European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen faces mounting criticism from lawmakers across the political spectrum following her announcement of a €600 billion pharmaceutical investment pledge to the United States as part of a new trade agreement, according to Euractiv.
Members of her own European People’s Party (EPP) raised serious concerns about her authority to make such commitments, arguing the Commission lacks mandate to direct private sector investment decisions.
“I don’t see what these investments are supposed to represent, since the Commission has no mandate to speak on behalf of private companies or to influence their investment decisions,” EPP lawmaker Tomislav Sokol said.
Laurent Castillo, his French EPP colleague, went further by branding the arrangement “a real capitulation” that “raises serious concerns about our health and industrial sovereignty.”
The controversy extends beyond the investment pledge to fundamental disagreements about the agreement’s balance. Sokol questioned whether the deal qualified as a genuine bilateral accord at all, remarking:
“To be honest, I don’t see how this qualifies as an agreement. For a true agreement, both sides must gain something – here, only one side [the US] does.”
He additionally warned that the Commission’s approach risked encouraging further US demands, suggesting it might prompt US President Donald Trump “to not stop here.”
While pharmaceutical tariffs were temporarily averted, the agreement permits potential future US tariffs of up to 15% on EU medicines, contingent upon an ongoing American investigation into dependency on European pharmaceutical imports. This provisional aspect fuelled demands for greater transparency, with Greek EPP MEP Dimitris Tsiodras highlighting conflicting interpretations between the two leaders:
“The differing statements made by Presidents von der Leyen and Trump regarding the imposition of 15% tariffs on certain medicines – as well as the absence of a concrete timeline – understandably raise questions,” Tsiodras said.
Both Castillo and Tsiodras have consequently called for the immediate publication of all annexes related to health products to enable a comprehensive impact assessment by the European Parliament.
Renew Europe MEP Stine Bosse described the deal as visibly “unbalanced,” lamenting that it “doesn’t give the impression that we got what we wanted,” particularly given the pharmaceutical industry’s need for regulatory certainty amidst President Trump’s fluctuating trade signals.
Although some Socialist and Democrat (S&D) members acknowledged the 15% cap was preferable to earlier US threats of 50% tariffs, Greek S&D MEP Nikos Papandreou characterised the outcome as a significant political setback.
However, EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič defended the agreement as essential damage limitation, stating it was “better than a trade war with the United States” and represented “clearly the best deal we could get under very difficult circumstances.”
