US Forum Board Members Joe Grogan and Matt Mowers.
• Earlier this year, the EU-US Forum released polling showing Europeans believe the EU is moving in the wrong direction, with von der Leyen, Macron, and Scholz receiving dismal approval ratings.
• The group released shocking polling in May 2024 that revealed discoveries that predicted the rightward shift in Europe that played out in its 2024 parliamentary elections.
• Throughout spring 2024, the EU-US Forum ran a six-figure paid media effort taking aim at the far-left policy agenda of the EU. This included campaigns in:
  • Rome, Italy with ads that said “EU Policies Are Putting Western Civilization at Risk.”
  • Budapest, Hungary during CPAC with ads that read “Demand Change in the European Union.”
  • Maastricht, Netherlands during the Maastricht Debate with the message: “Demand Borders. Demand Free Speech. Demand Change at the EU.”
• The EU-US Forum is led by multiple former Trump administration officials, including Matt Mowers and Joseph Grogan, both serving as senior advisors.

The post EU-US Forum Releases New Six-Figure Ad Urging President Trump to Keep Standing Up to EU Rules Threatening America’s Economic Golden Age appeared first on THE EU-US FORUM.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The EU-US Forum, an American nonprofit organization that aims to advance President Trump’s conservative agenda in Europe and stop the EU’s radical leftism from coming to the U.S., conducted a national survey of likely general election voters that found Americans view the European Union’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CS3D) as bad for business at home.

A clear majority want the Trump administration to shield U.S. companies from Brussels’ overreach and to use ongoing U.S.–EU trade negotiations as leverage to stop these rules. There is also a strong political incentive for members of Congress to support any efforts by President Trump to use trade negotiations to help repeal CS3D and CSRD, as 51% of voters would be more likely to support a candidate that does so.

Key polling findings:

• 52% would be more likely to vote for a member of Congress who encourages President Trump to use trade negotiations to stop the EU from imposing strict ESG regulations on American companies.
• 57% say EU regulations would unfairly impact U.S. businesses.
• 71% say these compliance regulations driven by the EU would raise costs on American families.
• Nearly six in ten say it’s important for U.S. trade officials to use negotiations to roll back the EU’s strict ESG regulations on American companies.
• 72% believe EU reporting requirements would be complex and difficult for smaller U.S. suppliers.
• 70% say resources spent on EU reporting would be better invested in American jobs.
• 70% believe forcing compliance with foreign rules sets a precedent for foreign governments to impose requirements on U.S. firms.

In response, President Trump has led the fight to protect U.S. companies from the EU’s CSRD and CS3D.

Read the full polling memo HERE.

BACKGROUND:

• In May 2025, the EU-US Forum hosted a panel discussion in Budapest, Hungary, featuring former Senior Advisor to President Donald Trump Jason Miller and EU-US Forum Board Members Joe Grogan and Matt Mowers.
• Earlier this year, the EU-US Forum released polling that found Europeans think the EU is moving in the wrong direction, granting von der Leyen, Macron, and Scholz dismal approval ratings.
• The group released shocking polling in May 2024 that revealed discoveries that predicted the rightward shift in Europe that played out in its 2024 parliamentary elections.
• Throughout spring 2024, the EU-US Forum ran a six-figure paid media effort taking aim at the far-left policy agenda of the EU. This included campaigns in:
  • Rome, Italy with ads that said “EU Policies Are Putting Western Civilization at Risk.”
  • Budapest, Hungary during CPAC with ads that read “Demand Change in the European Union.”
  • Maastricht, Netherlands during the Maastricht Debate with the message: “Demand Borders. Demand Free Speech. Demand Change at the EU.”
• The EU-US Forum is led by multiple former Trump administration officials. Matt Mowers, former Senior White House Advisor at the U.S. Department of State, and Joseph Grogan, former Director of the White House Domestic Policy Council serves as a Senior Advisor, both serve as senior advisors.

The post New Poll: U.S. Voters Reject EU’s CSRD/CS3D, Want Trump Administration to Use Trade Leverage to Protect American Businesses from these Far-Left ESG Regulations appeared first on THE EU-US FORUM.