Europe Must Not Be ‘Unprepared’ For Trade War, ECB’s Rehn Says

Higher barriers to trade would have a negative impact on the global economy, and Europe must be prepared for increased tensions, Bank of Finland Gov. Olli Rehn said Tuesday.

Rehn, who is a member of the European Central Bank’s governing council, said a soft landing for the eurozone economy was still a plausible scenario, but that the outlook is clouded by growing geopolitical uncertainty.

A new element in that uncertainty is the trade policy of Donald Trump in his second term as U.S. president. Trump has expressed a desire to raise tariffs on imports from a wide range of countries.

“What we do know is that significant import duties could have negative ramifications for the global economy,” Rehn said.

Questions about the future of one of Europe’s key trade relationships add to the other uncertainties that face policymakers, including Russia’s war on Ukraine, the conflict in the Middle East, and China’s military and technological ambitions, Rehn said.

“A new trade war is the last thing we need amid today’s geopolitical rivalries, especially among allies,” he told investors at a London conference.

Rehn said Europe must be better positioned to respond than it was during Trump’s first term.

“If a trade war were to start, Europe must not be unprepared,” he said.

The threat of new tariffs comes at a time when the eurozone’s two largest economies—Germany and France—are being led by minority governments. However, trade policy is decided at the level of the European Union as a whole, and implemented by the European Commission, rather than national governments.

“Political turmoil in Germany and France underscores the importance of the European Commission in providing leadership and direction,” Rehn said. Rehn was a member of the Commission from 2004 until 2014.

The ECB continues to say that its key interest rate needs to stay restrictive, and damp demand to cool inflation. But as it cuts its key rate, there will come a point where it moves to neutral, where policy is neither restraining or stimulating the economy. Rehn said that was likely to happen in the first half of next year.

“We might expect leaving restrictive territory between January and June, ” he said.

For many Australians, the 2026 Federal Budget initially felt like a direct challenge to the way wealth is created, held and transferred between generations.

The headlines were immediate: changes to capital gains tax, reforms to discretionary trusts, restrictions on negative gearing and increased scrutiny of investment structures. Unsurprisingly, affluent families, business owners and investors began asking the same question:

Is the way we hold our wealth still fit for purpose?

In recent days, the government has announced several significant amendments following industry consultation and public feedback, including exempting testamentary trusts from the proposed 30 per cent minimum tax and expanding capital gains tax concessions for small businesses.

The backdown is welcome. But it also highlights something much bigger.

This Budget has accelerated a conversation that many Australian families have been postponing for years.

The conversation is not really about tax. It is about wealth stewardship.

For decades, Australians have built wealth through businesses, property, investments and careful long-term planning. Yet many families have not revisited the legal structures surrounding those assets in years, sometimes decades.

We often see clients who have spent years building significant wealth, only to discover their legal arrangements no longer reflect their current circumstances.

Their children are now adults. They may own multiple properties.

They may have sold a business, entered a second marriage, become grandparents or accumulated digital assets that did not exist when their original estate plans were prepared.

The trust that distributes income may need to be reconsidered. The bucket company may no longer be so attractive.

The Budget has simply exposed a reality that already existed: wealth structures cannot remain static while life continues to evolve.

Importantly, trusts themselves are not the issue.

Trusts are legitimate planning tools that provide flexibility, protection and continuity. When used appropriately, they allow families to adapt to changing circumstances over time.

And neither is tax the issue, really. Getting the fundamentals right is more important for long-term, sustainable wealth than a few favourable tax treatments around the edges.

The real issue is complacency.

Too often, families create structures and assume the job is done. It isn’t.

Estate planning is no longer a document you sign once and file away in a drawer. It is an ongoing process that should evolve alongside your life.

We are also seeing a broader shift in how Australians define wealth itself. It is no longer just the family home and an investment portfolio.

Modern wealth includes businesses, digital assets, cryptocurrency, intellectual property, frequent flyer points and increasingly complex family arrangements.

At the same time, Australians are living longer than ever before, meaning wealth may need to support multiple generations simultaneously. This creates new responsibilities and new risks.

How do you help your children enter the property market without exposing family wealth to relationship breakdowns?

How do you structure wealth so that it remains a source of opportunity rather than future conflict?

These are the questions families should be asking now.

The recent debate surrounding testamentary trusts also serves as an important reminder that policy decisions can have unintended consequences for vulnerable Australians. It is encouraging that the government has listened to feedback and clarified its position.

But the lesson remains: the wealth landscape is changing.

Increasingly, governments, regulators and tax authorities are paying closer attention to how wealth is held and transferred. That means families cannot afford to adopt a “set-and-forget” approach to their structures.

The families who will be best placed for the future are not necessarily those with the greatest wealth.

They are the families with the greatest clarity. Clarity around ownership, succession and governance. And clarity around how wealth will transition from one generation to the next.

Ultimately, preserving wealth is not about avoiding change.

It is about preparing for it.

Because the greatest risk is not change itself.

It is losing the ability to respond to it.

Anthony Hunt is Co-Founder of Wealth Lawyers and former COO of Westpac Private Bank. He advises business owners, investors and affluent Australian families on wealth protection, succession planning and intergenerational wealth transfer

Europe Must Not Be ‘Unprepared’ For Trade War, ECB’s Rehn Says

Rehn said Europe must be better positioned to respond than during Trump’s first term

The Federal Budget may have softened some of its proposed tax reforms, but it has exposed a bigger issue: too many families are relying on wealth structures that no longer reflect the realities of modern life.