The EU's trade deficit with China is growing by €1 billion ($1.125 billion) per day, and French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz want a new legal weapon to stop it. In a letter to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, the two leaders called for a rapid-response tariff mechanism modeled on the US Section 301 duties — days before European trade leadership sits down with Chinese counterparts.

The letter argues the bloc's domestic manufacturing sectors and broader economy face systemic market-distortion practices that demand swift action. "Without delaying the full use of the existing set of instruments, we need a comprehensive framework to complement our toolbox with new legal instruments—in a lean and non-bureaucratic way," Macron and Merz wrote.

European Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič travels to Beijing on Thursday for the final round of trade rebalancing talks with Chinese trade officials. Those negotiations began four months ago. EU leaders will discuss the results at a summit in Brussels on October 15–16.

Why do Macron and Merz want a new instrument?

The core complaint is speed. The EU's existing Anti-Coercion Instrument — known colloquially as the "trade bazooka" — gives the Commission substantial authority to constrain imports when faced with economic coercion. But firing it takes too long, according to Paris and Berlin.

Under current rules:

• A months-long investigation must conclude before deployment.
• A majority of EU governments must vote to approve the action.
• Either requirement can stall a response while import volumes keep climbing.

The Franco-German proposal would erect safeguards against those national vetoes, allowing the Commission to act faster against unfair trade practices or market imbalances.

What is driving the urgency?

Macron has spoken openly and often about the flood of China-originating imports hitting European producers. His assessment carries a specific sourcing logic: US efforts to shrink its own trade deficit with China have redirected product flows toward the European market.

Washington's Section 301 tariffs illustrate the effect. Some were applied to China during President Donald Trump's first term and were built upon by President Joe Biden, slowing Chinese imports in certain critical sectors into the US market. Trump added more duties on trading partners, including China, after an investigation into forced-labor-linked practices concluded this summer.

For European suppliers competing against Chinese imports, that diversion effect is the commercial reality behind the letter. The EU-China deficit figure — €1 billion per day — is the number Paris and Berlin want the new framework to attack.

The letter also proposed that the Commission take concrete steps to diversify European supply chains and reduce reliance on China — a direct signal to apparel, footwear and textile sourcing directors still concentrated on Chinese capacity.

How has the Commission responded?

According to a report from Reuters, the Commission characterized the Franco-German plan as valuable and potentially viable. The response pointed to issues such as dumping and government subsidies — problems Von der Leyen herself has highlighted as detrimental to Europe's economy.

That framing matters. Treating the proposal as workable signals the Commission may be prepared to translate political pressure into legislative text, rather than filing the letter away after the Beijing talks.

What decision does this force?

For sourcing and compliance teams, the letter raises a planning question that no longer sits on the horizon. If the EU builds a Section 301-style mechanism with fewer veto checkpoints, tariff exposure on China-origin goods could move from annual review cycles to rapid Commission action.

Sourcing directors should treat the October 15–16 Brussels summit as the next checkpoint: the outcome of Šefčovič's Beijing round, and any Commission follow-through on the Macron-Merz framework, will determine whether dual-sourcing outside China moves from contingency planning to budget line.