Charles R. Goulding and Preeti Sulibhavi analyze Jamie Dimon’s stark warning about Europe’s economic slide and connect it to a critical inflection point in the continent’s 3D printing industry, marked by Trumpf’s exit and a call for renewed industrial strategy.
In mid-July 2025, JP Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon sent a shockwave through European financial and industrial circles. Speaking candidly during his European visit, Dimon pointed to a glaring economic reality: Europe’s gross national product (GNP) had slipped to just 65% of the United States’ GNP. His tone was blunt, and his message clear: complacency was dragging Europe down.
Dimon didn’t sugarcoat the issue. He highlighted the contrast between Europe’s economic stagnation and the more dynamic growth in the U.S. and China. While the U.S. pushes the frontier of innovation, bolstered by strategic investments in defense, tech, and infrastructure, and China expands its industrial footprint with state-led initiatives, Europe risks falling further behind. This was not a critique for criticism’s sake. It was a wake-up call.
A Parallel Development in 3D Printing
In an ironic twist of timing, just as Dimon was sounding the alarm, a coalition of European manufacturing bodies issued a “Manifesto for a Competitive European Additive Manufacturing Industry.” Spearheaded by the European Association for Manufacturing Technologies and supported by ten other organizations, the manifesto acknowledged many of the same issues Dimon pointed to, but within the specific context of 3D printing, or additive manufacturing.
Europe is not a newcomer to 3D printing. It has produced strong players such as Siemens, Renishaw, COBOD, Prusa, Ultimaker, Materialise, and EOS. These companies have been innovators and pioneers. Yet, despite this pedigree, the Manifesto admitted that Europe’s additive manufacturing sector has lost ground to the U.S. and China.
The U.S. has leveraged defense contracts and federal research initiatives to catapult its additive manufacturing industry forward. Programs tied to the military, aerospace, and naval shipbuilding have funneled billions into development, pushing U.S. companies ahead in scale and capability. Meanwhile, China has focused on building massive footprint additive machines, rapidly developing the capacity for large-scale industrial printing.
Europe, by contrast, has lacked similar cohesion and strategic urgency. The Manifesto was a clear signal: if Europe doesn’t move quickly, it could lose not only market share but its role as a global leader in manufacturing innovation.
Trumpf’s Surprise Exit from Additive
One of the most telling examples of Europe’s current struggle is the recent announcement that Trumpf, the German industrial machinery giant, would be exiting the 3D printing business. Trumpf, with 19,000 employees and annual revenues of €5 billion, had been expected to be a cornerstone of Europe’s Industry 4.0 ambitions. Its €500 million annual R&D budget suggested deep pockets for innovation, and its capabilities across laser technology and industrial systems made it a logical additive powerhouse.
Yet Trumpf chose to sell its additive manufacturing division to Lenbach Private Equities, a German investment firm. The buyer plans to focus the division on metal applications in aerospace and medical sectors—both of which require highly specialized knowledge and regulatory compliance. The deal caught industry observers off guard. Leading 3D printing analysts, including Fabbaloo, expressed dismay, noting that Trumpf had the resources and infrastructure to compete at the highest levels. Walking away now felt like a retreat rather than a pivot.
Why does this matter? Because when a company with Trumpf’s scale and reputation exits a growth sector like additive manufacturing, it sends a message: Europe is not yet prepared to lead this next phase of industrial transformation.
The Costs of Complacency
Dimon’s warning to Europe was not just about economic figures. It was about strategic priorities. The U.S. and China have treated emerging industries like additive manufacturing as arenas of national importance. They are aligning government policy, defense strategy, and private investment to win. Europe, on the other hand, has allowed fragmentation and underinvestment to slow progress.
The Trumpf episode is symptomatic of a broader trend. Rather than doubling down on additive to building a next-gen industrial base, European giants are stepping back, leaving the field to smaller players and private equity firms with uncertain long-term intentions. Lenbach may well nurture the former Trumpf division, but PE buyers often hold for value appreciation, not long-term industrial growth. Eventually, the business may end up in the hands of a strategic acquirer—possibly American or Chinese—looking to scoop up proven quality and engineering expertise on the cheap.
A Glimmer of Hope: Europe’s New Defense Budgets
Despite these setbacks, there is a silver lining. Europe’s recent commitments to significantly increase defense spending could serve as a catalyst for additive manufacturing. As seen in the U.S., defense demand is a powerful accelerant for the sector. Aerospace, weapons systems, and battlefield logistics all benefit from additive’s ability to produce complex parts on-demand and at distributed locations.
If Europe follows this model, routing some of its defense budgets into additive R&D, procurement, and ecosystem building, it could ignite a second wave of industrial growth. Countries like France, Germany, and Italy, which have strong engineering traditions, could become additive manufacturing leaders—if they act decisively.
Recognition Before Recovery
Ultimately, as much as Dimon wanted to jolt Europe into action, the Manifesto may be the more telling document. Self-recognition is the first step to recovery. The fact that Europe’s manufacturing associations are publicly calling out their own shortcomings is encouraging. It signals a willingness to confront hard truths and fix what’s broken.
The global 3D printing industry should pay close attention. If Europe does begin to refocus and reinvest, we could see a resurgence. The latent talent, engineering know-how, and industrial infrastructure are all there. What’s needed now is direction, unity, and capital.
For U.S. companies, this is a time for vigilance, not victory laps. European industry is beginning to acknowledge its mistakes and reassess its strategy. The sale of Trumpf’s division could turn out to be a temporary stumble or the first domino in a broader restructuring.
If Lenbach successfully scales the Trumpf additive unit, positions it for high-value aerospace and medical applications, and partners with European defense programs, it could turn today’s pessimism into tomorrow’s strength. Conversely, if strategic direction fails to materialize, it will only reinforce Dimon’s critique.
The Research & Development Tax Credit
The now permanent Research and Development (R&D) Tax Credit is available for companies developing new or improved products, processes and/or software.
3D printing can help boost a company’s R&D Tax Credits. Wages for technical employees creating, testing and revising 3D printed prototypes are typically eligible expenses toward the R&D Tax Credit. Similarly, when used as a method of improving a process, time spent integrating 3D printing hardware and software can also be an eligible R&D expense. Lastly, when used for modeling and preproduction, the costs of filaments consumed during the development process may also be recovered.
Whether it is used for creating and testing prototypes or for final production, 3D printing is a great indicator that R&D Credit-eligible activities are taking place. Companies implementing this technology at any point should consider taking advantage of R&D Tax Credits.
Conclusion: The Clock Is Ticking
Jamie Dimon’s blunt assessment may have stung, but it was rooted in reality. Europe’s economic and industrial slide is not inevitable but reversing it will take urgent action. Additive manufacturing, as both symbol and sector, is a microcosm of Europe’s broader challenge.
Trumpf’s exit, the release of the Manifesto, and the looming increase in defense budgets are all signs that the continent stands at a crossroads. Will it retreat or reassert its role as a manufacturing innovator? That choice, and the actions taken over the next few years, will determine whether Europe’s industrial future is defined by decline or resurgence.
For the U.S. and China, the message is clear too: don’t underestimate a continent that is starting to recognize where it’s gone wrong. In business and geopolitics alike, everyone loves a comeback.
