Others pointed out that the tariff rate they are pointing to is actually just calculated based on trade imbalance. So the logic is that they have a number they want to get to and are throwing around terms that their constituents don't understand to make it sound reasonable

VAT is not a tariff, no one reasonable thinks it's a tariff but the US doesn't use the term VAT so enough people won't second guess it if trump says it's an tax on american goods

Well, they are saying, EU market is harder to operate in (because everyone pays VAT) than the US market (no VAT, also lower regulatory barriers it seems), and also EU firms have a "home advantage" benefit, for example the regulation is written for their benefit.

So US is easy to sell in for everyone, EU is "hard" to sell in for everyone, but maybe less so for EU car makers. So there is something to this argument, it's not entirely without merit.

Additionally, US car tariff used to be 2.5%, whereas EUs is 10%. The imbalance is short in justification, though across the board, EU and US charge each other similar tariff amounts altogether, so there are other areas where the US charges more.

Whether that justifies broad brush enormous tariffs in everything, and whether US does the same in other industries (defence for example) is an exercise I leave for the trader.

> Can someone explain if there's any logic at all to counting a countrys VAT as part of its tariffs?

There is no logic. VAT isn’t tariffs and is not discriminatory. In the same way as trade imbalance is not theft. It’s just Trump trying to find reasons to complain and present the US as a victim.

A tariff is a tax specifically on foreign goods. It is an artificial barrier to trade used to make domestic products more competitive. VAT is a tax applied to all products equally, so it isn't a trade barrier. You might be able to construe a convoluted argument that it is easier for domestic companies to work through domestic regulation, but that's pretty weak.

The US seems to have simply taken the value of the trade deficit with a country, divided it by total imports from that country, and used that as the tariff percentage. So in their logic, wherever there is a trade imbalance, this must be explained by barriers to trade. So in a sense this is also a repudiation of the core hypothesis of global free trade as an ideology: That, if countries trade freely with one another, they can specialise on certain production and a virtuous cycle makes everyone richer. In Trump's ideology, trade is a zero sum game, and having a trade deficit means that you are losing.

For context - here is one of Trump's posts which mention VAT: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/1140091752662...

No details provided.

European VAT makes it difficult for American companies to compete in Europe. US has no VAT, making it easier for European companies to compete in America...

Combined with the fact that the US is the de-facto largest benefactor of NATO, Ukraine, UN, etc... then the US is getting shafted by the EU and Trump is correct in seeking ways to mitigate that.

Applying this economical pressure on the EU is a valid strategy, IMHO.

There is no logic to it. It's just the US going insane and Americans nodding along.

https://taxpolicy.org.uk/2025/04/02/no-vat-isnt-a-tariff-but...

https://iccwbo.org/news-publications/news/are-value-added-ta...

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/03/31/as-trump-reciprocal-tariffs-...

etc, etc.

The only reasonable reply as a consumer and/or cloud-service purchaser: Economic wide-scale boycott of the US.

US formally don't have VAT, when most other developed countries have.

As I know, US states few decades spent on talks about implement VAT, but have not achieved agreement yet.

For equivalent, most US states have trade tax, could be returned with set of rules. So, on some abstract level it could be considered as far equivalent of VAT, which is also could be returned with set of rules.