Higher US tariffs take effect on dozens of economies
Image: Peter Zay / AFP
Higher US tariffs came into effect for dozens of economies Thursday, drastically raising the stakes in President Donald Trump's wide-ranging efforts to reshape global trade.
As an executive order signed last week by Trump took effect, US duties rose from 10% to levels between 15% and 41% for a list of trading partners.
Many products from economies including the European Union, Japan and South Korea now face a 15% tariff, even with deals struck with Washington to avert steeper threatened levies.
But others like India face a 25% duty -- to be doubled in three weeks -- while Syria, Myanmar and Laos face staggering levels at either 40% or 41%.
Taking to his Truth Social platform just after midnight, Trump posted: "IT'S MIDNIGHT!!! BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN TARIFFS ARE NOW FLOWING INTO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!"
The latest tariff wave of "reciprocal" duties, aimed at addressing trade practices Washington deems unfair, broadens the measures Trump has imposed since returning to the presidency.
But these higher tariffs do not apply to sector-specific imports that are separately targeted, such as steel, autos, pharmaceuticals and chips.
Trump said Wednesday he planned a 100% tariff on semiconductors -- though Taipei said chipmaking giant TSMC would be exempt as it has US factories.
Even so, companies and industry groups warn that the new levies will severely hurt smaller American businesses. Economists caution that they could fuel inflation and weigh on growth in the longer haul.
While some experts argue that the effects on prices will be one-off, others believe the jury is still out.
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
With the dust settling on countries' tariff levels, at least for now, Georgetown University professor Marc Busch expects US businesses to pass along more of the bill to consumers.
An earlier 90-day pause in these higher "reciprocal" tariffs gave importers time to stock up, he said.
But although the wait-and-see strategy led businesses to absorb more of the tariff burden initially, inventories are depleting and it is unlikely they will do this indefinitely, he told AFP.
"With back-to-school shopping just weeks away, this will matter politically," said Busch, an international trade policy expert.
Devil in the details
The tariff order taking effect Thursday also leaves lingering questions for partners that have negotiated deals with Trump recently.
Tokyo and Washington, for example, appear at odds over key details of their tariffs pact, such as when lower levies on Japanese cars will take place.
Washington has yet to provide a date for reduced auto tariffs to take effect for Japan, the EU and South Korea. Generally, US auto imports now face a 25% duty under a sector-specific order.
A White House official told AFP that Japan's 15% tariff stacks atop of existing duties, despite Tokyo's expectations of some concessions.
Meanwhile, the EU continues to seek a carveout from tariffs for its key wine industry.
In a recent industry letter addressed to Trump, the US Wine Trade Alliance and others urged the sector's exclusion from tariffs, saying: "Wine sales account for up to 60% of gross margins of full-service restaurants."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Maverick
2 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Goose-step by goose-step, Republican Party authoritarianism marches into the political arena
Donald Trump's efforts to channel his authoritarian-wannabe style are bringing forth new insults to democratic practice and coherent governance. These run from the vindictive firing of a government labour statistician to the promotion of ultra-partisan redistricting of congressional districts to fend off a Democratic majority in the 2026 mid-term election. On the mean-spirited, small-minded side of the ledger, US President Donald Trump abruptly announced he was firing Erika McEntarfer, the head of the Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics. This office is one of the government's most important economic data compiling and analysis agencies. Among other things, it tracks the country's unemployment rate and the number of new jobs being created — information crucial for decisions and calculations by the government and business. The ostensible reason for Trump's ire was that the most recently reported number of new jobs created was well below what he had hoped to hear. That came in tandem with significant downward revisions to earlier monthly totals of new jobs. The Trump administration, however, took these mundane, even ordinary statistical calculations and routine revisions as direct slaps at the imaginary triumphs of Trumpian economic policies. The resulting damage from this firing to a heretofore broad trust in the reliability of the government's economic data will be difficult to repair, almost regardless of who is handed the poisoned chalice as the new head of that bureau. For many, any replacement's judgment and independence may well be seen as a politically tainted toady, tweaking (or falsifying) the data to curry favour with the current administration — and maybe the succeeding ones as well. While that position is a high-level yet specialised political appointment, when she was initially nominated and confirmed, McEntarfer had overwhelming support in the Senate. But to Trump, she was just one more agent of the imaginary deep state designed to bring him low. It's another of Trump's efforts to channel his authoritarian-wannabe style, bringing forth new insults to democratic practice and coherent governance. Attack on DEI Reaching deeply into the standard ways of academic appointments, the president's team usurped the authority of the commandant and staff of the US Military Academy at West Point to appoint lecturers. The Trumpians forced the withdrawal of the appointment of a highly regarded, academically qualified, experienced former military officer to a prestige professorship, Jen Easterly, a West Point graduate who served as the director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency under Biden. The ostensible grounds for this sudden decision remain somewhat murky, but presumably it was something she had said or written in the past, plus the fact that she is, well, quite obviously, female. Academic performance and the enthusiastic support for her by the school's commandant and academic officers were insufficient to secure the appointment. Yes, in the larger picture of a vast defence and security establishment, this personnel action might be seen as pretty small beer, but it is simply one more demonstration of the administration's desire to extirpate every supposed tendril of DEI — diversity, equity, inclusivity — in the Department of Defense. Trump's fury Then, the other day, one of those young comrades who are the hoplites of the so-called Doge — or Department of Government Efficiency — whose online moniker was Big Balls (we're not making this up), was the victim of an assault on the streets of Washington, DC. This single act was sufficient to drive Trump into a fury. He publicly threatened to seize control of the city's government on the grounds that it was an ungoverned, chaotic, crime-ridden shambles. All this fire and brimstone came despite the reality that ultimate control of the city's governmental mechanisms is constitutionally vested in the Congress and that branch of government has delegated some, but not all, of its powers to an elected mayor and city council. The president is not involved. Random tariffs Meanwhile, the Trumpian tariff roulette wheel continues to spin, with the pointer seemingly landing at random at new levels and countries. Okay, there are actually two pointers: one is for the applicable tariff rates, and one for the country. Regardless, it is hard to discern much deeper logic behind many of these choices (ask the gobsmacked folks in Lesotho or Laos), save for the impact of leaders expressing demurs over US policy or their economies' abilities to generate trade surpluses. All of that utopian nonsense about free trade, the World Trade Organization and most favoured nation treatment is going out the window, and the ghost of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 is now in the saddle and will be riding humankind. That Act is regarded as having provoked massive trade wars, cuts in international trade and contributed to the Great Depression. Oh, and Germany's slide towards dictatorship as a result of the economic collapse there. Most economists believe the costs to US consumers from these new tariff regimens will, soon enough, begin to bite as importers pass along the new tariff charges (even if foreign producers cut prices a bit to hold on to market share). It will take years for most producers to meet the ostensible goal of forcing manufacturers to move their production to the US, if ever. So far, at least, the impact on prices has been modest — if only because importers worked to bring in their import orders before the new tariffs kicked in. Much of what will stock US stores for the holidays has already been manufactured and exported, but not necessarily landed yet. The reported dampening of economic growth is one reason that drove that Trumpian hissy fit about the Bureau of Labor Statistics' head. Russian confusion One example of the lack of any larger strategic thinking for all these tariffs is that after years of Trump lavishing praise on the Indian government of Narendra Modi (and courting support and campaign contributions from the Indian-American community in the US, it must be said), India has just been hit with punitive tariffs on the grounds it is financing the Russian war machine by importing its discounted oil below global market prices. That punishment meted out might seem confusing, given Trump's unrelenting, increasingly desperate effort to make nice-nice with Vladimir Putin so he can be the man who brought an end to Russia's assault on Ukraine. On Friday night, following a White House ceremony that brought together Armenia and Azerbaijan for a handshake to end their decadeslong conflict, it was announced that Trump would host Putin in Alaska this week for a summit designed to end the Russia-Ukraine war. This putative ending of hostilities would be grounded in the harsh reality of a Ukrainian cession of territory to Russia — presumably Crimea and much of the eastern Ukraine already seized by Russia in the years of fighting, although Trump positioned this as 'exchanges of territory'. It does not seem the Ukrainians will get much of a voice in this, nor will Nato's European nations. As the ancient Greek historian Thucydides put it: 'The strong do what they can while the weak suffer what they must.' But Trump's unrelenting campaign to win a Nobel Peace Prize continues unabated. Gilded ballroom A Trumpian propensity for his grandiosity has been manifested in his plans to add a massive new ballroom onto the eastern side of the White House. It will be decorated in what should be called Trumpian Second Empire Grotesque — with an overabundance of gilt, painted ceilings, massive chandeliers, and oversized gold sconces and wall hangings everywhere possible. The plan to have this construction financed by private donations (and thus free from outside oversight) has led to concerns that it will be another effort at 'pay to play' special dealing, similar to corporate sponsorship of the traditional White House Easter egg roll. If one needed any further clarity about the ghastliness of such plans, the White House's Rose Garden — site of innumerable memorable public events — has now largely been replaced by an unrelenting concrete plaza. Joni Mitchell's 1970 lament in ' Big Yellow Taxi,' that '…they put up a parking lot', seems eerily appropriate. Contorted districts Still more astonishing behaviour by Trump has been his enthusiastic engagement with a gerrymandering initiative in Texas. Gerrymandering is an old habit in US politics, but this newest effort is proceeding down an especially problematic path. The term refers to the early 19th-century Massachusetts governor, Elbridge Gerry, who insisted upon shaping legislative districts that were so twisted and contorted in their boundaries that a famous political cartoon about it drew one of those districts in the shape of a winged salamander wiggling its way through the map of the state, hence the portmanteau word 'gerrymander' that has become the common description of problematic legislative constituencies. The number of each state's congressional districts is determined by the country's decennial census. (Yes, slaves were initially counted as 3/5ths of a person, a provision that became null and void after the abolition of slavery in 1865.) A Supreme Court decision subsequently upheld the requirement that congressional districts must be largely equal in population, and the 1965 Voting Rights Act mandated that minority-majority districts should be protected, rather than diminished by slicing up the state's minority populations and squeezing them into surrounding districts, thus effectively nullifying any possibilities of minority group voting power. Common sense has dictated that the districts must be, as much as possible, geographically cohesive, rather than, for example, being a modern manifestation of Governor Gerry's scheme, following a highway and including various bits of cities and towns along the way for many kilometres. One other key factor is that redistricting in accordance with the population figures after a census takes place state by state, rather than being a federal decision. Appalling redistricting plans deliberately squeezing minority populations into just one district, regardless of geography and at the expense of other plans have ended up in the courts. Clinging on The current imbroglio has arisen from the Republican governor of Texas, Greg Abbott, and that party's majority in the Texas state legislature — under the goad of Trump — to carry out a redistricting effort five years before a census takes place. That would rearrange the congressional districts in the state such that Texas would most likely end up with five additional Republican-leaning districts. The goal here is to build a bulwark that can bolster the razor-thin Republican majority in the House of Representatives in time for the mid-term election next year. The growing Republican fear is that sufficient numbers of voters in some marginal districts will be so significantly annoyed by the actual outcomes of the taxation and spending arrangements coming out of that now-passed 'Big Beautiful Bill' that Republicans may well lose control of the House. If that were to happen, investigations of Trump's governmental actions, public and adversarial hearings, and all manner of other efforts could stymie — and maybe even roll back — some of Trump's more egregious demands and desires. It could make his last two years as president a misery. In response, a significant caucus of Texas' Democratic state legislators fled the state, taking up temporary residence in Illinois (with the blessing of that Democratic Party-governed state's governor), preventing any legislative action in Texas because of the absence of a quorum. Escalating the fight, the Texas governor has threatened to have these malefactors arrested and shanghaied back to Texas, and then drummed out of office, thus allowing the redistricting to go forward without any obstacles by those pesky Democrats. Abbott has asked the FBI to help track down and arrest those dangerous criminals. The FBI, of course, is run by über-Trump loyalist Kash Patel, who is apparently itching to join the action. This is despite the absence of federal laws regarding the absence of state legislators from sittings of state legislatures. The National Review, a stoutly conservative journal, weighed in, with one columnist writing, 'Readers, we are in the midst of a major political Mexican standoff, one that feels surprisingly unremarked upon as we accelerate pell-mell toward the inevitable consequences of the breakdown of a series of electoral norms. 'I cannot help but think about it in cinematic terms. First Sergio Leone, then Quentin Tarantino, and now Democratic and Republican lawmakers across the nation are holding one another at electoral gunpoint, threatening mutually assured construction: the abrupt and hyper-partisan redrawing of congressional boundary lines in every state where it is politically possible.' In response to the Texan shenanigans, governors in Democratic Party-governed states such as Illinois, California, and New York have threatened to engage in the same kind of punitive redistricting, squeezing out Republican majorities in various congressional districts. This move has been labelled the 'nuclear option'. Such redistricting decisions would, of course, be a blow against the equal representation in Congress for the nation's citizens. And the blame for this belongs with a Republican Party desperate to hang onto power, despite changes of heart by voters. A path forward Taken together, the Trumpian onslaught is very real and, at times, startlingly specific and targeted deep in the bureaucracy. It draws on Trump's usual grievances about the government, the elites and the so-called deep state. It also draws on his famously thin skin. Together with Republican allies elsewhere, they seem determined to bring lasting change. But nothing is forever, and one election could overturn much of it. The Democrats may be coming together to draw their own lines in the sand. Going forward, salvaging the situation for the future with positions like the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics will require making such appointments fully independent of presidential choices, or, at the minimum, subject to unbreakable multiyear contracts. The model might be like the heads of the Congressional Budget Office or the Government Accountability Office. Solving the current tariff shambles is harder, but limiting presidential authority to decide on new tariffs in response to 'national emergencies' needs a serious rethink. Setting tariffs is, after all, listed constitutionally as one of Congress's enumerated powers. Finally, somehow, in some way, a new structure arbitrating redistricting for congressional seats must be found before the gerrymandering conflict locks in a deeply unrepresentative landscape that excludes political minorities, state by state. But don't count on any of this happening soon. The US's contemporary political culture is growing increasingly toxic. DM
Daily Maverick
3 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Thousands rally in Tel Aviv against Netanyahu's new Gaza plan, demand release of hostages
Protesters demand end to Gaza war, release of hostages Israeli public largely opposes military escalation in Gaza Netanyahu faces criticism from allies over new Gaza plan By Alexander Cornwell A day earlier, the prime minister's office said the security cabinet, a small group of senior ministers, had decided to seize Gaza City, expanding military operations in the devastated Palestinian territory despite widespread public opposition and warnings from the military the move could endanger the hostages. 'This isn't just a military decision. It could be a death sentence for the people we love most,' Lishay Miran Lavi, the wife of hostage Omri Miran told the rally, pleading to U.S. President Donald Trump to intervene to immediately end the war. Public opinion polls show an overwhelming majority of Israelis favour an immediate end to the war to secure the release of the remaining 50 hostages held by militants in Gaza. Israeli officials believe about 20 hostages are still alive. The Israeli government has faced sharp criticism at home and abroad, including from some of its closest European allies, over the announcement that the military would expand the war. The full cabinet is expected to give its approval as soon as Sunday. Most of the hostages who have been freed so far emerged as a result of diplomatic negotiations. Talks toward a ceasefire that could have seen more hostages released collapsed in July. 'They (the government) are fanatic. They are doing things against the interests of the country,' said Rami Dar, 69-year-old retiree, who traveled from a nearby suburb outside of Tel Aviv, echoing calls for Trump to force a deal for the hostages. Tel Aviv has seen frequent rallies urging the government to reach a ceasefire and hostage deal with Hamas, who ignited the war with their October 2023 attack. Saturday's demonstration attracted over 100,000 protesters, according to organisers. 'Frankly, I'm not an expert or anything, but I feel that after two years of fighting there has been no success,' said Yana, 45, who attended the rally with her husband and two children. 'I wonder whether additional lives for both sides, not just the Israelis but also Gazans, will make any difference.' Around 1,200, mostly Israelis, were killed and 251 were taken into Gaza during Hamas' attack on Israel on October 7, 2023. More than 400 Israeli soldiers have been killed in Gaza since then. Protesters waved Israeli flags and carried placards bearing the images of hostages. Others held signs directing anger at the government or urging Trump to take action to stop Netanyahu from moving forward with plans to escalate the war. A small number of protesters held images of Gazan children killed by the military. Israel's military has killed more than 61,000 Palestinians in the war, according to the Gazan health ministry, which said on Saturday that at least 39 had been killed in the past day. Some of the prime minister's far-right coalition allies have been pushing for a total takeover of Gaza. The military has warned this could endanger the lives of the hostages in Gaza. Far-right minister Bezalel Smotrich, a proponent of continuing the war, issued a statement on Saturday criticising Netanyahu and called for the annexation of large parts of Gaza. Netanyahu told Fox News Channel's Bill Hemmer in an interview that aired on Thursday that the military intended to take control of all of Gaza but that Israel did not want to keep the territory. The announcement from the prime minister's office early on Friday said the military would take Gaza City, but did not explicitly say if Israeli forces would take all of the enclave. Tal, a 55-year-old high school teacher, told Reuters at the rally in Tel Aviv that expanding the war was 'terrible,' warning it would result in the deaths of both soldiers and hostages and insisting that the war should end with the military withdrawing. 'We don't have anything to do there. It's not ours.'
IOL News
6 hours ago
- IOL News
Trump using Africa as ‘dumping ground' for convicts
A controversial Trump-era US deal to deport five convicted criminals to eSwatini has sparked outrage in the kingdom and fears that, once released, the offenders may cross into South Africa. Image: X Donald Trump and his US administration are facing significant criticism over what has been called a 'third country' scheme to send criminals to Africa. Activists, analysts, and human rights organisations are concerned about the security dangers that the deportation of hardened convicts could pose to Swaziland itself and the Southern Region. The mountainous Southern African kingdom borders South Africa and Mozambique. Without sharing their names, Washington, through its Department of Homeland Security assistant secretary, Tricia McLaughlin, last month confirmed the five convicted nationals were from Vietnam, Jamaica, Laos, Cuba and Yemen. Kelly Stone, Senior Consultant, Justice and Violence Prevention at the Institute for Security Studies, highlighted that these actions appear to be focused on identifying more authoritarian leadership styles and exploiting the desperation or instability of certain countries. She suggested that the primary security challenge lies in the potential destabilisation of Eswatini's national stability and its relationship with South Africa, rather than the immediate threat posed by the five individuals. Although Stone stated there is likely no legal recourse for South Africa as a third party regarding the deal between Eswatini and the US, she emphasised South Africa's obligation to closely monitor the security implications given its bordering relationship with Eswatini. 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 She suggested that Trump's transactional approach to governance might be setting up African countries to compete for US favour, potentially disrupting regional relations through varied import tariff rates. What does Eswatini gain from accepting these criminals, noting the undisclosed nature of the deal? Stone confirmed that the terms are secret and assumed that, similar to El Salvador, the benefits could be financial and political, such as White House visits or endorsements for ruling parties. She stated that it is not a capacity issue, as the US has sufficient resources to incarcerate these individuals, but rather a fulfilment of a campaign promise by the Trump administration to expel violent foreign criminals. Stone suggested that Trump's actions are driven by a campaign promise to "make America great again" by removing foreign nationals convicted of crimes, as they believe that porous borders have led to such individuals being in the US, adding that Trump is not interested in international humanitarian law or US obligations under it. ''What we're seeing is that he's particularly targeting countries that have more authoritarian leadership. Rwanda has held up its hand and said it's willing to take 250 deportees. We know that the human rights abuses and repression in Rwanda are very well documented. He's not going to places like South Africa, Botswana, Kenya, that are much more robust in their human rights architecture.'' Wandile Dludlu, a pro-democracy activist and deputy president of Eswatini's largest opposition movement, the People's United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO), recently stated to Al Jazeera: 'The US government views us as a criminal dumpsite and undermines the Emaswati [the people of Eswatini].' Dludu criticised the release of convicted criminals as "distasteful and fraudulent behaviour by His Majesty and his government amid the unprecedented public healthcare crisis" in the country. PUDEMO is a banned organisation in Eswatini. On its X account, the government of Eswatini maintained: "As a responsible member of the global community, the Kingdom of Eswatini adheres to international agreements and diplomatic protocols regarding the repatriation of individuals, ensuring that due process and respect for human rights is (sic) followed." Political analyst, Anda Mbikwana, also weighed in on the matter, saying it represents a troubling law in immigration policy that exposes both strategic shortsightedness and moral contradictions. ''This 'third-country' deportation" programme sends individuals from various countries to cash-strapped African nations, essentially paying them to warehouse criminals that America claims it cannot manage despite its vast resources and extensive prison system. The arrangement smacks of neocolonial exploitation, with wealthy America exporting its problems to impoverished Africa. ''The irony is particularly stark given America's simultaneous efforts to attract Africa's brightest minds. While actively recruiting the continent's doctors, engineers, and entrepreneurs — contributing to devastating brain drain — America now dumps its most problematic residents on African soil. This treats Africa as both a talent mine and a human waste repository. ''Beyond geopolitical implications lie serious human rights concerns. Reports indicate these individuals face solitary confinement for undetermined periods, conditions that international organisations classify as torture when prolonged. If America believes in rehabilitation and human dignity, shipping problems abroad while importing talent represents the ultimate rejection of these principles.'' Mbikwana added that this deportation policy creates dangerous precedents. ''The approach externalises costs while abandoning responsibility, undermining America's moral authority to criticise other nations' treatment of migrants. This is not confident superpower behaviour but a nation unwilling to face its challenges,'' he concluded. Refugee deportation has been an ongoing issue. According to Reuters, the UK had explored third-country deportation policies as part of its efforts to manage irregular migration and asylum claims. Under the previous Conservative government, the UK partnered with Rwanda in 2022, planning to relocate asylum seekers to Rwanda for processing. The UK committed £370 million ($497 million) in development funding over five years in exchange for this arrangement. In November 2023, the UK Supreme Court declared the plan invalid, citing violations of international human rights norms due to Rwanda's inadequate asylum system and concerns regarding human rights. Similarly, Israel had implemented a third-country deportation policy targeting African asylum seekers by sending them to countries like Rwanda and Uganda from 2013 to 2018. The Israeli government offered $3,500 per person to those who agreed to leave.
