logo
Trump says US-UK deal ‘done' as steel tariffs still up in air

Trump says US-UK deal ‘done' as steel tariffs still up in air

Independent5 hours ago

Donald Trump and Sir Keir Starmer have finalised a US-UK deal that will slash trade barriers on goods from both countries, but leaves the future of tariffs on British steel up in the air.
The Prime Minister said the move marked a 'very important day' for both sides as the US president announced the agreement was 'done' in a joint appearance on the sidelines of the G7 summit in Canada.
The deal will grant British carmakers a reprieve by the end of June as levies drop from 25% to 10%, while the aerospace sector will face no import taxes.
But tariffs for the steel industry, which is of key economic importance to the UK, will stand at 25% for now rather than falling to zero as originally agreed. This is less than the US global rate of 50% for steel and aluminium.
The Prime Minister described the pact as a 'sign of strength' in the transatlantic relationship, while Mr Trump praised Sir Keir as a 'friend' who had done a 'great job' securing the deal that eluded leaders before him.
Following the hastily arranged meeting, the two leaders posed for pictures outside the G7 venue with the signed documents, which the US president dropped before Sir Keir picked them up.
Mr Trump also mistakenly referred to the pact as a 'trade agreement with the European Union.'
In an impromptu media spray, the US president was asked whether steel tariffs would be eliminated, to which he replied: 'We're gonna let you have that information in a little while.'
The Department for Business and Trade said the two leaders had pledged to 'make progress towards 0% tariffs on core steel products as agreed'.
Asked whether Britain would be shielded from future tariffs, Mr Trump said the UK was protected 'because I like them'.
'The UK is very well protected, you know why? Because I like them. That's their ultimate protection,' he said.
The PM told the US President: 'Donald, thank you very much… A really important agreement. And so this is a very good day for both of our countries, a real sign of strength.'
The terms of the deal were agreed in May, but neither Washington nor London had yet taken the necessary steps to reduce tariffs.
Reports have since suggested the US could also push for the NHS to pay more for American drugs in exchange for softened tariffs, with White House sources telling the Telegraph the service would be expected to pay higher prices.
Downing Street insisted the Government will 'only ever sign trade agreements that align with the UK's national interests' but did not rule out discussing the issue with Washington.
The Prime Minister was also insistent that a nuclear submarine deal between the UK, US and Australia, called Aukus, is 'very important' to both the United States and Britain.
He said it was proceeding despite Washington launching a review into the pact, which is worth around £176 billion and believed to be aimed at countering China.
He said: 'We're proceeding with that, it's a really important deal to both of us.
'I think the president is doing a review, we did a review when we came into government, and that makes good sense to me.'
Sir Keir and his fellow world leaders are locked in a week of intense diplomacy amid the spiralling conflict in the Middle East and the war in Ukraine.
The Prime Minister joined Italian Premier Giorgia Meloni, French President Emmanuel Macron, Mr Carney and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz for a glass of wine and informal discussions on Sunday night.
Downing Street dismissed suggestions that the get-together had been a 'Trump-handling' exercise to prove the summit against the US president's unpredictability as leaders seek to put on a united front in the face of heightened global instability.
On Monday, splits opened up in the response to Russia, which Mr Trump suggested should not have been kicked out of the former G8 following its annexation of Crimea in 2014.
The US leader also signalled his reluctance to impose further American sanctions on Moscow despite a European push to heap more pressure on Vladimir Putin as he resists calls for an unconditional ceasefire in Ukraine.
Standing alongside Sir Keir, who had earlier said G7 allies would seek to ratchet up measures against the Kremlin, Mr Trump said sanctions were 'not that easy' and would cost Washington 'a tremendous amount of money'.
Asked whether Washington supported European efforts to impose further measures, he told reporters ahead of a bilateral meeting with the UK Prime Minister: 'Well Europe is saying that, but they haven't done it yet.
'Let's see them do it first.'
Asked why he wanted to wait to impose sanctions, Mr Trump said: 'Because I'm waiting to see whether or not a deal is done… and don't forget, you know, sanctions cost us a lot of money.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Banks significantly increased fossil fuel financing in 2024, analysis finds
Banks significantly increased fossil fuel financing in 2024, analysis finds

South Wales Guardian

time19 minutes ago

  • South Wales Guardian

Banks significantly increased fossil fuel financing in 2024, analysis finds

The top 65 lenders – which include UK giants Barclays, HSBC, Natwest and Lloyds Banking Group – committed 869 billion dollars (£639 billion) in financing to fossil fuels, the 16th annual Banking on Climate Chaos report said. A coalition of research and campaign groups, including the Rainforest Action Network and Reclaim finance, analysed the banks' lending and underwriting to 2,730 companies active across the fossil fuel industry. These were reported in sources such as Urgewald's Global Oil and Gas Exit List (GOGEL) and Global Coal Exit List (GCEL), Bloomberg and London Stock Exchange Group (LSEG). According to this year's findings, the top banks increased fossil fuel financing by 162 billion dollars (£120 billion) from 2023 to 2024. This marks a shift in direction after fossil fuel financing had been decreasing over the previous years since 2021. Since Donald Trump's election victory in the US last year, companies across many sectors have been weakening their climate commitments, cutting ESG investments and pulling out of climate groups. Major US lenders have left the Net Zero Banking Alliance, the sector's top climate coalition, and an increasing number of banks have watered down, or abandoned, past commitments regarding fossil fuels. The Banking on Climate Chaos report found that since the 2015 UN Paris Agreement – an international deal secured in 2015 in France to limit rising temperatures – banks have now financed fossil fuels by 7.9 trillion dollars (£5.8 trillion). The analysis also suggests that loans were the top form of financing last year, with an increase to 467 billion dollars (£343 billion) from 422 billion dollars (£310 billion) in 2023. The International Energy Agency has said that no new fossil fuel projects should be developed beyond existing fields to remain within the temperature limit. However, the report found that banks have financed companies that are expanding fossil fuels with 1.6 trillion dollars (£1.1 trillion) since 2021, and 429 billion dollars (£315 billion) alone in 2024 – a rise of 85 billion dollars (£62 billion) from the year before. The report also identifies JP Morgan Chase as the largest fossil fuel financier in the world, committing 53.5 billion dollars (£39.3 billion) to fossil fuel companies in 2024. British bank Barclays was the largest fossil fuel financier Europe in 2024, at 35.4 billion dollars (£26.0 billion), according to the report, which also found it to be among the top four with the largest absolute increase in fossil fuel financing. For the other UK banks on the list, HSBC provided a total of 16.2 billion dollars (£11.9 billion) in fossil fuel financing, Natwest provided 2.7 billion dollars (£1.9 billion), and Lloyds provided 1.6 billion dollars (£1.1 billion) – although the latter comes as a decrease from 2.3 billion dollars (£1.7 billion) in 2023, according to the analysis. Banking on Climate Chaos is authored by Rainforest Action Network, BankTrack, the Centre for Energy, Ecology, and Development, Indigenous Environmental Network, Oil Change International, Reclaim Finance, Sierra Club, and Urgewald. Allison Fajans-Turner, policy Lead at Rainforest Action Network, said: 'Even in the face of worsening disasters and increasingly dire warnings of scientists and policy experts, banks actually increased their financing to fossil fuels between 2023 and 2024 and still poured billions into expanded fossil infrastructure. 'Only rapid and robust binding government regulation and oversight can make banks change course. 'Without binding regulation, banking on climate chaos will remain banks' dominant investment strategy, tanking our economy and our planet.' Tom BK Goldtooth, executive director of the Indigenous Environmental Network, said: 'Despite their greenwashing and false promises, these banks continue to bankroll the expansion of the fossil fuel industry and the false solutions that deepen climate injustice, land grabbing, and human rights abuse. 'From carbon markets to carbon capture to geoengineering techno-fixes, these schemes are distractions from the real solutions rooted in Indigenous sovereignty, traditional Indigenous knowledge, land and oceans defence, and a just and energy transition away from extractive capitalism. 'Our lands and waters are not sacrifice zones, and our Peoples are not collateral damage.' David Tong, global industry campaign manager at Oil Change International, said: 'In 2025, banks have no excuse to keep financing fossil fuel companies. 'No major oil and gas companies we analyse plan to do anything even close to what is needed to hold global warming to 1.5C.' Lucie Pinson, director and founder at Reclaim Finance, said: 'This year, banks have shown their true colours — many have walked away from climate commitments and doubled down on financing fossil fuel expansion, even as global temperatures break records. 'A few European banks may have inched forward, but for most, the lure of dirty money has proven too strong.' The PA news agency has contacted JP Morgan Chase, Barclays, HSBC, Natwest and Lloyds for comment.

Brits face cancelled holidays as travel company loses license
Brits face cancelled holidays as travel company loses license

The Independent

time24 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Brits face cancelled holidays as travel company loses license

Hundreds of British travellers may have their summer holidays cancelled after a UK travel provider lost a key license on Friday. As of 13 June, operations by Great Little Escapes are no longer protected by an Air Travel Organiser's Licence (Atol). The company's Facebook page says the brand formerly offered 'holidays to the most iconic cities in the world'. A notice from the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) confirmed that the company based in Sandhurst, Berkshire, ceased trading as an Atol holder on 13 June 2025. The Air Travel Organisers' Licence is a financial protection scheme run by the CAA for package holidays sold by tour operators in the UK. Under the scheme, if a firm goes out of business, your booking will be refunded. According to Companies House, the travel provider has been operational since September 2002. Great Little Escapes also traded under the names Your Holidays, Great Little Escapes, Tunisia First and websites and said the CAA. It added: 'We are currently collating information from the company and will update this page as soon as possible.' Customers of Great Little Escapes are advised not to submit a claim before the CAA has finished gathering information. The closure comes just two months after operations by Balkan Holidays shut in the UK, with 'all forward holiday bookings' cancelled after almost 60 years of trading. The travel provider started operations in 1966 with summer holidays to Bulgaria, Croatia, Montenegro, Slovenia, Malta and northern Cyprus, as well as winter ski trips, on offer to travellers. In March, Jetline Holidays ceased trading as an Atol holder, raising doubts on whether trip bookings – specifically cruises –would still be valid. Princess, Cunard and Holland America were among the affected cruise holidays, most of which were cancelled due to a 'breach of contract' with the former travel operator. The Carnival brand cruise lines said in a statement: 'We recognise how disappointing this news will be for affected guests and express our sincere apologies for the disruption caused. This decision was not made lightly.'

Majority of Americans think Trump admin should follow court orders
Majority of Americans think Trump admin should follow court orders

The Herald Scotland

time25 minutes ago

  • The Herald Scotland

Majority of Americans think Trump admin should follow court orders

President Donald Trump's supporters are split, 50% to 50%, over whether the administration should follow court orders, according to NBC News. More: Everything's an 'emergency': How Trump's executive order record pace is testing the courts Trump's actions have sparked more than 250 legal challenges since his second term began on Jan. 20. The court cases have resulted in at least 25 nationwide injunctions through late April temporarily halting Trump's actions, according to the Congressional Research Service. In response, Trump and his allies have lashed out at the courts in a growing pressure campaign, including arresting and threatening the impeachment of judges. On April 25, federal authorities announced charges against a Wisconsin judge, accusing her of hampering immigration enforcement efforts. More: Dismantling agencies and firing workers: How Trump is redefining relations with Congress and courts The Trump administration has also tried resisting court rulings. After the Supreme Court ordered the administration to "facilitate" the return of a Maryland resident wrongly deported to El Salvador, Trump officials delayed bringing him back for nearly two months. The NBC News poll was conducted among 19,410 adults nationwide between May 30 and June 10. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 2.1 percentage points. It also found that 55% of Americans hold a strongly favorable or somewhat favorable opinion of the Supreme Court, while 45% of Americans hold a strongly unfavorable or somewhat unfavorable opinion. Contributing: Zac Anderson, USA TODAY

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store