This lucid article needs no comment - except its over- emphasis on the infamous 1930 Smoot-Hawley tariff. Like most of the debate, it ignores the earlier 1922 Fordnam-McCumber tariff with avg rates already near 40%. Sm-Haw mostly just further widened the tariff tax base.

Btw, heartfelt congrats to our US academic colleagues on providing such fine training in int'l economics to their political class (irony). This educational failure is breathtaking to say the least.

Or maybe there is something about protectionism that 200 years of research have overlooked?

Seems the early reports were too optimistic and the planned tariffs do include a formula for local content. That's gonna make things very tricky. We'll see producers pooling powertrain mfg etc to make onshore production worthwhile. Bye bye to variety?

This would also enable EU car makers to shift final assembly to the US and continue to serve their home markets w/o being penalized or having to build up excess capacity.

One slightly counterintuitive but effective thing the EU and others could do is to impose export tariffs - eg repeal current VAT reimbursements on auto exports. This won't revive trade but it nicely redirects customs revenue from the importer to the exporter.

European car makers: build flashy final assembly plants in trendy U.S. locations, open to the public and run as theme parks. Allow customers to pick up their new cars there - fireworks, gadgets & confetti! A Bavarian car maker did that with US clients coming over, big success.