Trump announces 'massive' Japan trade deal including 15% tariff
Trump has vowed to hit dozens of countries with punitive tariffs if they don't strike a deal with the United States by next month.
So far, Trump has only announced pacts with Japan, Britain, Vietnam, the Philippines and Indonesia, while talks continue with other trade partners.
"We just completed a massive Deal with Japan, perhaps the largest Deal ever made," Trump said on his Truth Social platform.
Trump said that under the deal, "Japan will invest, at my direction, $550 Billion Dollars into the United States, which will receive 90% of the Profits."
He did not provide further details on the unusual investment plan, but said the deal "will create Hundreds of Thousands of Jobs."
Japanese imports into the United States were already subject to a 10-percent tariff, which would have risen to 25 percent on August 1 without a deal.
Duties of 25 percent on Japanese autos -- an industry accounting for eight percent of Japanese jobs -- were also already in place, as well as 50 percent on steel and aluminum.
Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba said on Wednesday in Tokyo that the autos levy was cut to 15 percent.
"We are the first (country) in the world to reduce tariffs on automobiles and auto parts, with no limits on volume," he told reporters.
"We think it is a great achievement that we were able to get the largest cut (in tariffs) among countries which have trade surpluses with the US," he said.
This sent Japanese auto stocks soaring on Wednesday, including Toyota which rocketed more than 12 percent.
US-bound shipments of Japanese cars tumbled 26.7 percent in June, stoking fears that Japan could fall into a technical recession.
Last year vehicles accounted for around 28 percent of Japan's 21.3 trillion yen ($142 billion) of exports to the world's biggest economy.
To Trump's annoyance, US-made cars sell poorly in Japan, with only hundreds sold annually for the likes of General Motors, compared to millions of Toyotas bought by US motorists.
The US president also wanted Japan to increase imports of rice, the price of which has soared in recent months in the Asian giant, and of US oil and gas.
RICE IMPORTS?
But Trump said Tuesday that Japan has agreed to "open their Country to Trade including Cars and Trucks, Rice and certain other Agricultural Products, and other things."
Rice imports are a sensitive issue in Japan, and Ishiba's government -- which lost its upper house majority in elections on Sunday -- had previously ruled out any concessions.
Ishiba, whose future is uncertain following the election, said on Wednesday that the deal does not sacrifice Japan's agricultural sector.
Trump has been under pressure to wrap up trade pacts after promising a flurry of deals ahead of his August 1 tariff deadline.
Earlier on Tuesday, he announced a deal had been reached with the Philippines which would see the country face 19 percent tariffs on its exports.
The White House also laid out details of a deal with Indonesia, which would see it ease critical mineral export restrictions and also face a 19 percent tariff, down from a threatened 32 percent.
Indonesian goods deemed to have been transshipped to avoid higher duties elsewhere, however, will be tariffed at 40 percent, a US official told reporters Tuesday.
After an escalatory tit-for-tat with China, the two major economies agreed to a temporary lowering of tariffs, with another round of negotiations expected next week in Stockholm.
Since returning to the White House in January, Trump has imposed a sweeping 10 percent tariff on allies and competitors alike, alongside steeper levels on steel, aluminum and autos.
Legal challenges to Trump's non-sectoral tariffs are ongoing.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
IOL News
an hour ago
- IOL News
Sudan's war is an economic disaster: here's how bad it could get
People walk past destroyed vehicles on the grounds of a hospital in Sudan's capital Khartoum in April 2025. Image: AFP In the two years of civil war in Sudan the country has lost more than 50% of it's economy. Image: AFP Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad loading My research applies economy-wide models to understand how conflict affects national development. In a recent study, my colleagues and I used this approach to answer the question: what will happen to Sudan's economy and poverty levels if the war continues through 2025? To assess the economic impact of the conflict, we used a Social Accounting Matrix multiplier model. This is a tool that captures how shocks affect different sectors and other agents of the economy, such as firms, government and households. Based on our modelling, the answer is devastating: the conflict could shrink the size of Sudan's economy by over 40% from 2022 levels, plunging millions more into poverty. We modelled two scenarios to capture the potential trajectories of Sudan's economy. The extreme scenario assumes a sharp initial collapse, with a 29.5% contraction in the size of the economy in 2023 and 12.2% in 2024, followed by a 7% decline in 2025, reflecting some stabilisation over time. The moderate scenario, based on World Bank projections, applies a 20.1% contraction in 2023 and a 15.1% drop in 2024, also followed by a 7% reduction in 2025, indicating a slower but more prolonged deterioration. We estimated the annual figures and report only the aggregate impacts through 2025 for clarity. We found that if the conflict endures, the value of Sudan's economy will contract by up to 42% from US$56.3 billion in 2022 (pre-conflict) to US$32.4 billion by the end of 2025. The backbone of livelihoods – agriculture – will be crippled. And the social fabric of the country will continue to fray. How we did it Our Social Accounting Matrix multiplier model used data from various national and international sources to show the impact of conflict on the value of the economy, its sectors and household welfare. We connected this to government and World Bank data to reflect Sudan's current conditions. This allowed us to simulate how conflict-driven disruptions affect the value of the economy, its sectors and household welfare. What we found Under the extreme scenario, we found: Gross domestic product collapse : Gross domestic product (GDP) measures the total value of all goods and services produced in a country within a year. It's a key indicator of economic health. We found that the value of Sudan's economy could contract by up to 42%. This means the country would be producing less than 60% of what it did before the conflict. This would affect incomes, jobs, government revenues and public services. The industrial sector – heavily concentrated in Khartoum – would be hardest hit, with output shrinking by over 50%. The value of services like education, health, transport and trade would fall by 40%, and agriculture by more than 35%. Job losses : nearly 4.6 million jobs – about half of all employment – could disappear. Urban areas and non-farm sectors would be worst affected, with over 700,000 farming jobs at risk. Incomes plummet : household incomes would decline across all groups – rich and poor, rural and urban – by up to 42%. Rural and less-educated households suffer the most. Poverty spikes : up to 7.5 million more people could fall into poverty, adding to the 61.1% poverty level in 2022. In rural areas, the poverty rate could jump by 32.5 percentage points from the already high rural poverty rate pre-conflict (67.6% of the rural population). Women, especially in rural communities, are hit particularly hard. Urban poverty, which was at 48.8% pre-conflict, increases by 11.6 percentage points. The agrifood system – which includes farming, food processing, trade and food services – would lose a third of its value under the extreme scenario. Why these findings matter Sudan was already in a fragile state before the war. It was reeling from decades of underinvestment, international sanctions and institutional breakdown. The war has reversed hard-won gains in poverty reduction. It is also dismantling key productive sectors – from agriculture to manufacturing – which will be essential for recovery once the conflict ends. Every month of continued fighting adds to the damage and raises the cost of rebuilding. Our projections already show major economic collapse, yet they don't include the full extent of the damage. This includes losses in the informal economy or the strain on household coping strategies. The real situation could be even worse than what the data suggests. What needs to be done First and foremost, peace is essential. Without an end to the fighting, recovery will be impossible. Second, even as conflict continues, urgent action is needed to stabilise livelihoods. This means: supporting agriculture in areas that remain relatively safe. Food production must be sustained to prevent famine. restoring critical services where possible – particularly transport, trade and retail – to keep local economies functioning protecting the most vulnerable, such as women in rural areas and the elderly, through expanded social protection and targeted cash assistance. Third, prepare for recovery. The international community – donors, development banks and NGOs – must begin laying the groundwork for post-conflict reconstruction now. This includes investment in public infrastructure, rebuilding institutions and re-integrating displaced populations. The bottom line Sudan's war is more than a political crisis. It is an economic catastrophe unfolding in real time. One that is deepening poverty, destroying livelihoods and erasing years of progress. Our research provides hard numbers to describe what Sudanese families are already experiencing every day. The country's economy is bleeding. Without a shift in the trajectory of the conflict, recovery could take decades – if it happens at all. | The Conversation Khalid Siddig is Senior Research Fellow and Program Leader for the Sudan Strategy Support Program, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)
The Citizen
2 hours ago
- The Citizen
Toyota and Ford dominate 2024's world's best-selling bakkie list
In an even split within the top 10, both brands featured three products apiece. Arch rivals Toyota and Ford occupy a total of six places within the top 10 best-selling bakkies lists of 2024. Image: Jaco van der Merwe Having taken first place with the previous generation RAV4 as the world's best-selling vehicle of 2024, Toyota has also ranked top as the best-selling bakkie manufacturer of the past 12 months. Global top 10 According to a six-month and 153 market research by renowned automotive analyst Felipe Munoz, the Hilux ranked above the Ford F-150 as the world's best-seller with sales of 618 200 versus 594 100. ALSO READ: Now 'replaced' Toyota named world's best selling car of 2024 Admittedly sold in more markets compared to the F-150's core of North America, the Hilux finished as one of three Toyota products within the top 10, its Stateside twin, the Tacoma, and full-size Tundra placing eighth on 215 600 and ninth on 179 400 respectively. Equally, the Blue Oval also filled three slots within the top 10, with the Ranger placing fourth on 386 900 and the F-250 tenth on 167 300. Out of the remainder of the first 10, General Motors occupied third and sixth positions with the Chevrolet Silverado 1500 (418 300) and its upscale twin, the GMC Sierra 1500 (267 500), with Stellantis placing fifth on 282 300 with the Ram 1500 and Isuzu seventh on 262 200 with the D-Max. South Africa ranked In a separate report of the biggest non-US market bakkies, South Africa ranked in the top 10 of no less than six mainstream global products. These include the Hilux (4th), D-Max (4th), Ranger (5th), Nissan Navara (7th), Volkswagen Amarok (4th) and Peugeot Landtrek. Most likely as a result of all being locally produced, with production of the Landtrek supposed to start next year, the report doesn't mention any Chinese products, or the dated Mahindra Pik Up sold in fewer global markets. So far this year, South Africa's perennial top three, the Hilux, Ranger and D-Max, once again feature within the top 10 best-selling vehicles for the first half of the year, the former keeping its position at number one overall, followed by the Ranger at number two and the Isuzu at number five. NOW READ: South Africa's top 20 mid-year best-sellers of 2025 revealed
Mail & Guardian
3 hours ago
- Mail & Guardian
Reciprocity or retaliation? The semantics of US trade power
Trump's trade tantrums reflect the US president's transactional politics. Photo: File It's hard to decide what's more surreal — that the US is threatening 50% tariffs on Brazilian imports in the name of 'reciprocity' or that global markets, once jittery at the mere whisper of Trumpian trade tantrums, are now brushing off these ultimatums with a shrug and record-breaking rallies. In a letter campaign launched on 7 July, the US administration warned dozens of nations that, unless bilateral trade deals were reached by 1 August, punitive tariffs would be unilaterally imposed. Brazil, the current chair of Brics and a nation with a sizable trade deficit vis-à-vis the US, was told in no uncertain terms that its exports would be slapped with 50% tariffs. The premise is both stark and familiar: comply or pay. But this time, something has shifted. Unlike the uproar that followed the first wave of tariff threats in April — when emergency summits and legal challenges rippled across the globe — the second wave has been met with a remarkable degree of composure. The world isn't retreating. It's recalibrating. Take Brazil, for example. President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, just days after hosting the 17th Brics Summit in Rio de Janeiro, responded with restraint. 'We don't want an emperor,' he quipped, declining to engage in crisis theatrics. It was a sharp, yet composed, rejoinder to an ultimatum that would once have triggered panic. This moment marks more than defiance, it signals a strategic turning point. The Rio Declaration, adopted unanimously by Brics nations and invited partner countries, issued the bloc's clearest rebuke yet of US trade practices. 'We are seriously concerned about the rise of unilateral tariffs and non-tariff measures, which distort trade and violate WTO [World Trade Organisation] rules,' the declaration read. More than rhetoric, it outlined a coordinated vision — strengthen local currency trade, expand the role of multilateral development institutions and build resilient frameworks beyond the reach of US coercion. The contrast couldn't be clearer. While Washington leans on tariffs as a blunt tool of pressure, the Global South is coalescing around a more deliberate, cooperative trade vision. It's worth interrogating the logic behind these US threats. The idea that trade imbalances are inherently unjust and must be 'corrected' through punitive measures is a populist oversimplification. Economies specialise, consumers choose and deficits emerge naturally. Punishing countries for selling what Americans want to buy is not reciprocity – it's retaliation. Moreover, Washington's coercive strategy stands on shaky legal ground. The US Court of International Trade ruled in May 2025 that the administration's use of emergency tariff powers was incompatible with trade law. Yet, legality seems increasingly irrelevant in the face of a foreign policy that views the WTO not as a rules-based arbiter, but as an inconvenience. And still, the global economy hums. The Dow and Nasdaq have posted historical highs. Inflation remains subdued. Emerging markets, far from fleeing, are holding their ground. It's tempting to believe the tariffs are toothless. But that would be premature. Beneath the surface, a quieter reordering is underway. Countries are no longer scrambling to appease Washington. They're building buffers. From the Association of Southeast Asian Nations's supply chain diversification to the African Continental Free Trade Area's intra-regional push, nations are insulating themselves — not just economically, but diplomatically. The Brics bloc is central to this shift. No longer just a symbolic grouping, it has taken tangible steps toward a multipolar economic architecture. New initiatives unveiled in Rio — such as the Brics Pay platform, the Multilateral Guarantee Mechanism and ethical AI cooperation — are not mere declarations of intent. They are building blocks of a system that does not rely on Western-dominated institutions for validation. China's role in this transformation is pivotal. As the world's second-largest economy and a founding Brics member, China has consistently championed win-win cooperation over confrontation. Its advocacy for local currency-based payment systems, climate financing for the Global South and expanded youth and trade exchanges underscore a strategic, long-term vision. One not built on coercion, but on connectivity. India, too, proposed a forward-looking four-point agenda for the 2026 Brics Summit it will host: demand-driven development financing, climate adaptation support, ethical AI regulation and a framework for South–South food security. Together, these form a quiet, yet deliberate, counter-narrative to the transactional diplomacy of tariffs and threats. It's important to note that this isn't anti-Americanism. It's post-Americanism. Countries are not trying to isolate the US, they are trying to insulate themselves from its volatility. And the backlash is not limited to Brics. The EU, long seen as a compliant economic partner of the US, is beginning to show signs of fatigue. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has floated anti-coercion instruments aimed at retaliating against US overreach in public tenders and service sectors. Canada is considering reciprocal tariffs on US steel and agriculture. Even smaller nations like Malaysia are defending domestic policy space while exploring countermeasures. This isn't surrender. It's maturity. The world is learning that the US, for all its economic might, cannot permanently bend the global system to its will — at least not without consequences. Of course, the asymmetry of power remains. A 50% tariff from Washington still packs a punch. But its effectiveness as a shock tool is eroding. Countries are beginning to treat American threats not as destiny, but as one variable among many. If anything, the US approach might hasten what it fears most: a decentralised, multipolar trade regime. By using tariffs to enforce compliance, Washington is nudging others towards de-dollarisation, alternative payment networks and regional trade accords. Already, energy deals between Russia and China are settled in yuan and rubles. India pays for oil in dirhams. Brics's expansion to include Argentina, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates — and talks with Saudi Arabia as a strategic partner — further signals a pivot toward greater autonomy from Western leverage. As the 1 August deadline nears, some nations could still pursue tactical deals with Washington. India is reportedly close to a metals agreement. Pakistan is finalising a tariff adjustment deal. But the broader picture is one of divergence, not capitulation. The Rio Declaration summed it up best: 'Only when more and more economies issue a unanimous voice of condemnation and more and more actions form a counter-force can bullying be stopped.' The world is not panicking. It is prepared. And in that preparation lies not just the defiance of the present, but the blueprint of the future — a future where trade is negotiated, not dictated; where cooperation triumphs over coercion and where no nation, however powerful, can hold the global economy hostage to its whims. Dr Imran Khalid is a freelance columnist on international affairs based in Karachi, Pakistan.
