The $ 750 billion energy pact from President Donald Trump with the European Union, presented as a historical reorientation of transatlantic trade, is already faced with skepticism on its feasibility and binding nature.
Although the agreement describes massive American energy sales to Europe and promises $ 600 billion in the EU in the United States by 2028, industry analysts and political experts cited by CNBC think that the objectives are largely ambitious and politically complicated.
The White House says the EU has agreed to buy $ 750 billion in American energy and invest an additional $ 600 billion in the US economy, President Trump failed by reducing a threatened price by EU – out of steel and aluminum – at 15%. However, experts warn that the commitments are vague and inapplicable, preparing the way for potential transatlantic benefits if expectations are not satisfied.
Register For TEKEDIA Mini-MBA Edition 18 (September 15 – December 6, 2025)) Today for early reductions. An annual for access to Blurara.com.
Tekedia Ai in Masterclass Business open registration.
Join Tekedia Capital Syndicate and co-INivest in large world startups.
Register For Tekedia ai lab: From technical design to deployment.
Despite the representation of the agreement by the White House as an official agreement, the European Commission – the EU executive organization – stressed that the investment figure is based on the expressions of interest of companies and not legally restrictive.
“It’s not restrictive. It is a commitment,” said Erik Brattberg, an expert in Europe at the Atlantic Council. “The EU itself does not buy energy. It would be Member States or Companies of the Member States. ”
Even energy purchase commitments increase red flags. The president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, told journalists that the $ 750 billion would be distributed in annual slices of $ 250 billion throughout Trump’s mandate, targeting American oil, liquefied natural gas (GNL) and nuclear fuel to replace Russian imports. But analysts say that current American energy exports to respond to these figures would be a monumental logistical and political challenge.
KPLER basic product monitoring data shows that in 2024, EU member states imported around $ 80 billion in US oil, LNG, liquefied oil and coal gas. The achievement of the annual objective of $ 250 billion would require more than one triple increase.
“If this agreement was to be carried out, we are talking about the United States by providing the share of the lion of European energy imports,” said Helima Croft, responsible for the global raw material strategy at RBC Capital Markets. The total energy imports of the block amounted to $ 433 billion in 2024.
Food constraints are also obscured the image. American oil production is currently stable and could decrease in the coming months, according to Rystad Energy analyst Svetlana Tretyakova. The re -enhancing existing exports of Asia and Latin America to the EU would erase long -standing trade relations. In addition, the refining capacity and the climatic objectives of Europe are in tension with the idea of considerably increasing oil imports.
On the gas front, American LNG terminals are already operating at full capacity, tirelessly in the short term to meet the growing demand of Europe.
“There is no room to increase expeditions right now,” said Mathieu Utting in Rystad. Even if a larger LNG infrastructure is put online over the next two years, it has declared that Europe is already obtaining on half of its imports from LNG from the United States “it is very unrealistic that Europe imports exclusively from the United States,” he added. “They will want to diversify to a certain extent.”
This imperative of diversification makes the scale of Trump’s energy objectives even more difficult to achieve, in particular when no application mechanism exists to hold both parties responsible. A White House official, however, insisted Tuesday that Trump expects the EU to honor his commitment.
“This is what the EU agreed to buy,” the manager told CNBC. “The president reserves the right to adjust the rate rates if a renegal part.”
For the moment, the agreement serves more as a political signal than a final overhaul of trade. Experts like Alex Munton of Rapidan Energy note that if the title of $ 750 billion is “unrealistic”, the EU has always undertaken to extend the American energy trade because it eliminates Russian fossil fuels by 2028. The imminent metric deficit of 25 million tonnes in LNG imports from Russia presents a gap. The United States is well placed to fill.
“Interests align,” said Munton. “This is why it is essentially a practical matter.”
However, without implementation or concrete purchasing mechanisms, Trump’s energy pact seems to be more a political gesture than a guaranteed transformation of EU -EU economic ties – which can still become another flash point if expectations are not satisfied and that tariff threats return to the table.
