
U.S. Tariffs Surge Above 20% as Trump Tests Market Limits
Andrew Wilson, deputy secretary-general of the ICC, explained that the administration appears to be calibrating tariff levels to maximise revenue without triggering a full-scale market meltdown. Despite wide-ranging rates, Wall Street has shown remarkable composure, a stark contrast to the sharp sell-off experienced in April when the initial import duties were announced. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent confirmed that customs collections have reached approximately $100 billion so far, with projections forecasting up to $300 billion by year-end.
Legal and legislative challenges are emerging in response. A federal appeals court struck down the 'Liberation Day' tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, declaring the move exceeded executive authority, though the ruling is presently stayed pending appeal. Meanwhile, Congress is contemplating legislation aimed at curbing unilateral tariff powers, and trade negotiations with major trading partners—namely Japan, the EU, the U. K. and Canada—could moderate or delay certain duties.
ADVERTISEMENT
Since April, the U. S. has extended tariffs to a broad array of countries. Canada faces a general increase from 25% to 35% on non‑USMCA imports beginning 1 August, with additional duties on steel and aluminium already in place. Meanwhile, Brazil has been targeted with a 50% tariff, linked in part to political tensions, and levels between 25% and 40% are set for nations including Japan, South Korea, Thailand, Malaysia, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, South Africa and others. A hold‑and‑test strategy allows a window until August 1 for targeted trade deals.
Market participants have noted this restrained approach: a 10% baseline is broadly absorbed, but steeper duties serve as leverage. The administration appears comfortable testing thresholds before escalating further.
Economists caution that importers and consumers will bear the brunt of these changes. A Yale Budget Lab analysis determined that U. S. tariffs to date equate to a 24.6 percentage‑point rise in the average effective rate—potentially reaching 27% absent substitution effects. These duties could elevate consumer prices by roughly 2.9%, reducing household purchasing power by about $4,700 annually. Substitution toward non‑Chinese suppliers later moderates the rate to approximately 18.5%, the highest since 1933.
A Harvard Business School study corroborates these dynamics: between March and June, import prices rose ~3%, and domestically produced goods competing with imports increased by ~2% due to elevated component costs and altered supply chains. Similarly, U. S. apparel imports from China fell to the lowest in 22 years in May, as buyers shifted to suppliers in Southeast Asia and Latin America.
While equities appear resilient—with the S&P 500 near record highs—analysts warn that bond and currency markets may signal latent stress. UBS expects household and business inventories to help absorb short‑term shocks, but flags a possible 0.7 percentage‑point drag on GDP growth in 2025 if tensions persist.
Businesses represented by the ICC, covering some 45 million firms, have voiced concern: 60% of respondents to an ICC pulse survey consider the tariffs negatively, citing cost inflation, supply chain uncertainty and the risk of retaliation as principal worries.
Despite this, the ICC insists negotiators must prioritise de‑escalation and multilateral engagement. Secretary‑General John Denton called the policy shift 'a watershed moment in American trade policy' that could inflict systemic harm on the global economy, noting the effective U. S. tariff rate now eclipses levels last seen during the Smoot–Hawley era of the 1930s.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Zawya
2 hours ago
- Zawya
Out-gunned Europe accepts least-worst US trade deal
LONDON - In the end, Europe found it lacked the leverage to pull Donald Trump's America into a trade pact on its terms and so has signed up to a deal it can just about stomach - albeit one that is clearly skewed in the U.S.'s favour. As such, Sunday's agreement on a blanket 15% tariff after a months-long stand-off is a reality check on the aspirations of the 27-country European Union to become an economic power able to stand up to the likes of the United States or China. The cold shower is all the more bracing given that the EU has long portrayed itself as an export superpower and champion of rules-based commerce for the benefit both of its own soft power and the global economy as a whole. For sure, the new tariff that will now be applied is a lot more digestible than the 30% "reciprocal" tariff which Trump threatened to invoke in a few days. While it should ensure Europe avoids recession, it will likely keep its economy in the doldrums: it sits somewhere between two tariff scenarios the European Central Bank last month forecast would mean 0.5-0.9% economic growth this year compared to just over 1% in a trade tension-free environment. But this is nonetheless a landing point that would have been scarcely imaginable only months ago in the pre-Trump 2.0 era, when the EU along with much of the world could count on U.S. tariffs averaging out at around 1.5%. Even when Britain agreed a baseline tariff of 10% with the United States back in May, EU officials were adamant they could do better and - convinced the bloc had the economic heft to square up to Trump - pushed for a "zero-for-zero" tariff pact. It took a few weeks of fruitless talks with their U.S. counterparts for the Europeans to accept that 10% was the best they could get and a few weeks more to take the same 15% baseline which the United States agreed with Japan last week. "The EU does not have more leverage than the U.S., and the Trump administration is not rushing things," said one senior official in a European capital who was being briefed on last week's negotiations as they closed in around the 15% level. That official and others pointed to the pressure from Europe's export-oriented businesses to clinch a deal and so ease the levels of uncertainty starting to hit businesses from Finland's Nokia to Swedish steelmaker SSAB . "We were dealt a bad hand. This deal is the best possible play under the circumstances," said one EU diplomat. "Recent months have clearly shown how damaging uncertainty in global trade is for European businesses." NOW WHAT? That imbalance - or what the trade negotiators have been calling "asymmetry" - is manifest in the final deal. Not only is it expected that the EU will now call off any retaliation and remain open to U.S. goods on existing terms, but it has also pledged $600 billion of investment in the United States. The time-frame for that remains undefined, as do other details of the accord for now. As talks unfolded, it became clear that the EU came to the conclusion it had more to lose from all-out confrontation. The retaliatory measures it threatened totalled some 93 billion euros - less than half its U.S. goods trade surplus of nearly 200 billion euros. True, a growing number of EU capitals were also ready to envisage wide-ranging anti-coercion measures that would have allowed the bloc to target the services trade in which the United States had a surplus of some $75 billion last year. But even then, there was no clear majority for targeting the U.S. digital services which European citizens enjoy and for which there are scant homegrown alternatives - from Netflix to Uber to Microsoft cloud services. It remains to be seen whether this will encourage European leaders to accelerate the economic reforms and diversification of trading allies to which they have long paid lip service but which have been held back by national divisions. Describing the deal as a painful compromise that was an "existential threat" for many of its members, Germany's BGA wholesale and export association said it was time for Europe to reduce its reliance on its biggest trading partner. "Let's look on the past months as a wake-up call," said BGA President Dirk Jandura. "Europe must now prepare itself strategically for the future - we need new trade deals with the biggest industrial powers of the world." (Additional reporting by Jan Strupczewski in Brussels; Christian Kraemer and Maria Martinez in Berlin; Writing by Mark John; Editing by Nick Zieminski)

The National
3 hours ago
- The National
'Israel has to make a decision on Gaza', says Trump
Trump says Israel will have to decide on next steps in Gaza UAE and Jordan carry out aid air drops into Gaza Mediators resume contact with Israel and Hamas negotiators Yemen's Houthis threaten to target ships linked to Israeli ports Netanyahu says 'no more excuses' for UN after Gaza aid routes opened Israel announces 10-hour pause in military operations in Al Mawasi, Deir Al Balah, and Gaza city At least 59,821 Palestinians killed and 144,851 wounded since Gaza war began


Zawya
3 hours ago
- Zawya
GCC-Stat: GCC countries record $587.8bln in nominal GDP by end of Q4 2024
MUSCAT: The latest data released by the Statistical Centre for the Cooperation Council for the Arab Countries of the Gulf ('GCC-Stat') revealed that the nominal Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries reached US$587.8 billion by the end of the fourth quarter of 2024, up from US$579 billion at the end of the fourth quarter of 2023, reflecting a growth rate of 1.5%. The data indicated that the contribution of non-oil activities to the GCC's nominal GDP reached 77.9% by the end of the fourth quarter of 2024, compared to 22.1% from oil activities. The manufacturing sector contributed 12.5% to the GDP, while wholesale and retail trade accounted for 9.9%. The contribution of the construction sector reached 8.3%, while public administration and defence logged 7.5%, finance and insurance 7%, and real estate activities 5.7%. Meanwhile, other non-oil activities contributed 27%.