President Donald Trump has recently escalated his trade policy by imposing or threatening tariffs on the European Union, following actions against Canada, Mexico, and China. He has announced a 25% tariff on steel and aluminum imports from all countries, including the EU, reversing previous exemptions.

Additionally, Trump has vowed to impose broader “reciprocal tariffs” on EU goods, arguing that the EU has long taken advantage of the U.S. through unfair trade practices, such as its $235.6 billion goods trade deficit with the U.S. in 2024. He’s specifically criticized the EU’s 10% tariff on U.S. cars (versus the U.S.’s 2.5% on EU cars) and its reluctance to import more American farm products and vehicles.

The EU, led by figures like Ursula von der Leyen and Emmanuel Macron, has promised a “firm and proportionate” response, signaling potential countermeasures like those seen in 2018—targeting U.S. exports such as bourbon, motorcycles, and jeans. Germany, a major steel exporter, and Ireland, heavily reliant on U.S. trade, could be hit hard, though the UK’s post-Brexit status might spare it from the worst, with Trump hinting at a possible deal with PM Keir Starmer.

Economists warn that these tariffs could raise U.S. consumer prices, stoke inflation, and slow global growth—potentially shaving 0.5-0.9% off EU GDP if a 10% across-the-board tariff sticks. The EU is bracing for a trade war but hopes to negotiate, perhaps by boosting U.S. energy imports or coordinating on China’s steel overproduction. Still, Trump’s unpredictable approach keeps the situation tense.

The European Union is gearing up for a strategic response to Trump’s tariffs, drawing from past experience and current economic realities as of February 26, 2025.

Here’s how they’re likely to counter:

First, the EU is preparing targeted retaliatory tariffs, a playbook they’ve used before. In 2018, when Trump hit EU steel and aluminum with tariffs, the EU fired back with duties on $3.2 billion worth of U.S. goods—think Harley-Davidson motorcycles, Levi’s jeans, and Kentucky bourbon. This time, they’re eyeing a broader list, potentially hitting U.S. exports like agricultural products (soybeans, corn), tech goods, and energy exports (LNG). The goal? Painful enough to sway U.S. business lobbies and voters in key states, but “proportionate” to avoid all-out escalation.

Second, they’re exploring negotiation leverage. The EU could dangle increased purchases of U.S. liquefied natural gas—already up since Russia’s Ukraine invasion cut European energy options—or offer to align more closely on curbing China’s steel dumping, a shared gripe. Macron and von der Leyen have signaled openness to talks, hoping to trade concessions for tariff relief. They might also push a “Buy European” campaign to shift reliance away from U.S. imports, though that’s slower to bite.

Third, the EU’s flexing its regulatory muscle. They could tighten scrutiny on U.S. tech giants—think Google, Apple, or Amazon—with antitrust fines or data rules under the Digital Markets Act, indirectly pressuring Trump’s base. There’s also talk of carbon border taxes hitting U.S. goods if America doesn’t play ball on climate goals, though that’s riskier given global backlash potential.

Internally, the EU’s shoring up its own. Subsidies for steelmakers like Germany’s Salzgitter AG or France’s ArcelorMittal could blunt tariff damage, while trade deals with Asia or Latin America might offset U.S. market losses. Ireland, exposed with 13% of its exports to the U.S., might push for EU-wide relief funds

Germany wants to protect its car exports, France its farmers, and smaller nations fear collateral damage. Economists peg a 10% U.S. tariff costing the EU up to 0.9% GDP, so the bloc’s weighing pain versus principle. Expect a mix of retaliation and olive branches, calibrated to Trump’s next move.

Edukoya, the Nigerian edtech startup that once held the promise of revolutionizing online learning in Africa, has officially shut down, marking a significant blow to the country’s digital education sector.

The closure comes just four years after the startup secured $3.5 million in pre-seed funding—Africa’s largest at the time.

The company cited several reasons for winding down, including market unreadiness, limited internet connectivity, low access to learning devices, and unfavorable macroeconomic conditions.

Launched in 2021 by Honey Ogundeyi, Edukoya sought to address Nigeria’s deep-seated education challenges by offering a digital platform for online tutoring, live classes, and academic support. The startup’s vision was inspired by Ogundeyi’s own experiences with the Nigerian education system, where she witnessed firsthand how even the brightest students struggled due to systemic deficiencies.

Armed with the largest pre-seed funding in Africa’s edtech history, Edukoya entered the market with ambitious goals. The company quickly gained traction, reaching over 80,000 students and answering more than 15 million academic questions through its platform. It also integrated artificial intelligence into its services to enhance personalized learning experiences.

However, Edukoya found itself struggling against deep-rooted structural barriers. Internet access remained unreliable and costly for many Nigerian students, while limited device penetration meant a significant portion of its target audience could not access the platform. Furthermore, economic hardship made it difficult for families to afford premium digital learning solutions.

“In many ways, Edukoya was too early for its time—the infrastructure and economic conditions needed to support our vision at scale simply aren’t yet in place across our target markets,” the company explained in its shutdown statement.

Macroeconomic Challenges: The Edtech Industry’s Silent Killer

Edukoya’s exit from the market is not just an isolated case of a startup failing to scale. It underscores a larger crisis facing Nigeria’s edtech sector, where systemic economic and infrastructural issues continue to stifle growth.

A critical factor that contributed to Edukoya’s downfall was the worsening economic climate in Nigeria. In recent years, inflation has surged, eroding household purchasing power and making it difficult for families to prioritize digital education expenses. With many struggling to afford even basic necessities, premium online learning platforms became a luxury rather than a necessity.

Even free or low-cost digital education models have struggled. Poor internet connectivity in many parts of the country has rendered digital learning unreliable, while high costs of mobile data continue to limit access to online platforms. Unlike developed markets where edtech thrives on broadband internet, Nigeria’s dependence on mobile data presents a major obstacle.

A Grim Outlook for Edtech in Nigeria?

Against the backdrop of Edukoya’s specific struggles, and eventual shutdown comes the question: Is Nigeria truly ready for edtech?

Many industry players have echoed similar challenges, painting a bleak picture for the sector.

Sim Shagaya, the founder of uLesson, another prominent Nigerian edtech startup, has previously voiced concerns about the infrastructural difficulties that hinder digital education in Nigeria. In an interview, he pointed out that while the demand for quality education exists, the necessary conditions—such as widespread internet access, affordable devices, and financial capacity among parents—are still lacking.

Similarly, Tuteria, an edtech company focused on connecting students with private tutors, has struggled with adoption due to financial constraints among its target audience. The platform, which relies on users being able to afford private tutoring, has faced slow growth as parents grapple with economic difficulties.

For many edtech founders, Edukoya’s failure is not just about one company—it is a reflection of deeper structural issues that make it difficult for digital learning solutions to thrive in Nigeria.

As Edukoya battled these challenges, the company explored multiple strategies to stay afloat, including partnerships, mergers, and acquisitions. However, no viable solutions emerged. The company ultimately concluded that burning through its remaining resources in a hostile market was unsustainable.

“After exploring partnerships, M&A, and business model pivots without viable solutions, we’ve chosen to wind down operations and return capital to investors rather than deplete resources chasing scale in a challenging market,” Edukoya stated.

This failure to secure a merger or acquisition deal highlights the broader difficulties within Nigeria’s edtech space. Investors are hesitant to pour funds into a sector plagued by infrastructural deficiencies, and even established players are finding it difficult to scale profitably.

Is There Still Hope for Edtech in Nigeria?

Despite the gloomy outlook, some industry experts believe that Nigeria’s edtech sector still holds promise—if key structural challenges are addressed.

One potential avenue for growth is hybrid learning, which combines both physical and digital educational models. Unlike purely online platforms, hybrid learning allows students to supplement traditional schooling with digital resources, making it more adaptable to Nigeria’s current infrastructural realities.

However, government intervention has been touted as crucial. Countries where edtech has thrived, such as India, have seen strong policy support, including investments in internet infrastructure and public-private partnerships to make digital learning accessible.