&w=3840&q=100)
Trump new tariff rates ‘pretty much set,' says US trade representative
US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer gives a live TV interview about tariffs at the White House in Washington, DC, US. Reuters
New US tariff rates are 'pretty much set' with no immediate possibility for discussion, Donald Trump's trade advisor said in remarks broadcast Sunday, justifying the president's politically motivated charges against Brazil.
Trump, who has used tariffs as an instrument of American economic supremacy, has set tariff rates for dozens of economies, including the European Union, at 10 to 41 percent starting from August 7, his new hard deadline for the tariffs.
In a pre-recorded interview broadcast Sunday on CBS's 'Face the Nation,' US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said that tariff rates are unlikely to see changes in 'the coming days'.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
'A lot of these are set rates pursuant to deals. Some of these deals are announced, some are not, others depend on the level of the trade deficit or surplus we may have with the country,' Greer said.
'These tariff rates are pretty much set.'
Undoubtedly some trade ministers 'want to talk more and see how they can work in a different way with the United States,' he added.
But 'we're seeing truly the contours of the president's tariff plan right now with these rates.'
Last Thursday, the former real estate developer announced hiked tariff rates on dozens of US trade partners.
They will kick in on August 7 instead of August 1, which had previously been touted as a hard deadline.
Among the countries facing steep new levies is Brazil. South America's largest economy is being hit with 50 percent tariffs on exports to the United States – albeit with significant exemptions for key products such as aircraft and orange juice.
Trump has openly admitted he is punishing Brazil for prosecuting his political ally Jair Bolsonaro, the ex-president accused of plotting a coup in a bid to cling to power. The US president has described the case as a 'witch hunt.'
Greer said it was not unusual for Trump to use tariff tools for geopolitical purposes.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
'The president has seen in Brazil, like he's seen in other countries, a misuse of law, a misuse of democracy,' Greer told CBS. 'It is normal to use these tools for geopolitical issues.'
Trump was 'elected to assess the foreign affairs situation… and take appropriate action,' he added.
Meanwhile White House economic advisor Kevin Hassett said that while talks are expected to continue over the next week with some US trade partners, he concurred with Greer's tariffs assessment in that the bulk of the rates 'are more or less locked in.'
Asked by the host of NBC's Sunday talk show 'Meet the Press with Kristen Welker' if Trump could change tariff rates should financial markets react negatively, Hassett said: 'I would rule it out, because these are the final deals.'
Legal challenges have been filed against some of Trump's tariffs arguing he overstepped his authority.
An appeals court panel on Thursday appeared skeptical of the government's arguments, though the case may be ultimately decided at the Supreme Court.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
7 minutes ago
- India Today
Be careful with nuclear rhetoric: Russia cautions after Trump's submarine order
Russia on Monday called for everyone to be cautious about nuclear rhetoric, following recent comments by US President Donald Trump about repositioning American nuclear spokesman Dmitry Peskov downplayed the significance of Trump's remarks, made last Friday, in which Trump said he had ordered the deployment of two US nuclear submarines to "the appropriate regions" in response to statements by former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev regarding the risk of war between nuclear this case, it is obvious that American submarines are already on combat duty. This is an ongoing process, that's the first thing," Peskov said. Emphasising that Russia does not consider Trump's announcement to be an escalation of nuclear tensions, he said, "We do not believe that we are talking about any escalation now. It is clear that very complex, very sensitive issues are being discussed, which, of course, are perceived very emotionally by many people."While steering clear of direct engagement with Trump's comments, Peskov reiterated Russia's stance on responsible communication concerning nuclear matters."Of course, we believe that everyone should be very, very careful with nuclear rhetoric," he asked whether the Kremlin had advised Medvedev to moderate his tone in his online exchanges with Trump, Peskov declined to answer directly."Listen, in every country, members of the leadership... have different points of view on events that are taking place, different attitudes. There are people who are very, very tough-minded in the United States of America and in European countries, so this is always the case," he concluded by affirming that Russian foreign policy remains under the direction of President Vladimir Putin."But the main thing, of course, is the position of President (Vladimir) Putin," he said. "You know that in our country, foreign policy is formulated by the head of state, that is, President Putin."- EndsMust Watch
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
7 minutes ago
- First Post
India needs strategic patience to sail through Trump's tariff storm
On July 30, 2025, US President Donald Trump unveiled a sweeping 25 per cent tariff on Indian exports, effective August 7, alongside threats of penalties for India's continued purchase of Russian oil and military hardware. Justified by Trump as retaliation for India's 'far too high' tariffs and 'strenuous and obnoxious non-monetary trade barriers', this move severely disrupts an expanding trade partnership. More troubling is the proposed 100 per cent secondary tariff on nations dealing in Russian oil—especially damaging for India, which sources around 35 per cent of its crude from Russia. These measures risk entangling trade, energy security, and defence in a complex geopolitical crossfire. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD India–US Trade Snapshot India is the US' ninth-largest trading partner, and the US is India's largest export destination. In 2024, bilateral trade (per Indian sources) stood at $136.7 billion—with India exporting $91.2 billion and importing $45.5 billion, yielding a $45.7 billion surplus for India. U.S. data shows bilateral goods trade at $129.2 billion, with exports to India at $41.8 billion and imports from India at $87.4 billion. This trade imbalance remains a sore point for Washington. While Trump has dubbed India the 'tariff king', the actual weighted average tariff on US imports is under 5 per cent, well within WTO limits. However, India does levy higher duties on specific items like whisky, wines, and automobiles—similar to protectionist policies adopted by many other nations, including the US. India's major exports to the US in 2024 included electrical and electronic equipment ($14.4 billion), pharmaceuticals ($12.73 billion), and precious metals and stones ($11.88 billion). Conversely, US exports to India comprised mineral fuels ($12.6 billion), precious stones ($5.31 billion), and machinery ($3.29 billion), along with soybeans ($2.2 billion). Tariff Dynamics Before the Trump Shock Before Trump's announcement, US tariffs on Indian goods averaged 2.5 per cent, while Indian duties ranged from 10 per cent to 80 per cent depending on the sector—with high rates on agricultural products like apples and rice. Non-tariff barriers, especially in agriculture and pharmaceuticals, have long frustrated US businesses. Trump has used tariffs as a pressure tool to counter the trade deficit under the guise of protecting US industries. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD From India's perspective, the US administration has ignored the significant American advantage in India's services and education sectors. Furthermore, India's obligations to safeguard farmers' livelihoods, sensitivities regarding dairy products, ensure energy security, and maintain affordability restrict its capacity to yield to US expectations. Fallout The new 25 per cent tariff raises average duties on Indian goods to 27 per cent, affecting key sectors such as auto parts, electronics, steel, and aluminium. Even iPhones assembled in India may see price hikes. Projections suggest a 10 per cent to 50 per cent drop in Indian exports in these sectors—amounting to annual losses of up to $3 billion. India, with 1.4 billion people and the world's fourth-largest economy, aims to double trade with the US to $500 billion by 2030. However, Trump's tariffs threaten this goal, potentially trimming 0.3–0.5 per cent off India's projected 6.5 per cent GDP growth for 2025 (as per HSBC). For US consumers, these tariffs will likely spark inflation, especially in healthcare affordability. Tariff revenues—estimated to constitute 5 per cent of federal income in 2025—are intended to offset Trump's tax cuts and support domestic manufacturing. Yet economists, including JP Morgan, predict a US GDP slowdown to 1.6 per cent and supply chain disruptions, given India's crucial role in supplying generics, pharmaceuticals, and electronics. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Strategically, these tariffs risk alienating a key Indo-Pacific partner, undermining US efforts to counter China. The punitive measures could push India closer to the Russia-China-India (RIC) alignment. India imported $40 billion of Russian oil in 2024 (forming 35 per cent of India's energy imports). A 100 per cent secondary tariff on this trade would spike India's import bill, increase inflation, strain fuel subsidies, and derail fiscal targets—especially problematic in an election year. In defence, India's 36 per cent dependency on Russian arms (down from 55 per cent in 2019) makes it vulnerable to US sanctions, particularly regarding high-value systems like the S-400. While compliance compromises strategic autonomy, non-compliance risks further penalties. Given the perceived unreliability of US foreign policy, India may be inclined to take calculated risks. A Web of Sticking Points Agriculture is India's red line. The US demands greater access to India's protected agricultural market, particularly in dairy and grains. But with 45 per cent of the population reliant on farming, India faces high political costs in liberalising this sector. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD India is unlikely to emulate US allies like Japan or the EU in offering zero-tariff concessions, owing to security dependencies. Indian exports of auto parts, steel, aluminium, and electronics face the steepest tariffs. Less-affected sectors like textiles and gems may still lose market share to Vietnam and Bangladesh. In retaliation, India could target US exports such as soybeans and aircraft—although this could impact its aviation sector if the UK cannot meet shortfalls. Domestic Compulsions India's trade policy is constrained by domestic politics. Any concessions on agriculture risk electoral backlash. Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs), which drive Indian exports, would be severely impacted by higher US tariffs. Energy security remains paramount, and Russian oil provides affordable options not easily replaceable. Strategic autonomy underpins India's foreign policy. Aligning too closely with either Washington or Moscow would compromise this balance. Given Trump's recent policy unpredictability, abandoning a reliable partner like Russia seems unjustified. Balancing Act Trump's tariff blitz leaves India with limited but critical choices. These include: STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Negotiate a Selective Trade Deal: India may pursue a limited deal, lowering tariffs on non-sensitive imports like machinery, liquor, hydrocarbons, motorbikes, and soybeans—while resisting US demands on agriculture and dairy. It must stand firm on energy affordability for its vast poor population. From August 1, 2025, India should absorb the tariffs temporarily without rushing into a disadvantageous deal. It should protect MSMEs, prioritise growth, and wait out the 10-day deadline on secondary tariffs, monitoring US–China negotiations. This appears to be the most prudent approach. Diversify Markets: India should expand exports to Asean, the EU, and Africa. Deepening ties with Brics nations can also cushion the impact. Though these markets lack the scale of the US, diversification reduces dependency and future coercion risks. Aggressive pursuit of FTAs and strategic partnerships is essential. Strategic Reduction in Russian Trade: India can gradually diversify oil imports to the Middle East or the US and broaden arms sourcing to France, Israel, and others. However, higher costs and strong Russia ties complicate this transition. India can redirect exports to Asean, the EU, and Africa, though with smaller profit margins. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Self-Reliance: Strengthening the Atmanirbhar Bharat campaign for defence and tech manufacturing is vital. Past disruptions, like Covid, have shown India's capacity to localise supply chains—a trend that must accelerate. Controlled Retaliation: If unavoidable, India must retaliate proportionately with tariffs on high-profile US goods like aircraft, oil, whisky, and motorcycles. Such a move risks escalation but may be necessary to defend sovereignty and prevent future coercion. Brics Brics nations face similar US tariffs—34 per cent on China, 50 per cent on Brazil. The concept of a coordinated Brics response is attractive but lacks momentum. India-China rivalry and Russia's economic constraints limit cohesion. While alternate payment systems (eg, rupee-ruble trade) are being explored, intra-Brics trade ($700 billion) pales in comparison to their $5 trillion trade with the US. However, if Trump follows through with 100% tariffs on BRICS and 500% on countries trading with Russia, he may inadvertently force BRICS closer. This could catalyze a realignment toward the RIC format. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Realistic Road Ahead India's optimal response blends diplomacy, economic recalibration, and strategic signalling. A selective trade deal protecting sensitive sectors while retaining competitiveness is key. Simultaneously, India must diversify exports, reduce reliance on Russian oil and arms incrementally, and boost domestic manufacturing. Subsidies for impacted exporters and tax relief for MSMEs can cushion the blow. By reinforcing its role as a democratic counterweight to China, India can retain geopolitical leverage while defending long-term interests. Trump's tariff offensive poses serious challenges—but India possesses considerable leverage. Through smart negotiation, diversification, and strategic patience, India can weather the storm and emerge stronger, with a more resilient and self-reliant economic framework. Diplomacy, reform, and national resolve will be India's guiding tools in navigating this turbulent phase. The author is a strategic and security analyst. He can be reached at Facebook and LinkedIn as Shashi Asthana, @asthana_shashi on Twitter, and personal site. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
7 minutes ago
- First Post
Russia attacked with Kinzhal hypersonic missile, Ukraine destroyed Su-30 fighter jet
Overnight attacks in the Russia-Ukraine war led to costly losses as Russia launched an attack using the hypersonic Kinzhal missile, and Ukraine hit Su-35 fighter jets valued upto $50 million read more A Sukhoi Su-30 SM fighter plane fires missiles during the International Army Games in 2018 at the Dubrovichi range outside Ryazan, Russia (Photo: Reuters) The Russian Ministry of Defence on Monday (August 4) claimed that the country's armed forces had used a Kinzhal hypersonic missile, among other aerial systems, to strike infrastructure of Ukrainian military airfields. In a statement, the Defence Ministry of Russia said 'Armed Forces of the Russian Federation delivered a group strike by the Kinzhal aeroballistic hypersonic missiles and attack long-range unmanned aerial vehicles [UAVs] at infrastructure of the AFU military airfields.' Russia's Kh-47M2 Kinzhal, a nuclear-capable air-launched ballistic missile, was unveiled by President Vladimir Putin in 2018. Believed to be derived from the Iskander-M short-range ballistic missile, it has a range of 1,500 to 2,000 kilometers and can carry a 480-kilogram nuclear or conventional warhead. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Although specifics about the target of the strikes or the goal were not released, the statement did mention that 'The goal of the strike has been achieved, all the assigned targets were engaged.' Ukraine says attack thwarted, Russian jet downed The Air Force of the Armed Forces of Ukraine had released a statement earlier during the day claiming that Russia launched an attack with 162 Shahed attack UAVs and simulator drones as well as the Kh-47 M2 'Dagger' aeroballistic missile. Ukraine claimed it repelled the attack using 'aviation, anti-aircraft missile troops, electronic warfare and unmanned systems units, and mobile fire groups'. Ukraine further claimed that Ukraine Security Service (SBU) launched a powerful strike on the 'Saky' airfield on the night of August 4. It claimed that following the attack by UAVs, one Su-30SM fighter jet was destroyed, while another was damaged. In a statement, the Ukrainian Armed Forces also said that the cost of Su-30SM reaches $35–50 million apiece. 'This operation is another step towards weakening Russia's ability to wage war against Ukraine,' it added. In addition to the two Su-30SMs, three Su-24 planes were hit and an aviation weapons depot was also reportedly destroyed.
