The threat of tariffs from the US — seemingly dropped as quickly as they are proposed — is now par for the course for global fashion and luxury brands, who will need to adjust to the fact that trade terms are now wielded as blunt negotiation force.
Over the weekend, US President Donald Trump threatened sweeping tariffs on eight European countries — Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Finland — tying trade penalties to an extraordinary demand for the “complete and total purchase of Greenland”. In a Truth Social post, Trump said imports from the named countries would face a 10% tariff starting 1 February, rising to 25% on June 1, unless a deal is reached.
However, on Wednesday, after a critical speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Trump once again took to Truth Social to announce that the tariff threat had been dropped, thanks to a meeting with Mark Rutte, secretary general of NATO. “We have formed the framework of a future deal with respect to Greenland,” Trump wrote. “Based upon this understanding, I will not be imposing the tariffs that were scheduled to go into effect on February 1.”
US stocks rallied on Wednesday after the announcement, following a plunge earlier this week as the renewed threat of more tariffs set in. For an industry already navigating prolonged tariff volatility, the announcement has landed less as a shock than as confirmation that uncertainty is becoming a permanent operating condition.
“Our immediate reaction was concern, but not surprise,” says Helen Brocklebank, CEO of Walpole, which represents the UK luxury sector, of the threatened 10% tariff on the UK. Luxury brands, she notes, are operating in an increasingly politicized trade environment, where announcements can be made quickly and with limited consultation.
The US remains a critical market for European fashion and luxury exports, and even speculative tariff threats introduce friction into pricing, sourcing, and investment decisions. Yet, after a year of near-constant trade disruption, brands appear less inclined to panic — and more focused on preparedness.
A familiar rollercoaster
For many executives and advisors, the Greenland-linked threat felt like an escalation of a trend that began in earnest last year.
“The initial reaction was despair as this represents an escalation of the trade disruption that started in 2025,” says Neil Saunders, managing director of retail at GlobalData. “While no one expected tariffs to disappear, there was a hope that this year would be more of a settled state that would be about adjusting to the tariff changes rather than having to react to new ones. That is clearly not the case as tariffs are now being used for political purposes, which means the uncertainty continues.”
That uncertainty is compounded by the informal nature of the announcements. Angela Santos, partner at ArentFox Schiff, notes that the threat emerged and was then called off via social media rather than official trade channels.
“My first thought was, here we go again,” she says.
Still, brands have learned the hard way that dismissing early signals can be risky. What last year demonstrated, Santos says, is that Truth Social posts can become actionable developments — or fade into political rhetoric. Either way, even speculative announcements create real uncertainty for businesses that depend on predictable duty rates and cannot quickly shift production.
Operational fatigue and legal uncertainty
Most luxury businesses, Brocklebank says, are resisting knee-jerk decisions to tariff threats. Acting too early can be as damaging as acting too late, particularly in a sector where pricing, perception, and long-term brand equity matter. What is changing is not speed, but preparedness.