STRASBOURG — Europe should protect its share of market from global competitors’ investment in green tech, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said Wednesday. Von der Leyen said European Union leaders will discuss the issue during their Thursday summit. “The clean transition is in full swing,” she said during a debate in the European Parliament, pointing out how every year, hundreds of gigawatts of energy are added globally. “Cleantech markets around the world are booming,” including batteries, wind turbines and electric cars. “The rise in cleantech in Europe is also good news for energy security, and it is a great economic opportunity,” she added. Yet, she warned, Europe in the past missed out on chances to lead on green industry, with the loss of solar panel industry to more competitive Chinese companies being “a cautionary tale that we must not forget.” “Europe was a global leader in solar, but heavily subsidized Chinese competitors started to outprice Europe’s young industry — and today, China controls 90 percent of the global market.” “This time, we should learn our lesson,” she added, name-checking the Middle East and the “Global South” as regions competing for their spot in the global industrial green tech race. The European Commission expects renewables and other forms of clean energy to supply 50 percent of energy globally, while the cleantech market is projected to grow from €600 billion to €2 trillion over the next 10 years. The EU wants to capture 15 percent of the global production of clean technologies, with the EU market growing to €375 billion by 2035, according to Commission projections.

BRUSSELS — Europe’s agriculture ministers have a message for the European Commission: Hands off the billions of euros of public money that go to farmers each year. The ministers, led by Italy and Greece, used their monthly summit in Brussels on Monday to push back hard against any attempt to fold the bloc’s €386.6 billion Common Agricultural Policy into a broader, more flexible EU funding model. Their warning comes just weeks before the Commission unveils its post-2027 proposal for the EU’s next seven-year budget and the next chapter of the CAP, both expected in July. The message was pointed: This is their policy, and they won’t let it be redesigned by bean counters in Brussels. “The single fund would be the end of the Common Agricultural Policy,” Portuguese Agriculture Minister José Manuel Fernandes said, rejecting Commission ideas to merge farm and regional development funds into a single national envelope. “What has success must not be undone.” The “single fund” idea, floated in internal Commission talks, would reframe how EU money is allocated, potentially tying farm spending more directly to broad political goals such as defense or digital transition. Farm ministers see it as a direct threat to the bloc’s shared pot of money they help control, warning it would make it easier to siphon money away from farmers, and harder to ensure agriculture remains integral to the EU project. Agriculture Commissioner Christophe Hansen, who has pushed back against the budget revamp, tried to calm the waters, telling ministers the CAP remains “crucial” and pledging to maintain its “integrity,” while also promising a version that would be “more streamlined and targeted.” | Olivier Hoslet/EPA-EFE A joint paper backed by 14 countries, including France, Austria, Ireland, Portugal, Latvia and others echoed that fear, saying: “Another substantial reform will put the much-needed stability and predictability of the agricultural sector and food security at risk.” The ministers insist the CAP must remain “separate, dedicated and independent,” with its two-pillar structure intact. Spain’s Luis Planas was unequivocal: “We will continue fighting in the Council and in the [European] Parliament,” he said. “I hope the Commission does not make the mistake of putting forward a proposal that fails to meet the basic expectations of the sector.” Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has previously called for a “more flexible” EU budget focused on newer priorities such as artificial intelligence and climate resilience. “The new normal is anything but normal,” she said earlier this month. Agriculture Commissioner Christophe Hansen, who has pushed back against the budget revamp, tried to calm the waters, telling ministers the CAP remains “crucial” and pledging to maintain its “integrity,” while also promising a version that would be “more streamlined and targeted.”

WASHINGTON — Donald Trump wants to beat China in just about every market — but he’d rather take the loss on clean energy. In his second term, the U.S. president has returned more committed than ever to promoting fossil fuels and crushing clean, renewable power sources that don’t burn the planet. Trump’s view is that China has already won the clean energy race, due in part to practices such as forced labor, massive subsidies and intellectual property theft. Trying to compete with Beijing would just make the United States the loser. The president wants the U.S. to focus on energy sources it already dominates, including oil, natural gas and coal. That represents a complete break from Trump’s predecessor, Joe Biden, who sought to go toe-to-toe with China in a race for clean energy dominance. Not only that, it contrasts with Trump’s first term, when the White House took an all-you-can-eat-buffet approach to energy and clean power.  The new stance could present America’s competitors with a multibillion-dollar opportunity. And in Washington, it’s opening up a fundamental divide within Trump’s Republican Party as it works through spending talks. “The second administration is really not about taking half-measures,” said Daniel Simmons, who ran the Energy Department’s energy efficiency and renewable energy office in Trump’s first term. “To all appearances, it is not a battlefield that they care about.” GOP FISSURES Not all Republicans are ready to let China, Europe and other nations win the clean energy race by default.  That intra-GOP division is boiling underneath one of the biggest political controversies in Washington right now: the complicated passage of Trump’s “big, beautiful” tax and spending megabill. Hard-line conservatives are demanding that the bill include a wholesale gutting of hundreds of billions of dollars in Biden-era clean energy tax incentives, which were aimed at juicing U.S. competitors to Chinese and European manufacturers.  That push threatens to alienate moderate Republicans whose communities stand to gain from factories and other projects enabled by the tax breaks — and who had hoped they could win Trump to their side by framing the incentives as the key to edging out China. The message they’ve gotten instead: When it comes to winning on clean energy, Trump just isn’t interested. Trump’s Energy Department confirmed as much in a statement to POLITICO that focused largely on oil — an energy source that the U.S. produces more of than any other country. Trump officials have argued that putting any money into green technology boosts China, which dominates major slices of the global battery, electric vehicle, solar and wind energy supply chains. | Olivier Matthys/EFE via EPA “Thanks to President Trump, America is leading the way in lowering costs by removing red tape and unleashing affordable, abundant, and reliable American energy,” the department said Friday. “As the world’s largest oil producer, the United States welcomes a secure and stable global supply of oil that promotes economic prosperity at home and promotes peace and stability around the world.” The White House referred questions about its clean energy worldview to the Energy Department. DRILLING TO BEAT CHINA? Trump officials have argued that putting any money into green technology boosts China, which dominates major slices of the global battery, electric vehicle, solar and wind energy supply chains.  Trump’s zero-sum assessment of the clean energy market has forged an energy strategy even more reliant on fossil fuels than he pursued in his first term. Following this approach would jeopardize a U.S. clean energy manufacturing industry that is just beginning to sprout — and, green tech advocates say, all but ensure that China will command the global sector. That vision is coming to a head in Congress, where Republicans are working to slash the clean energy incentives created by Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act. While not proposing to erase the tax breaks altogether, GOP lawmakers in the House have floated tight restrictions outlawing Chinese sourcing in the supply chains of energy projects. Those limits would render most of the tax credits unusable for projects that have not yet been built, effectively squelching the nascent U.S. clean manufacturing sector. The changes remain in limbo as part of the broader budget reconciliation bill, the legislative vehicle for green-lighting Republicans’ and Trump’s policy agenda that can pass with a simple majority vote in Congress. House Republicans are trying to forge a compromise among fiscal conservatives and blocs of GOP lawmakers that want to preserve clean energy credits and raise tax deduction caps for state and local taxes.    Trump’s presence looms over the negotiations. He has repeatedly vowed to end Biden’s programs — the nation’s largest-ever investment in clean energy and fighting climate change — while labeling them the “green new scam.” Cutting many of those policies, such as consumer credits to purchase electric vehicles, would fund a small portion of his administration’s other priorities, including trillions of dollars in tax breaks. “They don’t see climate change as a problem,” George David Banks, who ran Trump’s first-term climate portfolio, said of the current team’s outlook. He added: “They don’t want to essentially create a jobs program for China.” Defenders of the IRA tax credits say wiping them out would wipe out an American jobs program, one whose benefits would flow to heavily Republican communities as well as Democratic strongholds. Private sector manufacturing projects seizing on Biden’s incentives had been projected to create roughly 160,000 jobs, according to analyses published late last year. Overturning the subsidies would eliminate a potential U.S. export market for solar modules and batteries that could be worth as much as $50 billion by 2030, according to another analysis by researchers at Johns Hopkins University. Other countries would fill an $80 billion investment gap left by shuttered U.S. solar facilities, electric vehicle shops and battery gigafactories.  Many countries stand to benefit from the U.S. vacating the space, the Johns Hopkins researchers wrote. But governments outside the U.S. would face risks as well: Those that fail to encourage cleantech investments at home may fall even further behind China, which would likely benefit in every industrial category.  The researchers also raised the prospect of a transition of intellectual property to China. As U.S. businesses shuttered, they said, foreign companies could purchase their technical knowledge at fire-sale prices. Donald Trump’s barrage of tariffs against nations worldwide would limit some of the advantage countries could gain by selling clean technology to the U.S., said Tim Sahay, one of the authors of the study. | Jim Lo Scalzo/EFE via EPA Trump’s barrage of tariffs against nations worldwide would limit some of the advantage countries could gain by selling clean technology to the U.S., said Tim Sahay, one of the authors of the study. Still, he said, the upshot from Trump’s policies was clear — including for European allies that had erupted in fury over Biden’s use of protectionist tax breaks to move clean energy manufacturing to the United States.  “China would be the biggest winner, but not the only winner … The rest of the world wins,” Sahay said. It’s “basically the IRA in reverse. When the IRA passed, foreigners were like, ‘Oh my God, Americans are stealing our jobs and investments because of their superior fiscal space.’ Well, now the IRA is gone, then foreigners are like, ‘Well, more for us.’” Some conservative clean energy supporters still hope they can persuade Trump to back tax credits that have yielded solar manufacturing and battery-making plants across Republican strongholds in the Sun Belt and Rust Belt.  Those advocates criticized the IRA for being too lenient in allowing Chinese content into the supply chains of products receiving the tax incentives. But they believe Trump would bless tweaks that tighten foreign content requirements to retain incentives that support blue-collar jobs in the U.S. “There’s an enormous and rapidly growing market for low-carbon technologies around the world, and right now the U.S. is a secondary player,” said Greg Bertelsen, CEO of the Cleaner Economy Coalition, a business advocacy organization that promotes low-carbon manufacturing at the state and federal level. “There’s a recognition within the Trump administration that we need to be competing in these markets for these technologies.” TRUMPISM ON THE ROAD Trump officials have been making a very different case. Last month, Energy Secretary Chris Wright flew to Eastern Europe to propose that ministers from Poland, Bulgaria, Hungary and other regional governments join “Team Energy Freedom,” urging them to embrace oil, gas and nuclear energy and reject what he framed as climate dogma.  “Climate alarmism has reduced freedom, prosperity and national security,” he said, adding — in language that carried a particular charge addressed to former communist bloc countries — that it may be a Trojan horse to “grow centralization and re-establish top-down control.” Wright’s subordinate, Tommy Joyce, was even more blunt in telling a gathering of 60 governments in London last month that the pursuit of climate policy was a gift to Beijing. “There are no wind turbines without concessions to or coercion from China,” he said. People outside the MAGA world also acknowledge the dominance China has built over decades of developing its clean energy supply chains.  In solar, batteries, electric vehicles and to some extent wind power, “China started early. China is the biggest,” said Li Shuo, director of the China Climate Hub at the Asia Society Policy Institute. In solar, batteries, electric vehicles and to some extent wind power, “China started early. China is the biggest,” said Li Shuo, director of the China Climate Hub at the Asia Society Policy Institute. | Wu Hao/EFE via EPA These are the core clean technologies the world is going to need en masse in the coming decades as it shifts toward a cleaner energy system. And in all of these fields, Li said, “the Chinese lead is significant and irreversible.”  In the past months, for example, two rival Chinese companies — BYD and CATL — made potentially game-changing claims in announcing they had developed electric vehicle batteries that could get 400 or even 500 kilometers (roughly 250 to 310 miles) from just a five-minute charge. By contrast, Tesla boasts that its “superchargers” can give drivers around 320 kilometers in about 15 minutes.  Republican proposals would also hamstring some clean energy technologies that the Trump administration has touted, such as next-generation nuclear, fusion and geothermal power, according to an analysis by the research firm Rhodium Group. The proposed tweaks to subsidies would essentially eliminate the long-term price signals that early-stage technologies covet, eroding their business case. Beyond that, the administration’s massive spending and job cuts across federal agencies and science research threaten to constrain U.S. innovation.  Rather than focusing on clean energy technologies such as batteries and EVs, the Trump administration has so far made critical minerals the forefront of its strategy to combat China, said a State Department official who was granted anonymity because they were not authorized to speak with the media. Those efforts focus on extracting and processing raw materials rather than supporting value-added industries like battery-making or electric vehicles.  The official said the administration’s opposition to subsidies for green technology doesn’t mean it opposes the technologies writ large — apart from wind energy, which Trump has made clear for years that he despises. AMERICA ALONE Apart from the current U.S. government, no other major power has determined that China’s dominance means that action to fight climate change needs to take a back seat. The Biden administration’s argument, one still being pursued in Europe, was that a targeted industrial strategy could claw back some share of those industries. Those strategies have often come cloaked in pledges to make this country or that country a “clean energy superpower.” But Li said there was a danger of “making too big of a promise. A promise that cannot be entirely fulfilled.”  Li said he had long feared that a U.S. president would someday ask: If China’s lead is so big, “then why do we play the game?” That is the conclusion being drawn in the White House during Trump’s second term. And it helps explain why the administration has broken so radically with past U.S. policy, shut down government funding for future projects, kneecapped agencies that deal with clean energy, and reversed regulations. “What has surprised me is the extent to which the administration hasn’t just pursued an agenda but has thrown sand in the gears of the parts of the agenda that they don’t agree with,” said Thom Woodroofe, a former Australian diplomat in Washington who now works at the Smart Energy Council. “Even when it costs American jobs.” Zack Colman reported from Washington and Karl Mathiesen reported from London.

LONDON — When Octopus Energy boss Greg Jackson appeared on Desert Island Discs in 2023 — one of the U.K.’s longest-running, most-loved BBC radio shows — his first song choice was a 1980s banger: Yazz’s “The Only Way Is Up.” The optimism was on-brand for Jackson, one of the energy industry’s most polished lobbyists with half of Westminster on speed dial. Octopus, the clean energy start-up he founded in 2015, this year became the single largest provider to U.K. households. The multibillion pound firm has its tentacles firmly around the corridors of power, selling politicians on its vision of homes aided by smart meters, solar panels and other green tech. Within days of Labour’s sweeping general election victory in July, Jackson was in the Treasury, a poster boy for new Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ promise to hook clean energy ambitions to economic growth. And he wasn’t just courting Reeves.  Jackson and his colleagues met new Labour energy ministers 10 times in the 12 weeks after the election, according to official records. They were picking up where they left off — transparency data shows the firm had dozens of meetings with Conservative ministers in their final full year in charge of the country. Jackson has always brought “interesting and novel” ideas to Whitehall, one energy policy veteran said admiringly. He is a “likable” guy, said a former senior Westminster official also lobbied by Jackson, and a “key voice” in the green debate, according to Wera Hobhouse, a Lib Dem MP who has seen Jackson up close from her seat on parliament’s Energy Security and Net Zero Committee. Now the Octopus boss has his lobbying sights set on an obscure technical change to the energy system, which comes with huge potential consequences. He is trying to persuade ministers to overhaul completely how electricity prices are set — precisely the sort of reform which would hand a newer, tech-driven business an advantage over its rivals. And he might just win. MY FRIENDS ED AND RISHI Those Whitehall meetings included four chats with Energy Secretary Ed Miliband. (“My friend,” as Miliband cheerfully called Jackson when the two shared a stage at an Octopus-backed event last November.)   Jackson has an unerring habit of getting access to the very top.  Octopus, this year became the single largest provider to U.K. households. | Leon Neal/Getty Images When the Conservative government announced plans in fall 2023 to water down a series of net zero policies, then Prime Minister Rishi Sunak found time that morning to call the Octopus boss with a quick heads-up.  These days, Jackson sits on the board advising Labour on its industrial strategy, where he rubs shoulders with former Energy Secretary Greg Clark and Shriti Vadera, once Gordon Brown’s right-hand-woman in the Treasury. The board’s inaugural meeting was hosted by Reeves and Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds. Jackson’s business success helps explain why ministers, desperate both to breathe life into a flagging economy and to honor a promise to clean up the energy grid by 2030, want him around. Financial backers have coughed up hundreds of millions of pounds for stakes in his company. (Jackson still has a four percent share). The massive Canada Pension Plan Investment Board has put in cash. Generation Investment Management, co-founded and chaired by former U.S. Vice-President Al Gore, struck a $600 million deal in September 2021. Now Octopus has a net asset value of over £7 billion, operating across 32 countries. Its sprawling high-tech central London office is all a bit Silicon Valley — open plan, floor-to-ceiling windows, fridges filled with beers. There are enough screens to grace a NASA mission control room. Informal around the office, the boss favors a quarter-zip fleece and jeans. “I’ve worn a suit, I think, to Buckingham Palace,” Jackson told POLITICO in February, referring to a visit to see King Charles III two years ago. Presumably unused to formal attire, Jackson split his trousers in the car on the way, forcing a last-minute dash to the tailor. Jackson paints these connections — with prime ministers and vice presidents, kings and government ministers — as a natural extension of his work. Not everything is rosy (Octopus lost money each year until 2023 and this year its earnings slid nearly 60 percent), but Jackson is bullish. “We’re the biggest energy retailer so, with seven-and-a-half-million customers, we’ve got very strong views on what’s needed to drive prices down and improve standards,” he said. ON THE INSIDE Those views have found a receptive audience in the corridors of power. Octopus are very effective lobbyists, said Adam Bell, an ex-official who spent eight years immersed in energy policy at the old Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy.  “Octopus, unlike other retailers at the time, tended to bring forward regulatory asks that were interesting and novel — things intended to give them freedom to experiment with new consumer offers,” he said. The firm “became quite popular in the department.”  Jackson is “one of the best communicators around on the consumer and technology trends driving the energy transition,” agreed another former Whitehall official, granted anonymity to discuss lobbying. He “has a really useful role to play in communicating this agenda to the public,” said a further Westminster figure. Those Whitehall meetings included four chats with Energy Secretary Ed Miliband. | Carl Court/Getty Images Not everyone is a fan, mind. Some industry figures suggested Jackson enjoyed access to the new government mainly because ministers doubt he will rock the boat. “Labour see him as the ‘no-new-friends strategy,’” said one. “As in: They knew him beforehand, and kind of see him as on the inside. Is he using that to his personal benefit?” Another industry figure shrugged: “He tells people what they want to hear. If you only tell people what they want to hear, then they tend to listen to you.” Like any seasoned lobbyist, Jackson insists he will work with politicians of any stripe. But the Labour links are undeniably there — he was once head of the left-wing pressure group Labour List.  “I mean, briefly, yeah,” he admitted. Companies House data shows he was a director at the group for over six years. Jackson insisted that was just “to keep the lights on until they got a management team.” “I’ve been in the room more with the previous government than this one,” he said. The Westminster hobnobbing is certainly relentless. Octopus met Conservative ministers 41 times in 2023, out-lobbied in the energy sector only by industry giants EDF and BP, according to Global Witness data. Jackson shrugs off the criticism. Rivals “find it easier to grab your shirt to try and drag you back than to improve their own performance,” he said. THE NEXT FIGHT Octopus has plenty of experience fighting (and winning) lobbying and legal battles. It repelled attempts by larger firms in 2022 to tighten rules on financial reserves. A year later it prevailed in a protracted legal battle with British Gas over the takeover of collapsed provider Bulb. Now Jackson’s eyes are firmly set on another big prize: electricity market reform. Now the Octopus boss has his lobbying sights set on an obscure technical change to the energy system, which comes with huge potential consequences. | Pool Photo by Leon Neal via Getty Images It would be the most seismic change to the market since privatization, replacing a single national electricity price with hundreds — possibly thousands — of prices across the U.K., determined by local supply and demand. It comes down to an obscure government consultation process opened nearly three years ago and still unresolved: the Review of Electricity Market Arrangements (REMA.) Advocates for locational pricing say it would bring down bills for consumers everywhere. It would certainly boost firms like Octopus which rely on tech and a much more flexible electricity grid. The offer of cheaper bills is not a purely altruistic lobbying move, of course, given the chance it would also help Jackson gobble up even more U.K. market share from his rivals. Many big developers are just as staunchly opposed and are lobbying ministers just as fiercely. They argue it could make electricity pricing unpredictable and deter investment essential to the U.K.’s green goals. Trade bodies like Renewable UK, Solar Energy UK and Steel UK are lined up against it, too. The lobbying spat will continue until a REMA decision arrives, expected in the summer. The government says only that an update will come “in due course.” The second industry figure quoted above was scathing. “He doesn’t build anything,” they said of Octopus’s contribution, adding: “His argument means not building any new infrastructure, but this network needs investment.” Chris O’Shea, boss of British Gas owner Centrica, is critical, too, even if he avoided mentioning Jackson by name. “I think we [should] listen to companies that are actually putting their hands in their pockets. I think we should be dubious about companies that have not put their hands in their pockets,” O’Shea said. “It’s not true to say we don’t build stuff,” parried Jackson, pointing to the renewables assets operated by Octopus’s energy generation arm.  He batted away the broader criticism. “I think companies are typically acting in what they think [is the] public interest,” he said — before suggesting it involved a dose of special pleading from developers, too. “It is notable that the companies that earn money from building wind farms, whether they’re turned on or not, are also the ones that earn money from building grid, right?” Octopus has allies in its fight.  Ofgem, the energy regulator, backs reform. “[W]e do see the attractions … in something that begins to separate the country into different zones and allows prices to settle more organically where they are,” Chief Executive Jonathan Brearley told POLITICO in December.  Tech firms, also a highly influential lobbying voice, reckon local pricing would help them power energy-hungry data centers. Small retail suppliers like Good Energy back the reforms, too. “It’s the needs of 30 million households and businesses that should come first,” Jackson said on X in February, pressing the case for reform. On his Desert Island Discs playlist, Jackson also chose “The Gambler” by Kenny Rogers. In public, and in the closed-off rooms of Westminster, he has laid his latest bet.

LONDON — He’s a billionaire firebrand at the forefront of green tech, owns a powerful political media platform — and has the ear of the incoming president of the United States.  So it’s little wonder governments across Europe are in turmoil over how to navigate Elon Musk, while dodging his erratic and often ill-informed criticisms about their domestic politics. The Tesla and X owner — tapped up to lead a government efficiency drive in Donald Trump’s second U.S. presidential term — has no compunction about lambasting serving administrations and throwing his weight behind opposition movements on the populist right. That’s despite him complaining about foreign interference when others attempt to get involved with U.S. politics.  His biggest beef appears to be with the British Labour government under Prime Minister Keir Starmer. But he has sharply criticized German Chancellor Olaf Scholz too and endorsed hard-right movements in both nations. Other European leaders have attempted to court Musk in the hope of avoiding his ire and smoothing their relations with Trump, who Musk helped into office via millions of dollars in campaign funding. French President Emmanuel Macron invited the Tesla and Twitter owner to the re-opening of Notre-Dame cathedral and wants him at an upcoming tech summit.  Italian Prime Minister Georgia Meloni has built her own bond with Musk. And Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was forced to play nice with him during a post-election call with Trump, despite sharp disagreements over the response to Russia’s full-scale invasion. Leaders from further afield, including Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, also increased their dealings with the businessman as the U.S. election loomed, to avoid the kind of harsh treatment meted out to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. Musk appeared to endorse Trudeau’s Conservative rival this week to boot. Those who put the time in are being vindicated. Trump rewarded the SpaceX mogul with his cost-cutting government appointment and has rarely been seen without Musk at his side since the election, cementing his influence on the coming administration. Among his political allies and enemies, a consensus has formed that Musk is one of the most powerful people in the world — if not the most powerful. Getting on his bad side can have dire consequences. “As a chameleon, you never know which version of Elon Musk is showing up,” said one former U.K. government adviser who dealt with Musk and was granted anonymity to speak candidly about him. “He’s a dangerous figure. And it’s in no one’s interests to have him as an enemy.” Elon Musk’s biggest beef appears to be with the British Labour government under Prime Minister Keir Starmer. | Leon Neal/Getty Images JUST ASK KEIR STARMER Musk launches social media attacks at Starmer with near-obsessive routine. He has backed the Reform U.K. movement led by Brexit campaigner Nigel Farage — a long-standing friend of Trump who met Musk last month and discussed a potential overseas donation. In recent days, Musk has also thrown his weight behind far-right rabble-rouser Tommy Robinson — a step too far even for Farage. He did so while peddling claims Starmer failed to take the issue of child grooming gangs seriously while he was head of the British prosecution service.  The latest Musk musings on X earned a rebuke from Labour minister Andrew Gwynne. “Elon Musk is an American citizen and perhaps ought to focus on issues on the other side of the Atlantic,” he told LBC radio. But Gwynne’s boss, Health Secretary Wes Streeting, offered the Tesla chief an olive branch in a later interview — demonstrating the tension in the British government over whether or not to rile the billionaire further. Streeting said Musk’s criticisms were “misjudged and certainly misinformed,” but stressed the British government is keen to cooperate with tech giants to tackle child sexual exploitation, Musk’s latest crusade and a campaign point for Farage. “We’re willing to work with Elon Musk, who I think has got a big role to play with his social media platform to help us and other countries to tackle this serious issue,” Streeting told ITV News. “If he wants to work with us and roll his sleeves up, we’d welcome that.” But Musk shows no signs of backing down and the U.K. government’s refusal to invite him to a crucial investment summit last October may have sealed its reputation with the tech mogul. For its part, Starmer’s Downing Street studiously avoided commenting on Musk’s latest attacks, even as Musk branded the prime minister “complicit in the RAPE OF BRITAIN” and demanded a fresh election. Starmer’s MPs — nervously eyeing a challenge from Farage’s party — were less circumspect. One, also granted anonymity to speak candidly, lamented that “at a time when communities need to come and work together, we have someone with a lot of influence sowing divisions and spreading hate.” GERMANY GIVES THE MIDDLE FINGER In Germany, mainstream political leaders are increasingly concerned about what Musk’s endorsement of the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) could mean for relations between the Trump administration and Germany’s next coalition government. The center-left Chancellor Scholz — a Musk bête noire — called a snap election for Feb. 23. | POOL photo by Soeren Stache/AFP via Getty Images And they have been less shy than the U.K. government about taking on Musk directly. The center-left Chancellor Scholz — a Musk bête noire — called a snap election for Feb. 23 and has found himself in a struggling campaign against the entrepreneur as well as his domestic political opponents. In an interview with Funke Mediengruppe published in recent days, Social Democratic co-leader Lars Klingbeil compared Musk’s interventions in the German election to the influence operations backed by the Kremlin and Russian President Vladimir Putin. “Both want to influence our elections and specifically support the AfD’s enemies of democracy,” said Klingbeil. “They want Germany to be weakened and plunged into chaos.” The conservative candidate in pole position to be Germany’s next chancellor, Friedrich Merz, has portrayed himself as a leader who will be able to make “deals” with Trump — at a moment when German exports are exposed to the president-elect’s repeated threats of a trade war with Europe. Many German mainstream politicians worry that, at the very least, Musk and the incoming administration will further undermine German centrist parties by normalizing the AfD and playing down its radicalism. Those worries grew more pronounced when U.S. Vice President-elect JD Vance reposted an English-language translation of Musk’s controversial tribute to the AfD in Germany’s Welt am Sonntag newspaper. “I’m not endorsing a party in the German elections, as it’s not my country and we hope to have good relations with all Germans,” Vance wrote on X. “But this is an interesting piece,” he added. FLATTERY FROM MACRON Musk hasn’t yet thrown his endorsement behind Marine Le Pen and the French far right. But President Macron — who, like Scholz in Germany, is politically fragile and facing domestic turbulence — is desperate to get him onside. He has been urging the tech entrepreneur, alongside Trump, to attend a major artificial intelligence summit in Paris next month. The duo’s appearance at the recent Notre-Dame reopening was a diplomatic coup for Macron.  “Trump doesn’t seem to hold Paris in the same contempt he holds the EU or Germany,” said a Republican foreign policy expert working with Trump’s transition team, who spoke on condition of anonymity in order to discuss the team’s internal thinking. “Macron can take solace in the fact that he’s not Scholz.” Musk hasn’t yet thrown his endorsement behind Marine Le Pen and the French far right. | Kent Nishimura/Getty Images Making life difficult for Macron, however, is the European Commission, which continues investigations into whether X complies with its information rules. It has found the microblogging site in breach of the Digital Services Act, the EU’s landmark content moderation law, for the deceptive design of “verified” badges and a lack of transparency to researchers. The jury is still out on X’s potential violations around the dissemination of illegal content and measures to fight information manipulation, and the Commission is mulling whether it could slap Musk with a mega-fine.  A back and forth between Musk and former European Commissioner for digital policy Thierry Breton became increasingly hostile. Breton resigned from his post shortly after their war of words, prompting glee from his nemesis. European leaders are waiting to see where Musk turns his attention next once Trump takes office later this month. The one certainty is the old rules of diplomacy are out the window. “While his behavior is dubious, business and trade is fickle,” said the former U.K. government adviser. “Governments should never rule out a significant opportunity to do business with him.” Noah Keate in London and Sue Allan in Ottawa contributed to this report.

Tommaso Grossi is an analyst in the European Policy Centre’s Social Europe and Well-Being Programme. Niccolò Barca is a freelance journalist and photographer based in Rome. In early July 2021, amid the pandemic, more than 400 workers from the former GKN plant in Campi Bisenzio, Italy were suddenly laid off with an email sent in the dead of night. The workers were stunned: The factory had been running well, new machinery had just been installed and management had even promised to hire more people. And yet, when they reached the factory gates that morning, all they found were private security guards blocking the entrance. So, they decided to occupy the factory in protest, resist the layoffs and call on the government to intervene. Now, encouraged by a wave of support from civil society — as well as the realization that promises to restart the factory were going nowhere — the cooperative born out of this struggle is taking matters into its own hands, outlining a plan for sustainable bottom-up reindustrialization. And yet, as of now, these former GKN workers have found little political support for their industrial plan. The result of close collaboration between researchers, workers and professionals, this plan would see the former auto-part plant shift to the production, installation, recovery and recycling of solar panels, as well as the manufacturing of cargo-bikes — an innovative, sustainable solution that could save jobs, cater to growing private and public sector demands, all while perfectly aligning with the EU’s Green Deal Industrial Plan (GDIP). Aimed at reshoring manufacturing capacity in energy-intensive and strategic sectors, the GDIP will inevitably require balancing economic competitiveness with sustainable practices, a massive reallocation of both capital and workers, as well as investment in green technologies and the skills required to produce them. As European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said, the EU’s industrial plan is designed to “turn skills into quality jobs and innovation into mass production.” Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni had repeatedly criticized former governments for not defending national interests and jobs during her 2022 election campaign — and yet, her government has, unsurprisingly, done little to address the issue either. | Anwar Amro/AFP via Getty Images So, as the cooperative’s negotiations with local and national government are protracted indefinitely — a strategy the former GKN workers believe is aimed at breaking their resolve — it’s hard to understand what could justify such inaction. According to Leonard Mazzone, a researcher from the University of Florence and member of the solidarity group that prepared the plan, everything is ready to go: They’ve found and reserved the machinery needed to begin production, constructed the first prototypes for the cargo-bikes, and 62 percent of the solar panels the factory aims to produce in its first year have already been ordered.  Furthermore, through private investors and a popular shareholder scheme that collected over €1.3 million from Italy and abroad, the group has already found nearly €6.3 million out of the estimated €11.5 million needed to start production. The remaining €5.2 million would need to be raised through debt capital, but according to the business plan, the factory could open as early as February 2026.  According to Mazzone there are no excuses left. The business plan projects a healthy net profit that’s been duly underestimated, considering the demand for solar panel recycling is destined to increase. Furthermore, he believes the plant could carve out a niche for itself by focusing on the production of “custom” panels aimed at particular requirements. The missing piece is just political backing. What the former GKN workers are asking of their regional government is to become a partner in their plan and guarantee them the use of the Campi Bisenzio factory. This means public funding to save quality jobs and support innovative production in a strategic sector dominated by foreign competition — as promised by the GDIP. And yet, for all the ongoing talk of revitalizing and greening Europe, company owners in Italy are allowed to relocate their businesses abroad rather than modernize and adjust at home. Moreover, the center-left Democratic Party (PD) failed to anticipate or prevent the GKN plant’s closure — a particularly notable failure given the company’s decision to shut down despite being profitable. The party may be in opposition, but it still governs several of the country’s regions, including Tuscany. And despite the rise of its new leader Elly Schlein, who briefly met with the workers to express her solidarity, the PD hasn’t followed through on its promises. Meanwhile, Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni had repeatedly criticized former governments for not defending national interests and jobs during her 2022 election campaign. And yet, her government has, unsurprisingly, done little to address the issue either. Rather, it has sold public enterprises to private funds like Blackrock, allowed relocations to take jobs out of the country and closed an eye to exploitative practices that increase competitiveness by cutting labor costs while doing very little to scale-up manufacturing capacity in green sectors. This particular story of struggle has become symbolic of of the state of industrial policy in Italy as much as abroad. On one hand, it shows the way forward for a possible convergence between labor and environmental justice to ensure that a just ecological transition doesn’t mean imposing long-term unemployment on workers. On the other, it has highlighted the lack of a sustainable industrial strategy willing to harness knowledge and encourage production in key sectors. As one of the cooperative’s leaders Dario Salvetti said, the GKN struggle has exposed the paradox of “a factory with no industrial plan and an industrial plan with no factory.” We’re about to see if the political will to resolve it exists.

Exxon Mobil Chair and CEO Darren Woods urged the incoming Trump administration to avoid making turbulent climate policy swings — and he pushed the president-elect to reject carbon border taxes favored by some GOP lawmakers. In an interview with POLITICO, Woods signaled that one of the most powerful players in the energy industry might serve as a moderating influence in Washington, even as Republicans seek to dismantle Biden-era climate policies. The future of the Inflation Reduction Act and other clean-energy programs is one of the most important questions hanging over the incoming administration. “I don’t think the challenge or the need to address global emissions is going to go away,” Woods said. “Anything that happens in the short term would just make the longer term that much more challenging.” Woods made the comments via telephone from the COP29 climate negotiations in Baku, Azerbaijan, just days after President-elect Donald Trump won the White House with a vow to turbocharge United States’ fossil fuel production and roll back Biden policies aimed at reducing greenhouse gas pollution and speeding the growth of clean energy. Trump is widely expected to withdraw the U.S. from the 2015 Paris climate agreement, and his election has scrambled climate diplomacy at the annual talks. Despite the forecasts that the world is on pace to set a new annual high temperature for the second year in a row, Trump has repeatedly called climate change a “hoax,” demonized policies promoting electric vehicles and castigated wind and solar energy. But some members of his party, including a sizable number of Republicans in Congress, have spoken out against wholesale repeal of the IRA, citing the economic benefits it has delivered to their districts. Woods, who took the top job at Exxon after his predecessor Rex Tillerson became Trump’s first secretary of State, said he opposed carbon border tariffs, which would impose fees on imports that are produced through processes with higher carbon emissions than in the U.S. That type of tariff has been touted by Robert Lighthizer, who was Trump’s first-term trade representative, as well as some Republicans in Congress who said it would benefit U.S. companies whose products are cleaner than their foreign competitors. It is widely viewed as a response to the European Union’s carbon border adjustment mechanism, which would tax imported raw materials from countries that do not have a price on carbon emissions. “I think it’s a bad idea. It’s a really bad idea,” Woods said. “I think carbon border adjustment is going to introduce a whole new level of complexity and bureaucratic red tape. I don’t think it’s going to be very effective.” Instead, he said, a regulatory system based on the carbon intensity of products would be a better solution. That would still require the government to enforce some basic accounting standards and a framework assessing the carbon dioxide footprint across a range of products. “Regulation will play a really important part of that,” Woods said. The EU’s carbon border adjustment mechanism has emerged as a COP29 flash point. China, Brazil, India and South Africa lodged a formal complaint against governments using trade measures to curb emissions, arguing it raised the costs of deploying green technology in low- and middle-income countries. Several countries initially raised similar objections to Biden’s IRA, contending it subsidized U.S.-based companies while shutting out foreign competitors. Trump has vowed to scrap many of those incentives. Woods said Exxon would adapt to whatever happens with IRA provisions that benefit the oil and gas industry, such as tax incentives for carbon capture, utilization and storage technology. “I’ve been advising that we have some level of consistency,” Woods said. “One of the challenges with this polarized political environment we find ourselves in is the impact of policy switching back and forth as political cycles occur and elections happen and administrations change. That’s not good for the economy.” Woods said Biden’s energy policies had amounted to “limiting the supply of traditional sources of energy and trying to force through expensive alternatives,” though he cautioned against complete about-face on climate change. He warned American industries that fail to address environmental performance during Trump’s second term risk worsening the problem. “We all have a responsibility to figure out, given our capabilities and ability to contribute, how can we best do that,” Woods said. “How the Trump administration can contribute in this space is to help establish the right, thoughtful, rational, logical framework for how the world starts to try to reduce the emissions.” Woods’ preferred approach on carbon intensity echoes several legislative proposals floating around Congress. Those are similar to other models that effectively reduced sulfur content in marine fuel oil and automotive diesel. “Once we can specify carbon intensity, you can then unlock the capability of industry to meet those carbon intensity specifications, and every government can set that level based on their set of circumstances in their country,” Woods said. Exxon has also launched a carbon capture business that aims to collect emissions of the greenhouse emitted from petroleum operations and store them in underground reservoirs in Louisiana and Texas as well as the seabed below the Gulf of Mexico. That technology has been embraced by the oil sector and received lucrative tax incentives in the Inflation Reduction Act, though it has been criticized by environmental groups. Despite Biden’s focus on green policies, the U.S. still became the world’s top oil and gas producer during his term and hit production levels unequaled by any other country in history. The U.S., the world’s largest economy and second-largest emitter of planet-heating gases, remains off track of Biden’s goal to cut emissions in half this decade, relative to 2005 levels.

Well, the Trump show’s just been rebooted. And Europe can’t look away. European policymakers have spent months preparing for Donald Trump’s potential return to the White House. But let’s be honest, they don’t really know how this will all unfold. For instance, Trump has promised to slap tariffs on every single European good entering the U.S. So the EU has preemptively locked and loaded some retaliatory measures. Seems logical — but that only works in a world where Trump is not erratic and impulsive. Also, remember Trump’s boast that he could instantly “end” Russia’s war in Ukraine? Whatever his bluster means, it has ramifications in Europe. And that’s just what’s consuming the headlines. Trump’s victory will inevitably affect every area of EU policy, from drug pricing to green technologies to artificial intelligence standards. So buckle up while POLITICO futurecasts what this all means for the EU. The remake will be unmissable, if nothing else. Energy Climate Trade Central banking Sustainability Financial services Health Mobility Defense Tech Competition Cybersecurity ENERGY Trump has boiled his energy policy down to three words: “drill, baby, drill.” His vow to boost oil and gas extraction, and ship more fossil fuels abroad, has raised eyebrows among environmentalists but has industry eyeing big profits. Despite American exports of natural gas hitting a record high last year, Trump wants to ax a Biden administration freeze on permits for new liquified natural gas (LNG) projects, a restriction that creates uncertainty for the European market. His crusade against the green transition could be less crowd pleasing. Some in Trump’s camp want him to scrap the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), which allocates more than half a trillion dollars for projects like clean tech, hydrogen and renewable energy. That program, however, has created jobs in key states and drawn business away from Europe, giving the U.S. a head start over the EU in industries such as wind, solar, alternative fuels and electric vehicles. Its repeal could be a boon for Brussels as it sets its sights on competition with Washington. Back to the top CLIMATE Donald Trump’s victory spells environmental disaster. To avert catastrophic levels of global warming, the world has very little time to dramatically slash emissions. Yet under Trump — who plans to pull the U.S. out of the Paris Agreement once again and double down on fossil fuels — the pace of the green transition is projected to slow down rather than speed up.  With the U.S. responsible for more than a tenth of planet-warming pollution, any shift in American climate policy has global consequences. A hotter planet means more disasters, including within the EU, which has to prepare accordingly for worse climate impacts. And some fear Trump’s win may reduce momentum for climate action worldwide, putting the Paris Agreement goals even further out of reach.  Funding for climate action in poorer countries is the hot topic at this year’s global climate summit starting Nov. 11, and Trump’s victory may plunge the conference into uncertainty — with many looking toward the EU to step up and fill the leadership vacuum. Yet without U.S. backing for much-needed reforms of the global financial architecture to cope with the climate challenge, debt-distressed developing countries will struggle to raise the necessary funds to switch away from fossil fuels.  Back to the top Donald Trump’s victory spells environmental disaster. | Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images TRADE “America First” will again sum up Trump’s approach to trade policy.  He’s vowed to bring back jobs to the U.S. and punish friends and foes with across-the-board tariffs of 10 or 20 percent (and up to 60 percent on goods coming from China), despite economists’ warnings of a detrimental impact on U.S. economic growth and higher costs for consumers. Trump’s trade policy is focused more on reducing the sizable U.S. trade deficit than on opening up new market opportunities. Trade policy will mainly be seen through the national security and geopolitical lens.  The EU failed to capitalize on the détente with the Biden administration to fix lingering trade disputes on steel and aluminum tariffs, green subsidies on electric cars, and reviving the highest court of the World Trade Organization. These rifts are expected to worsen under Trump.  The most immediate stress tests for Brussels and Washington will be to find a solution to the EU’s paused retaliatory tariffs against Washington (the truce elapses in March 2025), as well as its aircraft dispute over subsidies for Airbus and Boeing by 2026.  Back to the top CENTRAL BANKING Call it Trumpageddon.  If the president-elect goes ahead with even half the ideas he’s floated on the campaign trail, expect serious pain for the European economy. Analysts at Goldman Sachs said the euro could drop as much as 10 percent against the dollar if the new administration enacts its across-the-board tariff plan, while earnings among a group of Europe’s largest companies could fall by more than 5 percent next year.  Trump has explicitly called for more White House interference into the working of the U.S. Federal Reserve — America’s central bank — which has made its independence from politicians into a calling card. That could have huge implications for the stability of the global financial system, as well as the continued dominance of the dollar as the world’s reserve currency. Less direct, but no less impactful, are plans to deport undocumented migrants by the millions. It’s not yet clear who will be in the crosshairs of the mass deportation program, but given the importance of migrant labor, even the undocumented kind, for key sections of the American economy, there will be an unavoidable upwards pressure on prices. That could translate to higher U.S. interest rates, and put pressure on the European Central Bank to follow, screwing with an already shaky economic recovery. Back to the top SUSTAINABILITY It’ll come as no surprise to Brussels that the president-elect is not a fan of green policymaking. While the Trump administration probably won’t impact Brussels’ own rule-setting on green issues, Trump’s animosity for environmental policy will widen the gap between the two blocs on the international stage and harm the EU’s ambitions to promote multilateral cooperation. Under Biden, efforts to mandate American businesses to report on their environmental footprint were already stalling, frustrating Brussels’ hopes of creating global standards so companies operating in Europe don’t feel unfairly burdened. Under Trump, Brussels can kiss that dream goodbye.  Waltzing into the Oval office for a second time, Trump could also start backtracking on international commitments made by the U.S. The Republican Party is strongly against the U.S.-backed proposal to limit plastic production as part of the ongoing negotiations for a global plastics treaty. This could crush the EU’s hopes of American support in the final round of talks later this month. Back to the top Domald Trump’s animosity for environmental policy will harm the EU’s ambitions to promote multilateral cooperation. | Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images FINANCIAL SERVICES Trump’s victory will set the teeth of the world’s finance regulators on edge. Many global rules aimed at preventing another global financial crisis are drawn up in international bodies like the Financial Stability Board, IOSCO and the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision – all of which could be under threat from an uncooperative U.S.  In the short term, the Trump win looks like bad news for the global rollout of bank capital rules known as Basel III, drawn up after the 2007-2008 crisis to make sure lenders have enough reserves to cope with economic shocks. The U.S. has already changed its plans and postponed its rollout of the global rules after massive lobbying from the banking industry, and now could well scrap the rules altogether, prompting fears of financial instability.  But Wall Street is likely to be happy with Trump’s “America First” economic policies which boost manufacturing and loosen regulations, particularly on competition. Trump didn’t rock the boat on financial services policy the first time around, stacking regulators with Wall Street grandees. But while campaigning this time he launched a crypto venture. So the jury’s out on that one.  Back to the top HEALTH In his previous stint as president, Trump attempted to curb drug prices with little impact. Since then, the Biden administration has used the IRA to push through far-reaching drug price restrictions for people on Medicare, the health insurance for older Americans. Trump is unlikely to roll this back, meaning Big Pharma in the U.S. and Europe will be considering their investment options as both regions push to limit pharma profits. Global health advocates might also be fearing that Trump will once again withdraw from the World Health Organization (Biden overturned Trump’s previous withdrawal on his first day in office). The U.S. is the largest funder of the U.N. body, so its disengagement would have a huge impact on global health projects. Abortion has been one of the top voter concerns this election campaign. Trump, who claimed victory for overturning women’s right to abortion via Roe v. Wade, has since said he would veto a federal ban, leaving power with the states on the extent to which abortion is or isn’t allowed. Back to the top MOBILITY Donald Trump’s victory is likely to hurt European carmakers. “I want German car companies to become American car companies,” Trump recently told his supporters, promising “the lowest taxes, the lowest energy costs and the lowest regulatory burden” for automakers that choose to move production to the U.S. and “a very substantial tariff” on the others. Republicans also promised to cancel Biden’s electric vehicle mandate, which aims to ensure that half of all new cars and trucks sold in 2030 are zero-emission. Trump’s reelection could also spell bad news for Airbus and the rest of the European aircraft sector, with a possible wave of aerospace protectionism aimed at rescuing Boeing from troubled waters. It also remains to be seen if Trump will maintain his skepticism of green tech policies or continue to subsidize sustainable aviation fuels, which benefited massively from the Biden administration’s tax cuts under the IRA. As for shipping, which is most exposed to the negative effects of tariffs, the sector will be closely watching any type of trade war that a second Trump administration might launch. Back to the top DEFENSE A Trump win means Europe can no longer — or at least much less — rely on the U.S. for its defense and security. Donald Trump threatened during his first term to leave NATO and has repeatedly said on the campaign trail that Washington wouldn’t come to the rescue of allies who don’t invest enough in their military in case of a Russian aggression.  In a way, this may be a blessing in disguise for the EU, forcing European governments to work more closely together and make bold decisions — such as agreeing to joint borrowing to boost the bloc’s defense industry. France could revive discussions on the European aspect of its nuclear doctrine, while Brussels and London could accelerate talks for a defense and security agreement. Most countries would likely raise defense spending as much as possible.  On the other hand, we may see European capitals bilaterally try to curry favor with a Trump administration to ensure Washington remains interested in their security, namely by increasing even more purchases of U.S.-made weapons when the European Commission is trying to incentivize EU countries to buy local.  A Trump win means Europe can no longer — or at least much less — rely on the U.S. for its defense and security. | Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images The Trump win could mean the end of U.S. military aid to Ukraine and pressure on Kyiv to negotiate a peace deal with Russian President Vladimir Putin, even if the terms are more favorable for Moscow.  Back to the top TECH Under Biden, the EU was on speaking terms with the U.S. on tech. The Trump win could change that by spelling the end of the U.S.-EU Trade and Technology Council, the biannual transatlantic political gathering founded in 2021 as a place for the U.S. and the EU to discuss tech policy and coordinate on topics such as semiconductors and artificial intelligence standards. The collapse of such a diplomatic backchannel could come when international alignment on AI governance is needed the most.  Another liability is Trump’s proximity to Elon Musk, the owner of X, who has become a big Trump supporter. If the EU fines X for breaches of the bloc’s content-moderation rulebook, the relationship between Trump and the European Commission could sour very quickly and reinvigorate a well-known narrative that the EU is only trying to “take U.S. Big Tech companies down.”  Back to the top COMPETITION A Trump win opens up an uncertain era, as he hasn’t expressed clear lines on industrial policy or antitrust regulation, beyond an “America First” approach. While no fan of Big Tech, he has expressed frustration over European efforts to rein in American companies. He told a podcast in October that Apple Chief Executive Officer Tim Cook had called him to complain about an EU antitrust fine and losing a court ruling that required it to hand over billions of euros in back tax. He appears to oppose U.S. and EU antitrust efforts to split off parts of Google’s business, saying that “China is afraid of Google.” Trump has been backed by tycoon Elon Musk who has run into several digital regulation battles with the European Commission. Ultimately, Trump’s win may speed up European efforts to rely less on the U.S. as a partner, pushing on with an economic security strategy that emphasizes European production and a wide range of international suppliers and markets. That could see more pressure within Europe for EU merger reviews to allow bigger European companies and for more government help to boost European champions. Back to the top CYBERSECURITY The biggest cybersecurity impact of a Trump win is that his administration could remove Israeli spyware firms from the U.S. entity list of companies deemed a national security concern. Some of them, like NSO Group, have already been lobbying Republicans. The U.S. could also abandon American-led international efforts to clamp down on the proliferation and misuse of commercial spyware, which would have a ricochet effect on global efforts to rein in the surveillance tool.  Any distancing of the U.S. from NATO under Trump could also affect the Western alliance’s cyber capabilities.  Back to the top Gabriel Gavin, Zia Weise, Camille Gijs, Marianne Gros, Kathryn Carlson, Helen Collis, Tommaso Lecca, Laura Kayali, Pieter Haeck, Aude Van Den Hove, Antoaneta Roussi and Cory Bennett contributed to this report.

BRUSSELS — We’ll survive.  That’s the general feeling among the European Union’s green businesses as they prepare for Donald Trump’s potential return to power — despite the former president vowing to turn off the taps for any climate-friendly firms currently benefiting from Washington’s mammoth green subsidies. Trump has repeatedly railed against the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) — President Joe Biden’s landmark $468 billion plan to turbocharge investment in green technologies — and promised to block any more funds from the package being spent. But that won’t have much impact on the EU, experts and industry figures argue. To start, they simply don’t believe Trump will actually repeal the signature law if elected — practically speaking, it’s adding manufacturing jobs in red states. Even if Trump excludes the EU from the IRA’s green goodies, well, Europe isn’t drawing many benefits, anyway. And a full repeal might even help European governments struggling to match America’s subsidy splurge. Essentially, the global cleantech race will continue regardless. “I just don’t think there’s any chance of it being completely repealed,” said Antoine Vagneur-Jones, a senior analyst at BloombergNEF specializing in the climate-friendly industries dubbed cleantech. “It’ll be very hard for [Trump] to flick a switch and suddenly make it impossible for European companies to access those different incentives.” Of course, the IRA is a small subset of Trump’s promised economic upheaval that could do more damage abroad. The tariff-lover has toyed with a levy on each product entering the United States. Would that push China to flood Europe with more cheap products — a practice already harming EU solar manufacturers? Would Europe’s nascent green tech companies suddenly lose a massive market?  Still, green businesses insist they’re sanguine. “Economically, it would not be a good idea to remove the IRA as it creates a lot of jobs,” said Walburga Hemetsberger, CEO of Brussels’ SolarPower Europe lobby. Either way, though, “it is a worry that is not our worry.” “The European wind industry doesn’t tend to do trepidation,” added Giles Dickson, who heads the EU-wide WindEurope trade association. “We’re keeping an eye on it [but] you’ve got to remain level-headed about these things.” WORDS OR ACTIONS When Biden first signed the IRA into law in 2022, it struck fear into European politicians, who worried its combination of generous tax breaks and subsidies would lure their prized companies over the Atlantic. While those concerns have appeared overstated, Trump has boasted that he would reverse course.  Even if Donald Trump excludes the EU from the IRA’s green goodies, well, Europe isn’t drawing many benefits, anyway. | Brandon Bell/Getty Images “My plan will terminate the Green New Deal, which I call the Green New Scam,” the former reality TV host said in September. “It actually sets us back, as opposed to moves us forward. And [I will] rescind all unspent funds under the misnamed Inflation Reduction Act.” That could mean some change in policy, according to George David Banks, Trump’s former top international energy adviser, especially depending on who he appoints to run the U.S. Treasury. He singled out Robert Lighthizer, Trump’s former hawkish trade adviser. “I could see a Lighthizer-led Treasury Department using all of the tools at its disposal, including tax credits, to leverage against the Europeans and others in foreign economic negotiations,” Banks said.  That could affect IRA clauses that benefit EU firms, he said, including one that gives Americans a major tax break if they lease a foreign electric vehicle. It could also impact talks on a U.S.-EU pact on critical raw materials that would further expand Europe’s access to IRA-related credits, he added.  Still, a more substantive repeal is unlikely, according to Dan Mullaney, a former assistant U.S. trade representative for Europe who now works at the Atlantic Council think tank. “I don’t think that there’s going to be any rush to get rid of a program that has obviously encouraged manufacturing in the United States,” he said. “Whoever succeeds in the election will want to preserve and expand that approach, too.”  At the same time, Trump won’t be able to overturn the program himself, said Joseph Majkut, director of the Climate Change Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.  While the former president could “hold back unspent grant money,” he said, “that’s a much smaller amount of money” than the clean energy tax credits that require Congress’ approval. That could be an obstacle whether Democrats win a majority in Congress or not since many of the cleantech investments announced so far are in Republican-controlled states — making it sensitive for lawmakers from both political parties. MUCH OF A MUCHNESS  Even if Trump does succeed in scrapping the IRA, it wouldn’t scuttle too many existing projects. That’s partly because EU firms so far have only a limited presence in the U.S., according to Vagneur-Jones, the analyst. As of 2023, only a quarter of announced new electric vehicle and wind investments came from EU firms, he said, a fifth for batteries and even less for solar.  Even for electric vehicles — the core target of Trump’s ire — the impact of a reversal would “not [be] huge,” said Pedro Pacheco, an auto sector expert at the Gartner consultancy, since EU producers often sell above the price limit for accessing the most generous IRA credits. As of 2023, only a quarter of announced new electric vehicle and wind investments came from EU firms, he said, a fifth for batteries and even less for solar. | Sia Kambou/Getty Images More exposed are EU firms producing green hydrogen, a gas made from renewable energy that policymakers hope will help carbon-intensive industries cut emissions. For now, the majority of these companies have not yet begun U.S.-based production and thus aren’t benefiting from tax credits, said Jorgo Chatzimarkakis, CEO of Brussels’ HydrogenEurope lobby. But they had been eyeing America as a huge growth market. If Washington backtracks on its hydrogen incentives, Chatzimarkakis argued production capacity could turn back to Europe while “the center of gravity” on investments shifts to the Middle East and India. That said, losing the U.S. market would slow the industry’s ability to scale up.  That’s not the only problem facing the EU’s cleantech sector. Alongside persisting inflation pushing up supply chain costs, it is also grappling with a broader economic downturn facing the bloc. “European growth outlook does not look good,” Erik Nielsen, group chief economics adviser at UniCredit Bank, wrote in a recent analysis. “With the US economy presumably slowing and … with no realistic prospect of China recovering,” he added, “recent years’ driver of European growth — namely external demand — is petering out.”  That’s created a palpable fear among the EU’s politicians. On Monday, France called for more incentives to ease purchases of EU electric vehicles made inside the bloc.  Add to that the mounting fears that Trump could impose tariffs of 10 to 20 percent on all imported goods.  “That’s basically the beginning of a trade war,” said one EU diplomat, granted anonymity to speak candidly. “In that case, the markets will shrink.”  “How strong is the European internal market to survive that — I don’t know,” the diplomat added. For now, though, climate-friendly industries are resolute.  “Europe can survive Trump … whatever he does,” Chatzimarkakis said. “We’ll just look for new partners.”

“Blade Runner 2049” producers filed a lawsuit against billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk for allegedly using images from the film without permission at the Tesla robotaxi launch event. Alcon Entertainment, one of the production companies behind “Blade Runner 2049,” is suing Musk — along with Tesla and Warner Bros. Discovery — for copyright infringement. The company claims it rejected Musk’s request to use material from “Blade Runner 2049” as part of the marketing event for the new Cybercab, but Tesla’s CEO didn’t take no for an answer. “Alcon refused all permissions and adamantly objected to defendants suggesting any affiliation between BR2049 and Tesla, Musk or any Musk-owned company. Defendants then used an apparently AI-generated faked image to do it all anyway,” the complaint said. According to the lawsuit, Musk’s unveiling of a robotaxi — a futuristic-looking vehicle with no pedals or a steering wheel that Tesla says drives itself — used AI-generated imagery mirroring scenes from the film, including one featuring a man resembling Hollywood star Ryan Gosling, who plays the main character K in the film. The complaint called Musk’s use of images “a bad faith and intentionally malicious gambit” to “make the otherwise stilted and stiff content of the … event more attractive to the global audience and to misappropriate BR2049’s brand to help sell Teslas.” Alcon denied Musk’s request due to “his highly politicized, capricious and arbitrary behavior, which sometimes veers into hate speech.” Musk has repeatedly expressed support for Donald Trump in the 2024 United States presidential race, campaigned for him and most recently announced $1 million cash incentives to swing state voters in a bid to galvanize Republicans. Musk has long referenced the “Blade Runner” sequel as an inspiration for his Tesla technology. In a separate claim earlier this month, the director of sci-fi movie “I, Robot” Alex Proyas accused Musk of copying his designs. “Hey Elon, can I have my designs back please?” he posted on X.